HOW DID GOD AUTHOR THE BIBLE, SPIRITUALLY AND/OR VERBALLY?
Christianity, Islam, Mormonism and many other cults have books that they get
their doctrines from which are reputedly inspired by God. Their teaching is to
be as valid as it would be if the book dropped down from Heaven.
The theologians say that there are two kinds of inspiration. One is spiritual,
God putting the thoughts in you letting you find the words yourself, and the
other verbal is actually inspiring the words of a text, or putting the words in
your mind. The two could be true at the one time. Or it could be one or the
other.
In the spiritual variety, if God makes me realise that adultery is wrong then he
can leave it up to me to express this in my own words. If I put it down badly he
will keep at me until I do it right or get somebody else to do it. The most
striking absurdity in this is that a sensible God would choose good writers but
much of the Bible is so badly and unclearly written that even the author of
Second Peter complained about Paul’s epistles.
The spiritual theory is most popular among those who feel that there are minor
errors of grammar and history in the word of God. They say that this does not
make God a liar for he did not inspire the words but the meaning and his purpose
was to give us light in faith and morals.
If a book claims to be inspired then it must be held that it is saying that God
has sanctioned every word in it for you cannot separate the words from the
meaning. They are different but not separate. A blue plastic toy is a toy and it
is blue. Blue and toy and different but are the same thing when you can’t have
one without the other. The thought cannot be conveyed accurately without the
words so the inspiration of the Bible must be plenary (page 19, A Summary of
Christian Doctrine).
The spiritual or mental theory is indeed a mental theory for God must inspire
you to write some of the words for most thoughts come to you in the form of
words and you mentally talk to yourself in words all the time. The theory
implies that God has to inspire the words because he needs some control over the
words used to get the idea expressed clearly and properly. If I write, “Adultery
is bad”, because I feel or sense that God has told me it is sinful then that is
no use for I could mean that it is unpleasant but not immoral. God will have to
tell me to put the word immoral where bad is. God approves of the words of the
text which is all that matters though some claim that they don’t accept that he
does. The theory of spiritual inspiration is ridiculous so verbal inspiration is
the only possibility it seems.
When God inspires some words then he might as well inspire the rest. Why not?
The universal Christian consensus that God let the Bible writers write as they
pleased but without error or inserting what God did not want them to include so
that the words of scripture are as much the words of man as they are God (page
9, Know What You Believe; page 21, Set My Exiles Free). The Bible does not
sanction this absurdity. It’s a contradiction though religion says it’s a
paradox.
When we need to believe in a paradox to believe in the Bible’s divine
inspiration there is something wrong. You cannot assume that the paradox exists
on the grounds that the Bible shows evidence of divine inspiration and was also
freely composed by man. It is irrational to assume paradoxes where there is no
need for there is no shortage of philosophies that have contradictions that they
pretend are paradoxes. Better to assume that they were like divine typewriters
or if the Bible teaches the paradox then to scrap the Bible. God should not make
paradoxes where there need to be none and if the Bible requires one like this
then it is not the word of God at all. Also paradoxes are serious business for
they might be contradictions so you need absolute proof that the seemingly
conflicting components of a paradox are true. For example, you must prove that
the Bible is inspired by God first before you can believe in the paradox of
inspiration. The Bible cannot provide that kind of evidence. There is a paradox
in it regarding divine sovereignty and human freedom (page 28, Know What You
Believe). To avoid a paradox, divine sovereignty or human freedom or both should
be denied for paradoxes are inherently undesirable and are only tolerated under
extreme conditions. You would need to prove that God controls all things as
divine sovereignty claims as much as you can free will. You cannot so God, and
God must be in control of all things and be causing them to come to be to be
God, has to be done away with for to forsake his sovereignty dogma is to forsake
theism.
The Bible authors could have been used by God like typewriters which felt free
but who were not. This is not refuted by the fact that the authors studied and
did research for what they had to write. God got them to know what to write and
then he gave them the words to write with. This view is simple and avoids the
improbable mystery of how God could get free agents to freely write only what he
wants.
