-- B. The doctrine of inspiration.
serve to make us historically aware of what has happened in the past.
It does not even have the intention of providing us with a historical account according to the standard of fidelity required in other sciences. Scripture is a book of history; all that has been written before has been written for our learning, that we may have hope through patience and consolation of the Scriptures. The Scriptures were written by the Holy Spirit to serve Him in His guidance of the Church, in the perfection of the saints, and in the edification of the body of Christ. In them God comes daily to his people. In her, He speaks to His children, not from afar, but from close by. In her He reveals Himself from day to day to the faithful in the fullness of His grace and truth. Through her He works His miracles of mercy and faithfulness. Scripture is the permanent record between heaven and earth, between Christ and his church, between God and his children.
It not only binds us to the past, it binds us to the living Lord in the heavens. She is the viva vox Dei, epistola Dei omnipotentis ad suam creaturam. Through the word God once created the world, through the word He upholds it; but through the word He also recreates it and prepares it for His dwelling. Theopneustia is therefore also a permanent characteristic of Scripture. It was not only theopneusted at the moment it was written down; it is theopneust. Divinitus inspirata est scriptura, non solum dum scripta est Deo spirante per scriptores; sed etiam dum legitur Deo spirante per scripturam et scriptura ipsum spirante, Bengel on 2 Tim. 3: 16. Proceeding from revelation, it is kept alive and made efficient by theopneustion. It is the Holy Spirit who upholds prophecy and miracle, scripture and church, and puts them in relation to each other, and who thus prepares the parable. For when both being and consciousness will be
20 completely renewed, then revelation has its end. Scripture will no longer be needed. Theopneustia will then be the portion of all God's children. They will all be taught by the Lord and serve Him in His temple. Prophecy and miracle have become nature, because God lives among His people.
B. The doctrine of inspiration.
4. The authority of the Holy Scriptures has been recognized by all Christian churches. There is no dogma, on which there is more unity, than that of the Holy Scriptures. The genesis of this belief in the Scriptures is no longer traceable. It exists as far back as we can go. In the late 0. T. the authority of Yahveh's commandments and statutes, i. e. of the Torah and likewise of the prophets, is already established.
Moses and the prophets have always been men of divine authority among Israel; their writings were immediately recognized as authoritative. The Jews built on them a doctrine of inspiration, as strict and exclusive as possible. The Torah stands first in the O. T.
Scriptures; its contents are identical with divine Wisdom, the image of God, the daughter of God, the sufficient revelation of salvation, the highest good, the way of life, destined for all peoples. Had Israel not sinned, she would have been sufficient. But now the writings of the prophets have been added later to explain it. All these scriptures are divine, holy, rules of doctrine and life, and of infinite content.
Nothing in them is superfluous; everything has meaning, every letter, every sign, even the shape and form of a letter, because everything comes from God. According to Philo, the migr. Abrahae, and Josephus, Ant. 4, 6, 5. c. Ap. 1,7 the prophets were in a state of rapture and unconsciousness at the time of inspiration, which they compared with the pagan mantis and sometimes extended to others than the prophets, but the divine authority of the Scriptures is also unshakeable in their eyes. Only, in fact, this authority was again undermined by tradition.
The Scriptures themselves were insufficient. In the view of the Jews, there was also an oral tradition, originating from God, handed down to the Scribes by Moses, Aaron, the elders, the prophets and the men of the great synagogue. It was finally laid down in the Mishna and Gemara, which has now been added to the norma normans as norma normata, and reconciled with Scripture by means of thirteen hermeneutical rules in particular,
Zunz, Die gottesd. Vortrage der Juden 1832 S. 37 f. Weber, System der altsyn. pal. Theol. 1880. S. 14 1. 78 f. Schürer, Neutest.
Zeitgeschichte, Leipzig. 1874. S. 437 f.
The Christian congregation now rejected the whole Jewish tradition with Jesus and the apostiples, but still recognized from the beginning the divine authority of the O. T. Scriptures, Harnack,
Dogm. gesch. I 39 f. 145 f. 244 f. The church has never been without a Bible. It received the O. Test, from the hand of the apostles at once with divine authority. From the beginning the Christian faith embraced the divine authority of the O. T. Clemens Romanus teaches the inspiration of the O. T. as clearly as possible. He calls the O. T. writings τα λόγια τον ίλεον, 1 Cor. 53 , τας γραφας,τας άλη-ΐλεις τας δια 71νεύματος τον άγιον, ib. 45, cites places from the O. T. with the formula: the Holy Spirit says, ib. 13 and says of the prophets: o! λειτονργοι της χαριτος τον ϋ-εου δια πνενματος άγιον ελαλησαν ib.
