interpreters are decidedly opposed to any such conception of divine
The Bible is divinely inspired—that is the one great principle that controls Hermeneutica Sacra. It cannot be ignored with impunity. Any theory of interpretation that disregards it, is fundamentally deficient, and will not be conducive to our understanding of the Bible as the Word of God.
But the assertion that the Bible is inspired is not sufficiently definite. The meaning of the term "inspiration" is rather indefinite, and requires greater precision. By inspiration we understand that supernatural influence exerted on the sacred writers by the Holy Spirit, by virtue of which their writings are given divine truthfulness, and constitute an infallible and sufficient rule of faith and practice. It means, as Dr. Warfield expresses it, that the writers did not work on their own initiative, but "as moved by the divine initiative and borne by the irresistible power of the Spirit of God along ways of his choosing to ends of his appointment." And when it is said that the writers were guided by the Holy Spirit in writing the books of the Bible, the term "writing" must be taken in a comprehensive sense. It includes the investigation of documents, the collection of facts, the arrangement of material, the very choice of words, in fact all the processes that enter into the composition of a book. Inspiration must be distinguished from revelation in the restricted sense of immediate communication of God in words. The former secures infallibility in teaching, while the latter adds to the store of knowledge. But both of them must be regarded as modes of the revelation of God in the wider sense; modes, i.e., in which God makes known to man His will, His operations, and His purposes.
1. SCRIPTURAL PROOF FOR DIVINE INSPIRATION. Many interpreters are decidedly opposed to any such conception of divine inspiration. They often represent it as a theory devised by conservative theologians to make the Bible square with their preconceived notions of what the character of the Word of God ought to be. But it is a great mistake to regard the idea of divine inspiration as defined above, as a philosophical theory imposed upon the Bible. The outstanding fact is that it is a Scriptural doctrine, just as much as
the doctrines of God and providence, of Christ and the atonement, and others. The Bible offers us a large number of data for a doctrine of (i.e., respecting) Scripture. In the following paragraphs, the most important Biblical proofs for the divine inspiration of the Bible are briefly indicated.
a. The Bible plainly teaches that the organs of revelation were inspired, when they communicated orally to the people the revelations which they had received.
(1) The expressions which the Bible employs to describe the prophetic state and function are such as to imply direct inspiration. Nothing can be inferred from the name nabi, because it is of uncertain derivation. But the classical passage, Ex. 7:1, clearly teaches us that a prophet is one who speaks for God to man, or, more specifically, one who brings the words of God to man. Cf. also Deut. 18:18; Jer. 1:9; 2 Pet. 1:21. Moreover, we are told that the Spirit of God came or fell upon the prophets; that the hand of Jehovah was strong upon them; that they received the word of God, and were under constraint to utter it (Isa. 8:11; Jer. 15:17; Ezek. 1:3; 3:22; 37:1).
(2) The prophetic formulae clearly show that the prophets were conscious of coming to the people with the word of the Lord. In unburdening their souls, they were cognizant of the fact that God filled their minds with a content that did not originate in their own consciousness. Hence the following formulae: "Thus saith the Lord"; "Hear ye the word of the Lord"; "Thus hath the Lord God showed unto me"; "The word of the Lord came unto …"
(3) There is another remarkable feature in the prophetic writings that points in the same direction. In many of their discourses in which the Lord is introduced as speaking, the prophets suddenly turn from the use of the third to that of the first person, without any transitional "saith the Lord." In other words, they surprise the reader by beginning to speak as if they were God. Cf. Isa. 3:4; 5:3 ff.; 10:5 ff.;
27:3; Jer. 5:7; 16:21; Hos. 6:4 ff.; Joel 2:25; Amos 5:21 ff.; Zech. 9:7; etc. This would be unexampled boldness on the part of the prophets, if they were not absolutely sure that God was putting the words, which they were speaking, into their mouths as His own.
(4) Turning to the New Testament, we find that Christ promised His disciples the Holy Spirit, to teach them all things, and to bring to their remembrance whatsoever He had taught them (John 14:26). This promise was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, and, from that time on, the disciples speak as infallible teachers of the people. They know that their words are the words of God (1 Thess. 2:13), and feel confident that their testimony is the testimony of God (1 John 5:9– 12).
b. The Bible teaches the inspiration of the written word.
