01.08 - Rise and History of the Mechanical Theory of Inspiration

(8) Rise and History of the Mechanical Theory of Inspiration The verbal and mechanical theory of inspiration, generally called “ the traditional theory,” would seem to find its roots in the Jewish conception of their Scriptures, as being “the very Word of God,” and given them by divine revelation and inspiration.

They accordingly set great store by them. They treasured, and used them as history-book, law-book, and religious text-book; as hymn and prayer-book of the Jewish Church, and so guarded them as most sacred and holy. The men who wrote them were men of God, who wrote and spoke in His name and by His authority, having been commissioned by Him to declare His will to the children of men. This view dominated the Jewish mind from the time of the Captivity to the coming of Jesus Christ, and led them to guard every word and letter of Scripture as most sacred, to count and number the very words of Scripture, and to copy them with the utmost care, regarding every letter and word as in truth “ the Word of God.”

Jewish Rabbis and writers cherished the same idea, and ever spoke of their Scriptures as “sacred and holy”; they called them the “Scriptures of God,” the “Oracles of God,” and the “ Word of God “; while the “ Law “ was so sacred, it must not be touched by unclean hands nor given to the Gentiles except in the briefest and most summary manner. The Rabbis associated most remarkable stories with knowing and keeping the Law, invested it with the most marvellous meanings and significations, and laid down rules for its interpretation on Kabbalistic principles. The Lord Jesus sought to free them from this slavish regard to the letter of their Scriptures, and to lead them to the fuller recognition of their spiritual significance and teaching. He taught men that the Law itself was only a stage in the revelation of God and the development of Israel, that it was temporary and passing away, a “ shadow of good things to come,” and that they must advance from the temporal to the spiritual, from law to grace and truth, from “ the letter which killeth to the spirit which giveth life.” Christ treated those Scriptures reverently but freely, regarded them authoritatively but spiritually, and made them the starting-point for those higher and fuller revelations He came to impart. He had respect to those Scriptures as “being witnesses of Him,” while He ever unfolded their higher and spiritual meaning. After Christ’s death and resurrection the Apostles went everywhere preaching the facts of the Gospel, rather than expounding the “ Law and the Prophets.” They recognised the divine authority and spiritual significance of these Scriptures as also the authority and teaching of Christ, but they framed no theory of inspiration. When the Gospels and Epistles came into vogue, and were recognised and read in the churches along with the “ Law and the Prophets,” their inspiration and divine authority were thereby attested: but they reached no definite theory of inspiration.

Christian literature increased and multiplied. Many venerable writings were possessed and treasured by the Churches, and read for purposes of instruction and edification, and in process of time the Canon of the New Testament acquired equal recognition with the Old, and together the two Testaments were regarded as the Sacred Writings. Apostolic and Church Fathers, historians, and apologists used and quoted them as “the Word of God.” They acknowledged in them the presence of divine and human elements, but made no attempt to separate and define those elements, nor to explain the relations between them.

During the Middle Ages there came into vogue a Mysticism and Illuminism, and a Church tradition and authority which somewhat conflicted with each other, which struggle issued in the recognition of the Scriptures as supreme.

It was reserved for the Reformation period which sought to correct the abuses, superstitions, and slavery of Intellectualism on the one hand, and the tradition and authority of the Church and Pope on the other, to emphasise the pre-eminence of the Scriptures as supreme, and to guarantee individual liberty, spiritual freedom, and divine authority in matters of faith and religion. But the Scriptures did not bind men as did Church dogmas, confessions, and creeds. Their aim was to make men free by instructing them in the knowledge of the truth, to liberate them from a lordly authority by enlightening the mind and making them “wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ,” and by securing to them the liberty of the sons of God. But in freeing men from the dominion of a boasted Intellectualism and the tradition of an infallible Church authority, the Scriptures themselves became authoritative in all that pertained to doctrine and conduct, and were declared to be “ the very Word of God,” divinely revealed and inspired verbatim ct literatim, and of infallible authority in all that concerned faith and practice. By this means it was hoped to escape all difficulties and objections, and to secure an infallible and authoritative standard for truth and life which all would accept. But the very thing that was supposed would silence all objections raised anew the whole question with greater intensity. The traditional theory was keenly disputed and strongly opposed, with the result that an earnest attempt was made to frame a more rational theory of inspiration, and one that should do equal justice to the divine and human factors in the Scriptures. A more careful discrimination was made between revelation and inspiration, as also between revelation and Scripture; while the relation of divine revelation to human thought and language, and of divine inspiration to human freedom and intellectual activity became the subject of discussion. Hitherto the contending parties have regarded the question too exclusively from their own standpoint without due consideration of the opposite view. A better under standing between disputants is gaining ground, with the result that we are approaching a more intelligent, adequate, and permanent view of the subject.