8. He extends the inspiration also to the apostles, saying, that they went out μετά πληροφορίας πνενματος άγιον to preach, ib. 42, and that Paul wrote to the Corinthians πνενματικως, ib. 47. For the rest the apostles provide little material for the dogma of Scripture: the inspiration itself is certain, but there is still difference as to the extent and limits of inspiration; little is said of the N. T. writings, and apocrypha are sometimes quoted as canonical. The Apologists of the 2nd century, Justinus, Coh. ad Graecos c. 8. and Athenagoras, Leg. pro Christo cap. 7. compare the writers to a cither, lyre, or flute, of which the divine πληκτρον availed itself as of an organ. The doctrine of the apostles is on a par with that of the prophets ; as Abraham, so we believe τη φωνή τον 9-εον, τη δια ι:ε των αποστολών τον χριστόν λαλη&ειση παλιν και τη δια των προφητών κηρνχ&ειση ημιν, Just.
Dial. 119. The Gospels share in the same inspiration as the prophets, δια το τους παντας πνενματοφορονς ένι πνενματι ίλεον λελαληκεναι,
Theoph. ad Autol. 3 η. 12. With Irenaeus the full recognition of the inspiration of both Testaments is already present; Scripturae perfectae sunt, quippe a Deo et Spiritu ejus dictae, adv. haer. 2, 28., they have one author and one purpose, 4,9. And further the Holy
Scriptures are cited by the Fathers of the Church as &εια γραφή, κυριακαι γραφαι, ίϊεοπνευΰτοι γραφαι, coelestes literae, divinae voces , bibliotheca sancta, chirograph um Dei, etc. The writers are called λειτουργοί της χαριτος του ίλεου, όργανα ύ-ειας φωνής, ΰτομα ί)εον, πνευματοφοροι, χρι&τοφοροι, έμπνευϋ&εντες,
ΰεοφορουμενοι, Spiritu divino inundati, pleni, etc. The act of inspiration -is represented as driving, leading, etc., but especially often as dictating the Holy Spirit, Iren. 1. c. Aug. de cons. Evang. 1,
54; the scribes were the hands of the H. G., Aug. ib., they were not the auctores, but only scriptores, scribae; auctor of the H. Schrift is
God alone, Isidorus Hisp. lib. 1. de offic. c. 12, by Dausch, Die Schriftinspiration 1891 S. 87. Scripture is an epistola omnipotentis Dei ad suam creaturam, Aug. in Ps. 20. Serm. 2, 1. Greg. Magnus, Epist. 1. 4. ep. 31. There is nothing indifferent and nothing superfluous in it, but everything is full of divine wisdom; nihil enim vacuum, neque sine signo apud Deum, Iren. adv. haer. 4, 21, 3. Origen especially drove this strongly, saying, that there was not a tittle or an iota vain, that there was nothing in Scripture, quod non a plenitudine divinae majestatis descendat, Homil. 2. 21. 39 in Jerem. , and likewise
Hieronymus, who said: singuli sermones. syllabae, apices, puncta in divinis scripturis plena sunt sensibus et spirant caelestia sacramenta.
The Holy Scriptures were therefore without any defect, without any error, even in chronological, historical matters, Theoph. ad Autol. 23,
Iren. adv. haer. 3,5. What the apostles wrote must be accepted as if Christ himself had written it, for they were as it were his hands, Aug. de cons. Evang. 1, 54. In his letter to Hieronymus he says he firmly believes that none of the canonical writers scribendo aliquid errasse.
So if there is an error, non licet dicere: auctor hujus libri non tenuit veritatem sed: aut codex mendosus est, aut interpres erravit, aut tu non intelligis, c. Faust. But at the same time the self-confidence of the writers in their inspiration towards Montanism was accentuated as much as possible; prior research, distinction in development, use of sources and of the memory, difference in language and style were all emphasized by Iren. Orig. Euseb.
August. Hieron. etc.; even a difference in the mode of inspiration among O. and N. T., or also a difference in degree of inspiration according to the moral condition of the writers, was assumed by some, Novatianus, de trin. 4. Orig. c. Cels. 7. 4. But all this did not detract from the belief in the divine origin and the divine authority of the Holy Scriptures. These were generally established. The practical
use of Scripture in preaching, in the presentation of evidence, in the exegetical treatment, etc., proves this even more and more strongly than the isolated statements. The church in this first period was more concerned with the determination of the canon, than with the concept of inspiration, but understood the canon to be precisely divinae scripturae, Conc. Carth. 397 can. 47 , and ascribed to them alone authority, Conc. Tolet. 447, cf. Denzinger, Enchir. symb. et defin. no. 49. 125. Joh. Delitzsch, de inspir. scripturae s., quid statuerint patres apostolici et apologetae sec. Lips. 1872. Hagenbach,
Dogm. Gesch. § 31 f. Kudelbach, Zeits. f. d. ges. luth. Theol. u. Kirclie 1840. W. Rohnert, Die Inspiration der H. S. u. ihre Bestreiter, Leipz.
