04.05. Qualifying Facts...

5. QUALIFYING FACTS ENABLING US TO LIMIT INSPIRATION AND STATE ITS MEANING AN orderly discussion of the subject of inspiration would be to follow this method: First, the text of the Scriptures; second, the canon of the Scriptures; third, the historical setting; fourth, inspiration. This method has been adopted in my class in Baylor University and the Seminary, but in the present discussion I am treating inspiration only, and take for granted everything back of inspiration. In the preceding chapters we have discussed the inspiration of the New Testament and Old Testament Scriptures, the inspiration of the authors of the various books of the Bible, certain promises in the New Testament, then the fulfilment of those promises, but did not have space to discuss another important item, viz.: certain modifying facts and circumstances which help us to define and to limit inspiration.

There are certain terms in the Bible to which we need at this juncture to make reference.

One is regeneration, that work of the Holy Spirit which makes a sinner a Christian.

Another is sanctification, that work of the Holy Spirit which perfects holiness in the Christian.

Still another is revelation, which has for its author Jesus Christ only. He does the revealing, and it is an unveiling or disclosure of any matter which God wishes to make known to man. And illumination is that influence of the Holy Spirit such as you and I may have obtained by prayer, so as to help us understand the revelation.

Now, inspiration is a different thing. Christ reveals, but the Holy Spirit inspires, so inspiration is that influence of the Spirit (here I carry forward the definition given before) which qualifies its subject to receive a revelation, or to speak or write what God wills, so as to secure the infallible accuracy of the inspired declaration or record. This is a condensed definition of the one which I gave in former chapters.

Now, as bearing upon the definition of the terms “Regeneration,”

“Sanctification,” “Revelation,” and “Inspiration,” I wish to bring out some modifying facts in connection with the inspiration of the New Testament writers. The first Scripture I cite is John 11:50-52 : “Nor do ye consider that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not (and this spake he not of himself, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation, and not for the nation only, but that also he should gather together into one the children of God that were scattered abroad),” declaring in effect: “If we let him thus alone, the Romans will come and take away our nation.”

Now, here is a case of inspiration that will help to distinguish between the terms to which attention has been called.

Caiaphas was a bad man. He was not regenerated, he was not sanctified, but there was an influence of the Spirit resting upon him that caused him to say just what he said, and yet he did not mean it that way at all.

He had an entirely different meaning in his mind. He meant that, as a matter of political expediency, it was better, whether Christ was righteous or unrighteous, guilty or not guilty-it was better for that man to be put to death than that the Romans should come and take away their nation. That was all it was to him. He was the unconscious subject of the inspiration of God; so if anybody objects to Peter’s exhibiting faults after he was inspired, it may be replied that the object of inspiration was not to regenerate or sanctify. Here was a man (Caiaphas) who had never possessed that at all.

I take a second case illustrating the same thing. It was customary, when men were crucified, to write the indictment or accusation over the head of the man who was publicly put to death, and so Pilate wrote in three languages

Greek, Latin and Hebrew the accusation, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews,” or, as abbreviated by one of the writers, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews,” or, as abbreviated by another, “This is the King of the Jews,” or, as still more abbreviated by a fourth, “The King of the Jews.”

Now, he wrote that in three languages, and the Jews came to him and said:

“Write not that He is King, but that He said He was King.” Pilate said, “What I have written, I have written.”

Now, the circumstances show that, without Pilate’s meaning to, without his having a consciousness at all that there was an influence of the Spirit of God guiding him to write that sentence-writing it in the three languages of the world-it went abroad to the whole human race.

Many a man, without knowing it, has been moved to do things by the Spirit of God. Judas was an inspired man, and is in hell today. Saul, the King of Israel, was inspired at one time in his life. So we must not confound inspiration with either regeneration, or sanctification, or revelation.

Now we come to the second point. Turn to the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. I want you to see the particular working of the Holy Spirit that I am going to introduce now. Not only inspiration, but many other powers of the Spirit came upon the disciples. We have this account:

“And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?”

