False Theories Of Inspiration
FALSE THEORIES OF INSPIRATION
1. The Mechanical Dictation Theory.
This is the theory that God told Moses to write the word, “In,” and he wrote, “In.” Then God said, “Write the word, ‘the,'” and Moses wrote “the.” Then God said, “now write, ‘beginning.'” The problem with this view is that if fails to explain how there are different styles and vocabularies used by the different human authors of the Bible. On the other hand, there were indeed times when the Lord dictated His message very explicitly to the prophets.
Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD (Exodus 24:4).
Then the LORD said to Moses, “Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel” (Exodus 34:27). The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, 2 “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‘Write all the words which I have spoken to you in a book.'” (Jeremiah 30:1-2).
Then the LORD answered me and said, “Record the vision and inscribe it on tablets, that the one who reads it may run” (Habakkuk 2:2). In Jeremiah 36:1-32 we have a vivid picture of God giving His message to Jeremiah and then Jeremiah dictating that same message to his servant and scribe Baruch.
God gave His message to Jeremiah|g|Jeremiah dictated the message to Baruch|g|Baruch wrote down the message|g|Baruch read the message in the Temple| And it came about in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, that this word came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, 2 “Take a scroll and write on it all the words which I have spoken to you concerning Israel, and concerning Judah, and concerning all the nations, from the day I first spoke to you, from the days of Josiah, even to this day. 3 “Perhaps the house of Judah will hear all the calamity which I plan to bring on them, in order that every man will turn from his evil way; then I will forgive their iniquity and their sin.”
Then Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah, and Baruch wrote at the dictation of Jeremiah all the words of the LORD, which He had spoken to him, on a scroll. And Jeremiah commanded Baruch, saying, “I am restricted; I cannot go into the house of the LORD. 6 So you go and read from the scroll which you have written at my dictation the words of the LORD to the people in the LORD's house on a fast day. And also you shall read them to all the people of Judah who come from their cities. 7 Perhaps their supplication will come before the LORD, and everyone will turn from his evil way, for great is the anger and the wrath that the LORD has pronounced against this people.” And Baruch the son of Neriah did according to all that Jeremiah the prophet commanded him, reading from the book the words of the LORD in the LORD's house. (Jeremiah 36:1-8). In this case, the message of God was given through the intermediaries of Jeremiah and Baruch, yet nothing is said to have been lost in translation.
2. The Natural Inspiration Theory.
This view says that God had nothing to do with the Bible. It sees the authors as having been inspired in the same sense that Shakespear was inspired to write Hamlet. We have already noted that this is not a biblical picture of inspiration.
3. The Dynamic Inspiration Theory.
This theory says that God encouraged the authors to give first-hand reports of their revelatory experiences with God. They wrote of these experiences in the best way they humanly were able. This view likens inspiration to light passing through the stained glass of a cathedral window. The light is from heaven but it is stained and colored by the glass through which it passes. In the same way, the message of God is said to pass through the heart and mind of the original human author and come out discolored by his personality.
4. The Limited Inerrancy Theory.
God is seen as having superintended the writing process of the Scriptures so that the redemptive truths of the Bible are without error. This view sees the Bible only authoritative on these sorts of redemptive truths and to be capable of error on issues like historical or scientific accuracy.