1889 S. 85 f. P. Dausch, Die Schriftinspiration, eine bibl. geschichtl.
Studie, Freiburg 1891. S. 45 f. Koelling, Die Lehre von der Theopneustie, Breslau 1891. 84 f. Cramer, Godgel. Contributions IV 49121. Dr. W. Sanday, Inspiration, eight lectures on the early history and origin of the doctrine of biblical inspiration , Bampton lectures
1893.
5. The theology of the Middle Ages stuck to the Church Fathers and did not develop the doctrine of inspiration. Joh. Damasc., de fide orthod. 4, 17 mentions Scripture only briefly and says that law and prophets, evangelists and apostles, pastors and teachers have spoken by the Holy Spirit; and therefore Scripture is theopneist. Erigena, de div. nat. I 66 sq. says, that in all things one must follow the authority of H. S. because vera auctoritas rectae rationi non obsistit, but also omnis auctoritas, quae vera ratione non approbatur, infirma videtur esse. Thomas does not treat the doctrine of Holy Scripture either as Lombardus does, but nevertheless gives his thought on inspiration in his doctrine on prophecy, S. Theol. II 2 qu. 171 sq. Prophecy is definitely a gift of the mind and consists firstly in inspiratio, i. e. in an elevatio mentis ad percipienda divina, which takes place Spiritu
Sancto movente, and secondly in revelatio, worth-while the divine things are known, the darkness and ignorance are removed and the prophecy itself is completed, qu. Prophecy further consists in the gift of the lumen propheticum, by which divine things become visible, as well as natural things by the natural light of reason, ib. art. 2. But
this revelation differs; sometimes it takes place through the senses, sometimes through the imagination, and sometimes in a purely spiritual manner, as with Solomon and the apostles, ib. qu. 173 art. 2.
Prophecy by intellectualem visionem is generally ranked higher than prophecy by imaginariam visionem; however, if the lumen intellectuale does not reveal supernatural things, but only allows the naturally knowable things to be known and judged in a divine manner, then such a prophetia intellectualis is ranked below the visio imaginaria, which reveals supernatural truth. The authors of the hagiographa often wrote about things that are recognizable by nature, and they then spoke non quasi ex persona Dei, sed ex persona propria, cum adjutorio tarnen divini luminis. Thomas thus recognizes different modes and degrees of inspiration. He also says, qu. 176 art. 1, that the apostles received the gift of tongues in order to be able to preach the gospel to all nations, sed quantum ad quaedam quae superadduntur humana arte ad ornatum et elegantiam locutionis, apostolus instructus erat in propria lingua, non autem in aliena, and so also the apostles were sufficiently equipped with knowledge for their office, but did not know everything there is to know, e.g. arithematica, etc. But no error or falsehood can occur in Scripture, S. Theol. I qu. 32 art. 4. II 2 qu. 110 art. 4 ad 3. The most extensive discussion of Scripture is given by Bonaventura in the prooemium for his Breviloquium, ed Freiburg 1881 p. 1-32: Scripture does not originate from human research, but from revelation of the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit. No one can know it except by faith, because Christ is its substance. She is cor Dei, os Dei (the Father), lingua Dei (the Son), calamus Dei (the Holy Ghost). Four things are of the Scriptures especially to be considered; her latitudo: she contains many parts , O. and N. T., different kinds of books, legal, liistorical, prophetic, etc.; her longitudo: she describes all times from creation to the judgment day in the three ages of lex naturae, lex scripta and lex gratiae or in seven aetates; her sublimitas: she describes the different hierarchies, ecclesiastica, angelica, divina; her profunditas: she has a multiplicitas mysticarum intelligentiarum.
However much the Holy Scriptures use different ways of speaking, they are always real, there is nothing untrue in them. For the Holy
Spirit, ejus auctor perfectissimusnihil potuit dicere falsum, nihil superfluum, nihil diminutum. That is why the reading and examination of the H. S. is so urgently needed; and for this purpose
Bonaventura wrote his precious Breviloquium. In the Prologus for his Sententiae, Duns Scotus does introduce various grounds on which belief in the Holy Scriptures rests, such as prophecy, inner agreement, authenticity, miracles, etc., but he does not discuss the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures. And for the rest we find little substance for the dogma of Scripture in scholasticism. No need was felt for a special treatment of the locus de S. Scr., since its authority was fixed and no one disputed it. She had in the Middle Ages, at least formally, an undisputed dominion. It was symbolically represented as the water of life, glorified in praise, venerated and worshipped like the image of Christ, written down in the most precious manner, illustrated, bound and displayed. It had an honored place at the councils, was kept as a relic, worn around the neck as an amulet, buried with the deceased, and used as the basis for oaths. And it was also read, studied, explained and translated much more than the Protestants later believed, Vigouroux, Les livres saints et la critique rationaliste, 3rd ed. I 226 s. Janssen, Gesch. des deutschen Volkes, I 48 f. Herzog2 3, 545 f. There was no opposition to Scripture. Also
Abaelard, Sic et Non, ed. Henke et Lindenkohl, Marb. 1851 p. 10.11 does not say, that prophets and apostles erred in writing, but only, that they sometimes erred as persons, appealing to Gregory, who had acknowledged this also of Peter; the gratia prophetiae was sometimes taken away from them, that they might remain humble and acknowledge, that they received and possessed that Spirit of God, qui mentiri vel falli nescit, only as a gift. Neither is Agobard of Lyon an opponent of inspiration; only that he opposes Fredegis of Tours with a more organic view, which recognizes differences of language and style, grammatical deviations etc., Münscher - v.
