"The Doctrine of Inspiration"?

[Guest]

Okay, so me and Mike were having a discussion about the fact that at least Paul and John thought that the Parousia/Resurrection/Rapture/Day of Judgement etc. was imminent in their days. I suggest that their expectaiton was proved wrong by the non-occurence of these things. Mike sugests that this idea destroys the theory of inspiration.

I wanted to ask a pretty broad question:

What is the "the doctrine of inspiration" and how does it relate to the issue of the writers of Scripture having eroneuous beliefs, attitudes, expectations, etc?

I hope the question makes sense

God bless,
Ely

[Guest]

According to theology books, there is no such thing as "the doctrine of inspiration." However, there are a considerable number of theories of inspiration.

For example, the verbal dictation theory states that God dictated the words of the Bible to the writers, and they simply wrote down what they heard. Another form of this theory is that the Spirit of God possessed the minds and bodies of the writers so completely that they became passive intruments in writing God's words.

The more usual verbal inspiration theory, sometimes called "the dynamical theory" is that even though the writers wrote with their own vocabulary and style, God somehow guided their writing so that it would be free of error. In this view, both the writers and the words were inspired. The words are thus infallible and free of error.

A third view is that it is not the words of the Bible that were inspired, but the authors. Thus the authors wrote in their own styles, and expressed their own attitudes. They were inspired in such a way that their messages are essentially true, but that this does not imply that every sentence in the Bible is infallibly true and necessarily free from error.

There are a number of other theories of inspiration as well.

Personally I am inclined toward the third view.

Ely, I think you are correct in stating that the apostles expected the coming of Christ in their own day, though that didn't happen.

At this point, someone is sure to ask, "Did Christ also expect that He would return in a very short time also? There are scriptures that indicate it. Was Christ Himself "mistaken"?

My answer is, "Yes. I think Christ did expect to return soon." It is written that no one knows the day or the hour of His return, not even the Son, but the Father only.

The appointed time for Christ's return is in the Father's hands.

[Guest]

I'm really not too sure what to think...So much of what I have learned has changed in the last two years. Things were a lot easier before I became intimate with my bible. Since then things are not so cut and dry.

I actually kind of like the idea that the inspiration lies in the influence of the Spirit leading early Christians to see these writings in the NT on par with OT scriptures.

I'll figure it out...even if I need to memorize the whole thing.

mike

[Guest]

I think Christ did expect to return soon." It is written that no one knows the day or the hour of His return, not even the Son, but the Father only.

Uh Oh! Now you went there! I think the fact of Jesus expecting the fig tree to have fruit on it is an example of a mistaken expectation on His part. Where do people say that Jesus indicated that He expected to return soon?

I'm really not too sure what to think...So much of what I have learned has changed in the last two years. Things were a lot easier before I became intimate with my bible. Since then things are not so cut and dry.

Yeah that's where I am too. The only writing I can think of which directly relates to this topic is the following:

20But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. 2 Peter 1

[Guest]

Where do people say that Jesus indicated that He expected to return soon?

Ely, you are probably thinking of Jesus saying it while He lived here as a human being. I don't have time right now to look it up, but here are the scriptures from Revelation where, long after his resurrection, He revealed to John that He intended to come soon:

Revelation 2:16 Repent then. If not, I will come to you soon and war against them with the sword of my mouth.
Revelation 3:11 I am coming soon; hold fast what you have, so that no one may seize your crown.
Revelation 22:7 And behold, I am coming soon." Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.
Revelation 22:12 "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done.
Revelation 22:20 He who testifies to these things says, "Surely I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!

The word translated as "soon" is the Greek word "tachy". It can also mean "quickly". The meaning of a word can often be determined by examining other places in the NT where it is used. Here are the other places:

Matthew 5:25 Make friends quickly with your accuser, while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison;
Matthew 28:7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead, and behold, he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him. Lo, I have told you."
Matthew 28:8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.
Mark 9:39 But Jesus said, "Do not forbid him; for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon after to speak evil of me.
Luke 15:22 But the father said to his servants, ‘Bring quickly the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet;
John 11:29 And when she heard it, she rose quickly and went to him.
Acts 17:15 Those who conducted Paul brought him as far as Athens; and receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him as soon as possible, they departed.
Revelation 11:14 The second woe has passed; behold, the third woe is soon to come.