The foregoing certainty creates a presumption in favor of the inspiration of the organs of revelation in writing the books of the Bible. If God deemed it necessary that they should bring their oral message to the people under the direction of the Holy Spirit, He can hardly have regarded it as less essential that their writings should be safe-guarded in the same way. But we need not rest satisfied with presumptive evidence. The Bible actually teaches the inspiration of the written Word. It is true that not a single passage can be quoted which asserts explicitly the inspiration of the whole Bible, but the evidence is cumulative and leaves no doubt on this point.
(1) In the days of the New Testament, the Jews possessed a collection of writings, technically designated he graphe (the Scripture), or hai graphai (the Scriptures) (Rom. 9:17; Luke 24:27). The he graphe are repeatedly quoted in the New Testament as having divine authority. For Christ and His disciples, an appeal to he graphe was the end of all controversy. Their "it is written" was equivalent to, "God says." Moreover, these writings are sometimes designated in a way that points to their sacred character, for instance, they are called graphai hagiai (Rom. 1:2), and ta hiera grammata (2 Tim. 3:15). And besides
these, there is even a description that points directly to their divine character. They are called "the oracles of God" (Rom. 3:2). In the classical passage, 2 Tim. 3:16, it is perfectly clear that the Scriptures in their entirety, conceived as a direct divine revelation, are meant.
(2) There are a number of quotations from the Old Testament in the New that identify God and Scripture as speakers. A striking example is found in Heb. 1:5–13, where seven Old Testament words are quoted, and are said to have been spoken by God, viz., Ps. 2:7; 2 Sam. 7:14; Deut. 32:43 (LXX), or Ps. 97:7; Ps. 104:4; Ps. 45:6, 7; Ps. 102:24–27; Ps. 110:1. In looking up these passages, we notice that in some of them God is, and in others, He is not the speaker. What Scripture says, is simply ascribed to God. Moreover, in Rom. 9:17 and Gal. 3:8, Old Testament words are quoted with the formula, "the Scripture saith" ("preached"), while in the passages cited, Ex. 9:16; Gen. 22:18, God is the speaker. This identification was possible only on the basis of a strict view of inspiration.
(3) The locus classicus for the inspiration of the Bible is 2 Tim. 3:16. For a detailed interpretation of this verse, we refer to the Commentaries. A few remarks must suffice here. In the immediately preceding context, the apostle speaks of the advantages of Timothy in that he had received a strictly religious education, and had also from childhood known the Holy Scriptures, i.e., the Old Testament. And now, in the 16th verse, the apostle emphasizes the great importance of these Scriptures. From this, it follows that he graphe also refers to the Old Testament as a whole. The word theo-pneustos means God-breathed, i.e., the product of the creative breath of God. The Greek word pasa is rendered by some "all," and by others "every," which makes very little difference, since the one emphasizes the totality, and the other every part of it. Again, some render: "All (every) Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable," etc.; and others: "All (every) Scripture given by inspiration of God is also profitable," etc. But even this makes no great difference, for the inspiration of the Old Testament is either asserted or implied.
(4) Another important passage is 2 Pet. 1:19–21, where the apostle assures his readers that what had been made known to them of the power and coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, did not rest on cunningly devised fables, but on the word of eyewitnesses. And then he adds that they have even better testimony in the prophetic word (by which Dr. Warfield understands the whole Old Testament). This is called more sure, because it is not of private interpretation, i.e., not the result of human investigation, nor the product of the writer's own thinking. It came not by the will of man, but as a gift of God.
(5) Still another passage of considerable importance is 1 Cor. 2:7–13. Paul points to the fact that the wisdom of God, which was hidden from eternity, and which only the Spirit of God could know, had been revealed to him. And then he continues: "Which things we also teach, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth." Since he uses the present tense, this applies also to the things which he was writing to the Corinthians.
c. The Bible teaches that inspiration also extended to the words that were employed by the writers. It is a well-known fact that many who profess to believe that the Bible is inspired are emphatic in their denial of verbal inspiration. They find satisfaction in the acceptance of some kind of partial inspiration, as, for instance, that only the thoughts and not the words, or that only the matters pertaining to faith and life, or, more limited still, that only the words of Jesus, were inspired. Some object to the term "verbal inspiration," because it is apt to suggest a mechanical theory of inspiration, and prefer to use the term "plenary inspiration." There is no objection to this, if it be understood to mean, among other things, that this supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit extended to the very choice of the words, for this is certainly taught in the Bible, both by express statement and by implication. Notice especially the following:
(1) In the passage already referred to under b (5), Paul claims to teach the things that were revealed by the Spirit of God, "not in words which man's wisdom teacheth, but in words which the Holy