Coelln, Dogm. Gesch. II 1 S. 105. Ecclesiastically, the inspiration and authority of the Holy Scriptures was pronounced and recognized several times, Denzinger, Enchir. n. 296. 386. 367. 600.
6. The Trentine Council declared in sess. 4, that the truth is contained in the written books and unwritten traditions, which have been received from the mouth of Christ by the apostles, or have been handed down from hand to hand and have come to us by the same apostles, Spirito Sancto dictante; and that therefore, after the example of the fathers, it is all the books of the Old and New
Testament, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, and likewise the traditions .... tanquam vel oretenus a Christo, vel a Spiritu Sancto dictatas ... . accepts and worships. The inspiration was here extended to the tradition, but still clearly pronounced from the H. S. as well.
But among the Roman theologians there soon came great differences regarding the nature and extent of inspiration. Both the auctor utriusque testamenti and the dictare were interpreted differently.
The theologians of the 16th century were generally still of the stricter persuasion of churchmen and scholastics. They were mostly followers of Augustine in the doctrine of grace, Jansenists,
Augustinians and Dominicans. The most important among these are Melchior Canus, Loei theol. 1563, Bannez, Comment, in primam partem D. Thomae Lugd. 1788. Bajus and Jansenius, Billuart,
Summa S. Thomae torn. 2. Wirceb. 1758, Rabaudy, Exerc. de Scriptura sacra,-in this century still Fernandez, diss. crit. theol. de verbal! S. Bibl. inspiratione, but also Jesuits, such as Tostatus,
Costerus, Turrianus, Salmeron, Gregor de Valencia, De rebus fidei h. t. controv. Lugd. 1591 etc. These teach alien a positive effect of God's
Spirit on the writers, which extended also to the singula verba. But soon a more lax direction emerged, and this among the Jesuits. In the year 1586 Lessius and Hamelius opened their lectures at the Jesuit College in Leuven, and there they defended among others the theses: 1° ut aliquis sit S. Scriptura, non est necessarium, singula ejus verba inspirata esse a Sp. S°. 2° non est necessarium, ut singulae veritates et sententiae sint immediate a Sp. S°. ipsi scriptori inspiratae. 39 liber aliquis (qualis forte est secundus Machabaeorum) humana industria sine assistentia Sp. S'. scriptus, si Sp. S״s postea testetur, ibi nihil esse falsum, efficitur Scriptura sacra. Here word inspiration is rejected, the immediate inspiration also of many things, e.g. of history, which the writers knew, is considered
unnecessary, and even in some books an inspiraiio subsequens or aposterior approbation of H. G., so named later by Bonfrerius, is considered sufficient. The faculties of Louvain and Douai condemned the theses, but others rejected this censorship, and the pope made no decision. The first two theses were widely accepted, but the third went too far and was adopted by few, 0. a. by Bonfrerius, Frassenius,
Richard Simon, Histoire critique du N. T. 1689 ch. 23, and in this century still by the bishop of Spiers, Haneberg, Gesch. der bibl.
Offenbarung, 3rd Aufl. 1863. Another direction is represented by Mariana, Tract, varii VIII, El. du Pin, Dissert, préli-minaire tom. I Paris 1701. J. Jahn, Introductio in libros Vet. Test. 1814 and conceives of inspiration as a -louter negative assistance des H. G., by which the writers were preserved from error. Both these directions held to the infallibility of Holy Scripture, but identified this factual result with the divine origin of Scripture. On the other hand, infallibility in matters which were not in the narrow sense religiousethical was abandoned and inspiration limited to what was actually dogmatic-ethical by Erasmus, on Mt. 2, Ch. 10, and Apologia adv. monachos quosdam Hispanos, Abbé Le Noir, Lenormant, Les origines de l'histoire d'après la Bible Paris 1880, de Broglie, Langen in Bonn, Rohling, Natur und Offenbarung 1872. Related to this is the idea of Holden, doctor of the Sorbonne, in his Divinae fidei analysis
1770 and Chrismann, Regula fidei catholicae, who assumed that the truths of faith and morals were inspired by Scripture, but taught that the rest of Scripture was only assisted by the faithful. Of similar tendency is also the view in the Roman Tübinger school, whose representatives Drey, Apologetik 1838 S. 204 f. Kuhn, Einl. in die
Dogmatik 1859 S. 9 f. Schanz, Apol. des Christ. II 318 f. etc. older influence of Schleiermacher, connected inspiration with the whole organism of revelation, and extended it in different degrees to the different parts of Scripture. Most Roman theologians after the Reformation take a middle course. On the one hand, they reject the lax inspiration which would have existed only in negative assistance or posterior approbation, because if all decisions of the councils were true, then everything was inspired. On the other hand they also deny the strict inspiration verbalis, according to which all things not only
maaieven all singula verba are dictated and inspired, because many things and words were known to the writers and therefore did not need to be inspired: the difference in language and style, the use of sources etc. also proves the incorrectness of verbal inspiration. An inspiratio realis is therefore sufficient, which is sometimes a revelation, sometimes an assistance. We find this theory in Bellarminus, de Verbo Dei. I c. 14. cf. de Cone. II c. 12. XII c. 14. C. a Lapide on 2 Tim. 3 : 16. de Theologia Wirceburgensis, disp. 1 cap.