Why can’t he get us to freely do what he wants all the time? The theory
contradicts the existence of God which depends on us having free will to get God
off the hook for doing evil. It is blasphemous to teach this inspiration mystery
as being true when the Bible says we are biased against holiness which is true.
It is blasphemy because if God could control us without imposing on our free
will then he should not let us sin so much. The Bible can’t be trusted when the
devil’s men wrote it freely.
The Bible assumes that we have commonsense so it implies that we should not
create mysteries where none need be. No verse says that people were free to
write what God wanted. Implication is one of the ways that the Bible says it had
to have been written by men used like typewriters.
Any sinful fraud could say that God made them write new scripture. Trusting
their work is not a matter of trusting God but them even if God did write
through them for we don’t know the difference. There is a lot of merit in
claiming God controlled you to write, but if the person claims to be free we
have far less reason to trust them. Besides, you only have the fraud’s word for
it that he was not free so it doesn’t help much. But it makes more rational
sense to believe the person who denies his freedom and that God was really the
only author. We don’t have any affidavits from Bible writers that they were not
free when they wrote so we have no right to believe that God wrote the Bible.
Spiritual inspiration needs verbal inspiration to work. If you want to believe
God wrote books then believe the authors were his typewriters.
It may be objected that any scripture allegedly verbally inspired by the same
God would have the same style but all such books show different styles showing
that the books can’t be or claim to be verbally inspired. But God could imitate
the writer’s style. If he had not the sceptics would say that the New Testament
or whatever was forged by one author. God is not like humans that he tends to
stick to the same style.
THE MYTH APPROACH
The spiritual theory of inspiration often means that the Bible stories are
thought to be a divinely inspired myth. Here is an example. We read in the book
of Genesis that God made Eve from Adam's rib. The reader might say that God is
only indicating that woman needs man and the literal story is not to be taken
seriously. The story is only a parable.
But the story could have been meant literally. There is no hint given that we
are to impose our own meaning on it. The Catholic Church in the Catechism
settles for saying that the account has symbolism but is based on a historical
skeleton which means Adam and Eve and their power to infect the universe with
sin and Satan's role in this is all true.
The myth approach leads people to invent their own interpretations and declare
them the word of God. Only a hypocrite says he believes in the Bible as the word
of God and then makes his interpretations the real word of God. That is the
person that scoffs at the believer in the literal interpretation and labels him
a fundamentalist! The worst fundamentalist is the one who says his fantasies
about the Bible word of God are the Bible word of God. Better to be the humble
literalist!
Think about God's alleged true meaning, that woman needs man. The story would
indicate that better by saying that God made Eve from Adam's heart. Why a rib?
It is an insult to woman to say that God had to make her from something that could
be done without such as rib! And no women believe that men and women need to be
bodily or genetically related. And Adam had to be asleep for the rib to be
taken. Thus he missed out on a chance to see this creature being built from a
part of him. He had to depend on God telling him that he made him from him. That
makes this a bit more impersonal.
The myth approach promotes the fundamentalism of telling people lies about the
Bible.
FINALLY
Verbal inspiration tends to be unpopular though the Bible teaches it. The
"faithful" wish to stave off atheist ridicule for they feel it is too much to
say that "Jesus is Lord," Paul's words, are just as much God's words. The idea
that Jesus became fully man despite being fully God implies that you can say the
Bible is fully human and fully supernatural. It's a mystery. Spiritual
inspiration is popular but most of its preachers do not believe it for they use
it as an excuse for getting rid of God's teachings that they do not like. One
casualty was hell being God's torture chamber and the latest seems to be the
teaching that only a man and woman can marry in the sight of God.