Now compare that with 1 Corinthians 14:27-28, and you have a phenomenon: “If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church: and let him speak to himself and to God.”

Now here was an inspiration that came upon those men that enabled them to speak the words of God in a language that they did not know themselves.

Some, it seems, had the gift of interpretation.

I want you to see the bearing of this upon verbal inspiration. If a man himself thoroughly understood the tongue that he was going to speak in if he knew what the words meant one might claim for him the inspiration of ideas, but not of words. But these men did not know, certainly not in the case of 1 Corinthians 14:27-28.

Let us now suppose a case. It is the day of Pentecost, and one of the inspired people is standing up to speak to the people of other nations, and to speak it in their language, although he does not know the language himself. In answer to the question from some Greek in the audience:

“How must I pray?” he answers in Greek, ho Theos, hilastheti moi to hamartolo (God be merciful to me, the sinner). But, as a proof that it was verbal inspiration, he did not know what it meant.

Or, suppose it was a Roman, and he replies to that question in Latin, Deus, propitius esto mihi peccatori (God be merciful to me, the sinner).

Or, suppose a question in the first instance was in Greek, “What must I do to be saved?” and he answers in Greek, Pisteuson epi ton Kurion Iesoun Christon kai sotheese su (Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved), or to the Roman in the Latin, Crede in Dominum Iesum Christum et salvus esis to (Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved).

I am elucidating this to show the bearing of a certain fact of this kind upon the inspiration of the words. Here it was bound to be an inspiration that furnished the word as well as the idea, because the man is speaking in a tongue that he doesn’t know.

Take another case: In the promise of the inspiration which is found in John 14:26, one effect was that it would bring all things to remembrance, and yet we find Paul, in 1 Corinthians 1:16, saying: “And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides I know not whether I baptized any other.”

Now, here is a lapse of memory in Paul, but the question is: Is it a lapse of memory on the point upon which he was inspired? The promise was to bring to remembrance all things whatsoever Christ had said or commanded. Inspiration on one thing doesn’t guarantee a perfect memory in other things; it did not bring back to memory the number of people he had baptized.

Let us take another case. It is very important indeed, and I shall have to find myself differing from a great many people in the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 12:12-13 :

“Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God: that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Spirit teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual words.” In this we have both revelation and inspiration conjoined. Here is revelation, illumination and inspiration all together. There are three significant Greek words here, pneumatikoio, pneumatika and sugkrinontes, “ joining spiritual things to spiritual words.”

Look again at the passage before us: “We have received spiritual things, and we have received them not in the wisdom that man teaches, but in the words that the Spirit teaches, joining spiritual things to spiritual words.” That is a good translation of this passage, and is considered so by some good scholars. I cite an authority on that translation, Dr. Hodge, of Princeton, who is as fine a scholar as can be found. He says that this inspiration which Paul received enabled him to set spiritual things, not in words that man’s wisdom taught, but in words that the Spirit taught to him which we call joining spiritual things to spiritual words.

It is claimed that logos there might mean “discussion.” Now, this has a direct bearing upon the subject of verbal inspiration, and yet we do not find that verbal inspiration stereotypes the style, even in the case of a single man. It is nothing mechanical like that, nor does it in the least destroy the individuality of the inspired man. When Paul writes, he writes in Paul’s style; when Peter writes, he writes in Peter’s style. The Holy Spirit inspires the penman and not the pen, and we must not be disturbed when we find Paul’s style, when he is writing spiritual things in spiritual words, or Peter’s style in his writings. We should accept that fact as we go along. In other words, by the wisdom of God, through inspiration, we have a Bible of infinite variety. We have history, law, poetry, parable, allegory, proverb, symbol, simile, argument, persuasion-every form of composition or speech, by all classes of men, and yet each man was moved to speak as he spoke or wrote.