Marchini, de divinitate et canonicitate sacr. Bibl. Pars 1 art. 7.
Liebermann, Instit. theol. ed. 8. 1857 I p. 385 sq. Perrone, Praelect.
Theol. IX 1843 p. 66 sq. Heinrich, Dogm. I 382 f. Franzelin, Tractatus de div. Script. Kleutgen, Theol. der Vorzeit I 50. H. Denzinger,
Vier Bücher von der relig. Erk. II 108 f. F. Schmid, de inspirationis Bibl. vi et ratione. Jansen, Praelect. theol. I 767 sq. See further on these different theories of inspiration Perrone ib. IX 58 sq. Jansen, ib. 762 sq. P. Dansch, Die Schriftinspiration 1891. S. 145 f. The Vatieanum, though it did not propose a particular theory, yet decidedly condemned that of the inspiratio subsequens and the mera assistentia, and, after repeating the Trentine decision, declared that the Church recognizes those books for sacred and canonical, not because they are sola industria humana concinnati, sua (i. i. of the church) deinde autoritate sint approbati; nor also, because they revelationem sine errore contineant; but therefore that they Spiritu
Sancto inspirante conscripti Deum habent auctorem, atque ut tales ipsi ecclesiae traditi sunt. In can. 2, 4 the council calls the books divinitus inspiratos once more. In cap. 3 de fide it says, that fide divina et catholica ea omnia credenda sunt, quae in verbo Dei scripto vel tradito continentur. This decision leaves nothing to be desired in terms of clarity. The Roman Church understands inspiration as a positive influence of God's Spirit and upholds the infallibility of Scripture. And the encyclical of Leo XIII de studiis Scripturae sacrae
IS Nov. 1893 was written in this same faith.
7. The Reformers accepted Scripture and its theopneustics as it had been handed down to them by the Church. Luther, from his soteriological point of view, occasionally judged some books, Esther,
Ezra, Neb., James, Jude, Rev. unfavourably and admitted minor inaccuracies, but on the other hand held to the inspiration in the strictest sense and extended it to the letters. Bretschneider, Luther an unsere Zeit 1817. Schenkel, Das Wesen der Protest. II 56 f.
Köstlin, Luther's Theology II 246 f. W. Rohnert, Was lehrt L. von der Insp. der H. Schrift. Leipzig 1890. Fr. Pieper, Luther's doctrine of inspiration, Presbyt. and Ref. Rev. April 1893 p. 249-266. The Lutheran symbols have no separate article on Scripture, but presuppose its divine origin and authority throughout, Conf. Aug. praef. 8. art. 7. Art. Smale. II art. 2. 15. Form. Cone. Pars I Epit. de comp, regula atque norma 1. The Lutheran dogmatists, Melanchton in the praefatio for his loci, Chemniz, Examen Cone. Trid. Loe. 1.
Gerhard, Loci Theol. loc. 1. etc. all have the same view. Not first Quenstedt and Calovius, but already Gerhard calls the writers Dei amanuenses, Christi manus et Spiritus Sancti tabelliones sive notarios, ib. loc. 1. cap. 2 § 18. Later ones have only developed and applied the principle further, Heppe, Dogmatik des deutschen Prot.
I. 207-257. Hase Hult. Rediv. § 38 f. Schmid, Dogm. der ev. luth. K. cap. 4. Rohnert, Die Inspi-ration der H. Schrift 169 f. Koelling, Die
Lehre von der Theopneustie 1891. S. 212 f. Among the Reformed we find the same doctrine of Scripture. Zwingli often subordinates the external word to the internal, admits historical and chronological inaccuracies, and sometimes extends inspiration to heathen writers,
Zeiler, Das theol. System Zwingli's 137 f. Chr. Sigwart, Ulr. Zwingli 45 f. But Calvin holds the Scriptures in a full and literal sense to be
God's word, Instit. I. c. 7-8, Comm. on 2 Tim. 3:16 and 2 Pet. 1:20; he acknowledges the letter to the Hebrews, though not for paulinic, yet for canonical, and takes Mt. 22 : 9, 23 : 25 to be an error, but not in the autographa, Cramer, The Scripture of Calvin. Herald. n°. 26 v.