[Guest]

My view will sound like circular reasoning but it's not circular reasoning if the question is, "Is the Bible inspired?" Start with Jesus. Jesus quoted the Old Testament scriptures as though they were the very words of God. The New Testmament doesn't share this distinction but Jesus gave the apostles the right to speak on his behalf. We have their writings so they are the commands of Jesus. This doesn't mean the New Testament is inspired in the same way the Old Testament is inspired, but it does mean the teachings of the apotles are authoritative. I know Padion and many others feel the early church fathers have equal authority but I don't take that view because the fathers contradicted one another. The only way to establish the matter is to have actual spokesmen for Christ, preserved in written form. That authority was only given to a select few.

The whole idea of inspiration is kind of misguided. The real question is, "Is the Bible authoritative or not?" Authority is different than inspiration because for the bible to be authoritative, all we need are accurate records of what Jesus did and said. If we have that, we've established authority. I believe those records are accurate because I believe the witnesses. Jesus said if we recieve them, we receive him who sent them. The Holy Spirit reveals to us, if we listen, who is a true witness and who is a false witness about Christ. Yet, unlike other religions who use similar concepts, we are required to "test all things and hold fast to that which is good." The Spirit works in us, but we're commanded to use our brains as well. So it's actually the Holy Spirit that convinces me of the authority of scripture, but my mind validates what he reveals to me.

[Guest]

I know Padion and many others feel the early church fathers have equal authority but I don't take that view because the fathers contradicted one another.

First, JC, I don't regard the early church fathers as of "equal authority" with that of Jesus Christ or His apostles.

I believe Jesus Christ Himself is the pioneer of our faith and the chief apostle of our profession. We are under His authority and His alone.
I believe the primary documents of the Christian faith are the gospels, and that they are basically accurate historical records of much of what Jesus said and taught. I believe that, as a disciple of Christ, I am required to literally fulfill Christ's instructions in "The Sermon on the Mount" as well as all of His other instructions.

Inasmuch as the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit, and correctly interpreted the teaching of Christ, they are also to be listened to. Thirdly, there is authority in the elders that the apostles appointed. I think Clement of Rome was one of those. He wrote a powerful letter to the Corinthians shortly after the death of Paul and Peter. I have never found anything in that letter which contradicts the teachings of Christ and His apostles. Yes, he relates the story of the Phoenix as if he actually believed in this unique bird. But the Bible also speaks of unicorns as if they exist. I am naive enough to allow for the possibility that unicorns did exist, and maybe the Phoenix also.

As for the fathers contradicting each other, one could maintain that this was also done by the NT writers, for example, Paul taught "justification by faith alone" and James taught that faith was not enough but that justification was by works as well. Of course, those who have made up their minds that there can be no contradictions in the Bible, have devised explanations of this.

[Guest]

Paidion, I apologize for misrepresenting your views. You said this:

As for the fathers contradicting each other, one could maintain that this was also done by the NT writers, for example, Paul taught "justification by faith alone" and James taught that faith was not enough but that justification was by works as well. Of course, those who have made up their minds that there can be no contradictions in the Bible, have devised explanations of this.

I have no opinion whatsoever regarding contradictions in the bible, except to say that the ones I've been shown, like the above example, are not impressive. A man as astute as yourself can surely see that James was emphesizing the need to have "real" faith because that kind of faith can be demonstrated. Paul often spoke of the need to demonstrate your faith in his epistles. Anyway, I don't want to move away from the original topic of this thread. God bless.

[Guest]

I guess my real point is not so much to show that there are contradictions in the Bible, but to point out that the apparent contradictions in early writers do not justify one in rejecting these writers, or supposing that they have no spiritual authority. Their apparent contradictions can be explained, just as those in the Bible can be explained.

Some of the "genuine" contradictions of the early Christian writers have appeared because their writings have been heavily interpolated by later writers. In some cases, later writers may have even forged the entire writing.

There have also been some parts of the Bible that were added by later writers.