Now let us take 2 Corinthians 12:1-21, where the Apostle Paul is describing how he received a revelation. He had to be inspired to receive it. The inspiration itself qualified him to receive a revelation. John was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day when he received the Revelation. Paul is recording a fact that occurred fourteen years before. Fourteen years before he wrote, he was inspired to receive a revelation, and now he is inspired to record it. He says:

“I knew a man in Christ just about fourteen years ago, whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, but I knew such an one caught up to the third heaven into the paradise of God.” So we see that the inspiration doesn’t make knowledge perfect on the method, and that is why I don’t include in my definition of inspiration, the method of inspiration. Though Paul states there the process, he cannot say that he knew so as to state whether it was in the body or out of the body. That is where his knowledge was imperfect. And then notice that the Bible, both in the New and Old Testaments, tells us a good many things that wicked people said and did, and the question has been asked, “How can that prove the Bible to be the Word of God?” Those wicked people were not inspired of God to say the wicked things they said and do the wicked things they did, but the Book recording them is inspired. Now bear that in mind as bearing upon inspiration. In the next place, please notice the distinction in the workings of inspiration when the subject of it is writing history, or bearing testimony on the one hand, and on the other hand, making an argument or an appeal. The most astounding thing in the whole Bible to me is the proof of inspiration on this point. When it comes to writing history, it is arbitrarily given. There are no explanations given. The writer does not stop to go into explanations of the stupendous things he records. Unlike human historians, not one of them makes a solitary explanation. They go on and state the facts arbitrarily, and this is characteristic of both Old Testament and New Testament history. The next peculiarity is the brevity of its statement. It puts in a phrase what a human historian would put in a volume. It packs into a few sentences the most momentous incidents of time.

Commence with the case of the apostles, and you behold Peter. Peter steps on the stage. Then Paul steps on the stage and he has his say, but they don’t stop to explain what the great majority of the disciples said or did or wrote. The history makes no explanation at all.

Then each writer, under his own inspiration, addresses himself to the work before him without the slightest effort to harmonize what he is going to say with any of the other New Testament writers.

Take Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Matthew commences with Abraham and closes with the resurrection; Mark commences with John the Baptist and closes with the resurrection; Luke commences with Adam and closes with Paul a prisoner at Rome; John begins with Jesus in eternity and closes with his Revelation on Patmos. Paul commences where John does and closes where Jesus Christ turns the kingdom over to the Father. Mark never once stops to consider where the others begin.

These historians go right ahead teaching things in the domain of science, geography, astronomy, history, and going down into all the spheres of technical knowledge. They go right on confronting everything in the wide world, and never expecting to make a mistake in anything, and the man is not living that can show where they ever did make a mistake.

Whether they teach history, science, geography or philosophy, or refer to the weather, the times, the customs, or the seasons, they use the right words or phrases in everything they say.

Take the officer in the Philippian gaol, that Roman gaoler, where there is not a man to witness. It is the most remarkable history that the world has ever seen.

They go on and tell us, and it just makes one shiver as he reads.

These New Testament writers voice a statement, for instance, that Christ has raised a young man or a girl from the dead. The young man is given back to his mother, the girl to her parents, and we look to see what the writer says in explanation. He doesn’t say a word!

Now contrast that with the feelings and emotions of the personality of the writers when they are not testifying, but writing letters. Take up Paul’s case. We can hear the very throbbings of his heart. We can look down into the very depths of his soul. We can hear him say that he could wish himself accursed for his brethren’s sake. We can see the heaviness of his heart and the tears when he is writing of his unfaithful brethren, just as you can see John writing when no man or angel is found who is able to open the book of future events. Then you see all the feelings of Jeremiah brought out: “Oh, that my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people!”

Now that is marvellous. When you go to history, they are the only people that fail to explain it. They are the only people that fail to give evidence. Why, you put that before a lawyer, and he understands it in a moment. They speak, so that they are the only witnesses that are wanted on the witness stand.

Now, leaving out things in these histories that you wonder at, you find that in writing under inspiration Paul says to Timothy, “Bring my cloak and books at Troas.” I never understood Paul’s captivity at Rome until I read that sentence. In prison !

“I have one old weather-beaten cloak,” he writes, “that I carried with me on many voyages and travels, and the winter’s coming, and I am not able to buy a new cloak. When you come, bring me that cloak. I am shut up here in this prison, and I want to read, so bring me the books, and especially the parchments.”