Moore, Calvin's doctrine of holy Scripture, Presb. and Ref. Rev. Jan.
1893 p. 49 etc. The Geref. confessions have most an article on the Holy Scriptures and clearly pronounce its divine authority, I Helv. 13. II Helv. 1. 2. 13. Gall. 18. 5. Belg. 3. Angl. 6. Scot. 18 etc.; and the Geref. theologians all take the same view without distinction, ürsinus
, Tract, theol. 1584 p. 1-33. Zanchius, Op. VIII col. 319-451. Junius, Theses Theol. cap. 2. Polanus, Synt. Theol. i 15. Synopsis, disp. 2.
Voetius, Disp. Sei. I. 30 sq. etc. Cramer, The Roman Catholic and Old Prot. Schriftbeschou wing. Heraut n°. 26 v. Heppe, Dogm. der ev. ref.
K. S. 9 f. Occasionally a feeble attempt at more organic consideration is discernible. The inspiration was not always in revelation, but, when it came to known matters, in assistia and directio ; the writers were not always passive, but sometimes active, so that they used their own reason, memory, judgment, style, but in such a way that they were nevertheless guided by H. G. and protected from error,
Synopsis 3 : 7. Rivetus, Isag. seu introd. generalis ad Script. V. et N.
T. cap. 2. Heidegger, Corpus Theol. loc. 2. § 33. 34, but even with this the divinity and infallibility of the Scriptures were not in the least impaired. The writers were not auctores, but scriptores, amanuenses, notarii, manus, calami Dei. The inspiration was not negative but always positive, an impulsus ad scribendum and ae suggestio rerun! et verborum. It communicated not only unknown but also already known things and words, for the writers had to know them precisely now and precisely in such a way, not only materialiter but also formaliter, not only humane but also divine, Schmid, Dogm. der ev. luth. K. 23, 24. Voetius, Disp. I 30. The inspiration extended to all chronol. histor. geogr. matters, to words, even to vocals and signs. J.
Buxtorf, Tract, de punctorum origine, autiquitate et auctoritate 1648.
Anticritica 1653. Alsted, Praecognita Theol. p. 276. Polanus, Synt.
Theol. I p. 75. Voetius, Disp. I 34. Cons. Helv. art. 2. Barbarisms and solucisms were not accepted in the H. S. Difference of style was explained by the will of the H. G., who now and then wanted to write differently, Quenstedt and Hollaz at Rohnert, Die Inspir. der H.
Schrift 205. 208. Winer, Grammatik des N. T. Sprachidioms, 6th Aufi. 11 f. Voetius ib. Gomarus, Op. 601. Materialiter, as regards letters, syllables and words, Scripture is e sensu creaturarum, but formaliter, as regards den sensus &εοπνενστοτ, male creaturis accensetur, cum sit mens, consilium, sapientia Dei. Hollaz, Exam. ed.
Teller p. 992, at Dauschll2. 1111714 Nitzsche wrote in Gotha, according to Tholuck, Vermischte Schriften II 86, a dissertation on the question, whether the Holy Scriptures themselves were God.
8. But when the theory of inspiration, as with the Jews and the Mohammedans, had thus reached its ultimate conclusion, opposition arose from all sides. Even in early times there was no lack of criticism of Scripture. Jehoiakim burned the scroll of Baruch, Jer. 36.
Apion summarized all the accusations made by the pagans against the Jews concerning circumcision, the prohibition of boar's meat, the exodus from Egypt, the sojourn in the desert, etc. Josephus, contra
Apionem, J. G. Muller, Des Flavius Josephus' Schrift gegen den Apion 1877. The Gnostics, Manichaeans and their related sects in the Middle Ages tore the N. Test apart from the Old and attributed it to a lower god, the demiurge. Especially Marcion, in his Antitheses, and his disciples Apelles and Tatian, starting from the Pauline opposition of righteousness and grace, law and gospel, works and faith, flesh and spirit, directed their attack against the anthropomorphisms, the contradictions, the immorality of the Old Testament, and said that a God who is wrathful, repentant, vengeful, jealous, commands theft and lies, descends, gives a severe law, etc., cannot be the true God.
They also pointed with fondness to the great difference between Christ, the true Messiah, and the Messiah, as the prophets expected him to be. Of the N. T. Marcion rejected all the writings except those of Luke and Paul, and corrupted even these by abridgment and interpolation, Tertullian, adv. Marcionem. Epiphanius, Haer. 42.