BOOKS CONSULTED
A Summary of Christian Doctrine, Louis Berkhof, The Banner of Truth Trust,
London, 1971
Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, John W Haley, Whitaker House, Pennsylvania,
Undated
Answers to Tough Questions, Josh McDowell and Don Stewart, Scripture Press
Bucks, 1988
Attack on the Bible, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, 1965
Biblical Exegesis and Church Doctrine, Raymond E Brown, Paulist Press, New York,
1985
But the Bible Does Not Say So, Rev Roberto Nisbet, Church Book Room Press,
London, 1966
Catholicism and Christianity, Cecil John Cadoux, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1928
Catholicism and Fundamentalism, Karl Keating, Ignatius Press, San Francisco,
1988
Creation and Evolution, Dr Alan Hayward, Triangle, London, 1994
Does the Bible Contradict Itself? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan,
1986
Encyclopaedia of Bible Difficulties, Gleason W Archer, Zondervan, Grand Rapids,
Michigan, 1982
Essentials, David L Edwards and John Stott, Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1990
Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Vol 1, Josh McDowell, Alpha, Scripture Press
Foundation, Bucks, 1995
Free Inquiry, Fall 1998, Vol 18, No 4, Council for Secular Humanism, Amherst,
New York
God and the Human Condition, F J Sheed, Sheed & Ward, London, 1967
God Cannot Lie, David Alsobrook, Diasozo Trust, Kent, 1989
God, Science and Evolution, Prof E H Andrews, Evangelical Press, Herts, 1985
God’s Word, Final Infallible and Forever, Floyd C McElveen, Gospel Truth
Ministries, Grand Rapids, 1985
How and Why Catholic and Protestant Bibles Differ, Carolyn Osiek, RSCJ and
Donald Senior, CP, The Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota, 1983
How to Interpret the Bible, Fergus Cleary SJ, Ligouri Publications, Missouri,
1981
In Defence of the Faith, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene Oregon, 1996
Inspiration in the Bible, Fr Karl Rahner, Herder and Herder, New York, 1966
Jesus and Early Christianity in the Gospels, Daniel J Grolin, George Ronald,
Oxford, 2002
Jehovah of the Watch-tower, Walter Martin and Norman Klann, Bethany House
Publishers, Minnesota, 1974
Know What You Believe, Paul E Little, Scripture Union, London, 1973
Know Why You Believe, Paul E Little, Scripture Union, London, 1971
New Evangelicalism An Enemy of Fundamentalism, Curtis Hutson, Sword of the Lord,
Murfreesboro, 1984
None of These Diseases, SI McMillen MD, Lakeland, London 1966
Our Perfect Book the Bible, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, 1958
Proof the Bible is True, Rev JMA Willans BD, Dip.Theol. Vermont Press, Larne,
1982
Radio Replies Vol 3, Radio Replies Press, Minnesota, 1942
Reason and Belief, Bland Blanschard, London, George Allen and Unwin Ltd, 1974
Return to Sodom and Gomorrah, Charles Pellegrino, The Softback Preview, New
York, 1995
Science and the Bible, Henry Morris, Moody Press, Bucks, 1988
Science Held Hostage What’s Wrong With Creation Science and Evolutionism, Howard
J Van Till/Davis A.Young/Clarence Menninga, IVP, Downer’s Grove, Illinois, 1988
Science Speaks, Peter W Stoner and Robert C Newman, Moody Press, Chicago, 1976
Set My Exiles Free, John Power, Logos Books, MH Gill & Son Ltd, Dublin, 1967
Testament, The Bible and History, John Romer, Henry Holt and Company, New York,
1988
The Authority of the Bible, Ambassador College, Pasadena, California, 1980
The Bible is the Word of God, Jimmy Thomas, Guardian of Truth, Kentucky
The Bible, Questions People Ask, A Redemptorist Pastoral Publication, Liguori
Publications, Missouri, 1980
The Canon of Scripture, FF Bruce, Chapter House, Glasgow, 1988
The Church of Rome and the Word of God, Rev Eric C Last, Protestant Truth
Society, London, Undated
The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, Edited by Raymond E Brown, Joseph A
Fitzmyer, Roland E Murphy, Geoffrey Chapman, New York 1990
The Theology of Inspiration, John Scullion SJ, Mercier, Cork, 1970
The Unauthorised Version, Robin Lane Fox, Penguin, Middlesex, 1992
Verbal Inspiration of the Bible, John R Rice Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro,
1943
What is the Bible? Henri Daniel-Rops, Angelus Books, Guild Press, New York, 1958
Why Does God..? Domenico Grasso SJ, St Pauls , Bucks, 1970