Irenaeus, adv. haer. passim. Harnack, Dogmengesch. I 226 f. Celsus continued this battle in a sharp way and gave a sharp critique on the first chapters of Genesis, the creation days, the creation of mankind, the temptation, the fall, the flood, the ark, Babel's tower, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and furthermore on Jonah,
Daniel, the supernatural birth of Jesus, the baptism, the resurrection, the miracles and accused Jesus and the apostles, for lack of a better explanation, of deceit. Porphyrius started the historical criticism of the books of the Bible; he contested the allegorical exegesis of the Old Testament, attributed the Pentateuch to Ezra, held Daniel to be a product of Antiochus' time and subjected many accounts in the Gospels to sharp criticism. Julian later made all these attacks against Scripture in his Λογο! χατα χριστιανών once more renewed them. But with that, the end of the criticism of the
time had been reached. Scripture came to general and undisputed dominion; criticism was forgotten. She revived in the Renaissance, but was then for a time still subdued by the Reformation and the Roman Counter-Reformation. Later it rose again, in rationalism, deism and French philosophy. First it was directed more against the content of Scripture in the rational eighteenth century; then it was directed more against the authenticity of the writings in the historically-minded nineteenth century. Porphyrius replaced Celsus,
Renan followed Voltaire, Paul of Heidelberg gave way to Strauss and Baur. But the result always remains the same, Scripture is a book of error and falsehood.
As a result of this criticism, many have changed the doctrine of inspiration. At first inspiration is still held to be a supernatural working of H. G. in writing, but limited to the religious-ethical; in chronological, historical, etc., it is weakened or denied, so that here greater or lesser errors may occur. The Word of God is to be distinguished from Holy Writ. This was already taught by the Socinians. The writers of the O. and N. T. have written divino spiritu impulsi eoque dictante, but the O. T. has only historical value, only the doctrine is directly inspired, in the rest a leviter errare is possible, Fock, Der Socin. 320 f. The Remonstrants took the same position. They acknowledge inspiration, Conf. art. 1, but admit, that the writers have sometimes expressed themselves less exact et praecise, Limborch, Theol. Christ. I c. 4 § 10, or have sometimes erred in the circumstantiae tidei, Episcopius, Instit. Theol. TV 1 cap.
4, or stronger still in the historical books neither needed nor received inspiration, H. Grotius, Votum pro pace ecclesiae, Clericus, with Dr.
Cramer, The geschied, of the doctrine of inspiration in the last two centuries 1887. bl. 24. The same doctrine of inspiration we then find in S. J. Baumgarten, J. G. Töllner, Sender, Michaelis, Reinhard,
Dogm. § 19. Vinke, Theol. Christ. Dogm. Comp. 1853 p. 53-57.
Egeling, Way of Salvation, 3rd ed. II 612. etc. But this theory met with many objections. The separation between what is necessary for salvation and what is incidental to history is impossible, since doctrine and history are completely interwoven in Scripture. It does
not do justice to the consciousness of the writers, who by no means limit their authority to religious-ethical matters but extend it to the whole content of their writings. It is contrary to the use of Scripture by Jesus, the Apostles, and the entire Christian Church. This dualistic view therefore gave way to another, the dynamic one of Schleiermacher, Christ. Gl. § 128-132. It consists in transferring the theopneustic from the intellectual to the ethical. Inspiration is not primarily a property of Scripture but of the writers. These were bornagain, holy men; they lived in the presence of Jesus, experienced his influence, lived in the holy circle of revelation and were thus renewed, also in their thinking and speaking. Inspiration is the habitual characteristic of writers. Their writings also share it; they too carry a new, holy character. But this inspiration of the writers is therefore not essential, but only gradually distinguished from that of all believers, for all believers are guided by the Holy Spirit. Nor is it to be understood mechanically, as if it were the part of the writers only occasionally and in some subjects. God's Word is not incorporated into Scripture mechanically, as a picture into a frame, but it permeates and animates all parts of Scripture, as the soul does all members of the body. However, not all parts of Scripture share this inspiration, this word of God, equally; the closer something is to the center of Revelation, the more it breathes the Spirit of God.
Scripture is therefore at once a divine and a human book, on the one hand containing the highest truth and at the same time weak, fallible, imperfect; not revelation itself but the ear of revelation; not the word of God itself but a description of that word; imperfect in many respects, but still a sufficient instrument for us to attain a faultless knowledge of revelation. Finally, it is not Scripture, but the person of Christ, or Revelation in general, which is the principle of theology. Of course, this theory of inspiration is open to many modifications; theopneustics can be placed in a more or less intimate relationship to Revelation, the action of the Holy Spirit can be interpreted more or less positively, the possibility of error can be admitted to a greater or lesser extent. But the basic ideas remain the same; inspiration is in the first place a characteristic of the writers and then of their writings, it is not a momentary act or a special gift
of the Holy Spirit but a habitual characteristic, it works dynamically, so that the possibility of error is not excluded in all parts. This theory has almost completely replaced the old doctrine of inspiration. There are only a few theologians left who have not essentially adopted it.
See Rothe, Zur Dogm. 121 f. Twesten, Vorles. I 401 f. Dorner, Glaub. I 620 f. Lange, Dogm. I § 76 f. Tholuck, art. Inspir. in Herzog1.
Cremer, id. in Herzog2. Hofmann, Weiss, u. Erf. I 25 f. Id.
Schriftbeweis, 2e Aufl. I 670 f. Ill 98 f. Beck, Vorles. über christl.
Glaub. I 424-530, Einleitung in das System der christl. Lehre, 2e Aufl. § 82 f. Kalmis, Luth. Dogm. I 254-301. Erank, Syst. der chr.
Gewissheit II 57 f. Id. Syst. der chr. Wahrheit, 2e Aufl. II. 409 f. Gess, Die Inspiration der Helden der Bibel und der Schriften der Bibel,
Basel 1892. W. Volck, Zur Lehre von der H. Schrift, Dorpat 1885.
Grau, Bew. d. Glaubens Juni 1890, S. 225 f. Zöckler, Bew. d. Gl. April 1892 S. 150 f. Kahler, Wiss, der chr. Lehre, 1884. S. 388 f. Kübel,
Leber den Lnterscheid zw. der posit, u. der liber. Richtung in der mod. Theol. 2e Aufl. S. 216 f. Pareau et H. de Groot, Comp. dogm. et apol. Christ. 1848 p. 200 sq. H. de Groot, De Gron. Godgel. 1855 bl.
59 v. Saussaye, Mine Theol. of Ch. d. 1. S. 49-61. Roozemeyer, Voices v. W. and Fri. July 1891. Dr. Is. van Dijk, Wrong use of the Bible
1891. Daubanton, The theopneustics of Holy Scripture 1882.
Oosterzee, Dogmatics § 35 v. Id. Theopneustics 1882. Doedes, Doctrine of salvation § 1-9. Id. The Ned. Geloofsbel. bl. 11-36. R. E.
Horton, Inspiration and the Bible 4 ed. London 1889. C. Gore, Lux mundi, 13 ed. London 1892, p. 247. Farrar and others, Inspiration, a clerical symposium, 2 ed. London 1888. W. Gladden, W110 wrote the Bible, Boston, Houghton 1891. C. A. Briggs, Inspiration and inerrancy, with papers upon biblical scholarship and inspiration by L. J. Evans and Η. P. Smith, and an introduction by A. B. Bruce,
London 1891. J. de Witt, Inspiration 1893 etc. Ritschl and his school may also be mentioned here, in so far as they emphasize the objective revelation in Christ in contrast to conscious theology and in connection with it also try to make Scripture true, A. Eitschl, Rechtf. u. Vers. II2 9 f. W. Herrmann, Die Bedeutung der Inspirationslehre für die ev. Kirche, Halle 1882. Kaftan, Wesen der christl. Rel. 1881 S.
307 f. Nitzsch, Lehrb. der ev. Dogm. 212-252. E. Haupt, Die
Bedeutung der H. Schrift für den evang. Christian, Gutersloh 1891 etc. But this theory satisfies neither the church nor so-called science.
The critical objections against Scripture do not apply to the periphery but to the very center of revelation. Therefore others have gone even further and denied inspiration as a supernatural working of God's Spirit. The Bible is a chance collection of human writings, written by men with a deep religious spirit and created among a people who may be called the people of religion. Of revelation and inspiration there is only a metaphorical sense. At the most there is a special guidance of God's general providence in the creation and collection of these writings. The inspiration is only gradually different from the religious inspiration, in which all pious people share, Spinoza, Tract, theol. polit. cap. Wegscheider, Instit. theol. §
13. Strauss, Glaub. I 136 f. Schweizer, Glaub. I 43 f. 179 f.
Biedermann, Dogm. § 179208. Pfieiderer, Grundriss § 39 f. Lipsius, Dogm. § 179 f. Scholten, L.H.K. I 78 v. Yet it is remarkable that all these men continue to recognize to some extent the religious value of Scripture. They not only see in it a source for the knowledge of Israel and of early Christianity, but they also try to maintain it as a means of grace for the cultivation of the religious-ethical life, cf. Bruining,
Theol. Tijdschr. Nov. 1894, p. 587 f. In this respect they differ favorably from all the radicals, who have completely done away with the Scriptures, have shaken off all piety for them, and have nothing left for them but ridicule and contempt. In the first centuries Celsus and Lucianus were the interpreters of this; towards the end of the Middle Ages the slander of the tres impostores was introduced; in the 18th century this hatred of Christianity was expressed by Voltaire, who from 1760 had no other name for Christianity than l'infame and since 1764 has mostly signed his letters with écrasez l'infame; and in this century this enmity against Christ and His Word has increased and grown.
Against all these more or less negative tendencies the inspiration of Scripture in a positive and full sense is still recognized and defended in this century, except by Roman theologians, by I. da Costa, On the Divine Instruction of the Holy Scriptures, edited by Rev. Eggestein,