Hereafter let no one talk about that sentence not being put in there by inspiration.

I now apply some of these facts. Understanding these things on inspiration, let us go back and apply some of this to the Old Testament.

I will take up some of the most difficult cases, even worse than that great sea-monster swallowing Jonah. Take 2 Peter 2:15-16 : “Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Besor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness, but was rebuked for his iniquity; the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbad the madness of the prophet.”

Now examine what Jude says, Jude 1:11 : “Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Korah.”

Now take what Jesus says, Revelation 2:14 : “But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumbling-block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication.”

Now turn to the Old Testament. Notice that it bears distinct testimony to that record in the twenty-second, twenty-third and twenty-fourth chapters of Numbers. There was this man Balak who had sent for Balaam to come and prophesy against the children of Israel. Balaam was rebuked by the dumb ass.

Under the influence of the Spirit this dumb ass speaks. The only trouble about the case now is that the uninspired asses sometimes speak. But, speaking seriously, here is a case of the inspiration of an animal. The most wonderful thing in this world is the influence of the Spirit of God; for He could brood over inorganic matter and give it life; create darkness and light; influence children in the womb; cause a dumb brute to speak in the language of man. The most alluring quest in the world is the study of the work of the Holy Spirit.

Take this case of Balaam, if you want to study the method of inspiration as it relates to the character of the inspired one. Suppose we look a little, first, at Numbers 22:38 : “And Balaam said unto Balak, Lo, I am come unto thee: have I now any power to say anything? the word that God putteth in my mouth, that shall I speak.”

Notice again the next chapter, Numbers 23:5 : “And the Lord put a word in Balaam’s mouth and said, Return unto Balak, and thus thou shalt speak.” And then we have the words that He put in his mouth:

“And how shall I curse whom God hath not cursed? How shall I defy whom God hath not defied?…Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his!…God is not a man that he should lie.”

Notice the last verse, where he expresses the vision of the future. Balaam, the man who heard the words of God, prophesied: “I shall see him, but not now; I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a star out of Jacob, and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.” That is a marvellous prophecy of this wicked man, not a regenerated man, not a sanctified man, but an inspired man, unable to speak for God any word except that which God put in his mouth. God takes this man and inspires him to receive a revelation, inspires him to tell that revelation with infallible accuracy, inspires him to point with an insistent finger into a future so dim and distant that no uninspired eye could see it. A Star! A Star!! And yet wise men shall see that Star at a later day, and find it shining on a Babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, and laying in a manger.

Now let us take two or three epistles. In Romans 15:4, the Apostle Paul makes a statement. We have proven him to be an inspired man. Now he is going to make a statement about the whole Old Testament: “Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.”

If he is referring only to the faith of Abraham, what about the book of Ruth, that sweet little pastoral gem? Let me tell you. I read that book over again the other day to see if I could get an inspiration; it came over me like a vision, and I felt the Spirit of God. Here is the genealogy of David. Here is the sidelight on the dark period of the judges. Here is the proof that while many were going astray and were doing wickedly, a family unknown to history, like one of the seven thousand that had not bowed the knee to Baal and, unknown to Elijah, were keeping the commands of God.

“Well now,” I said, “I will read Esther.” What is there good in the book of Esther? As I looked over the newspapers and saw the Jews in Russia under the iron hand of persecution driven away from their homes to an awful exile yet they are not annihilated. Now, here is a little book in the Old Testament that gives us a picture of a people in exile, and persecuted; that compares this people to a burning bush that burns but is never consumed. “And whatsoever things were written before time were written for our admonition.”

Now I turn to 1 Corinthians 10:6-11. Here the apostle is talking about that long journey through the wilderness, and of it he says: “Now these things happened unto them by way of ensample; and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages are come.”

We should look back to the start of that marvellous pilgrimage and be admonished of our course.

Now take Romans 3:9. The apostle propounds two terse questions: “What then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin.”

He bases the biggest argument that was ever made by mortal man upon two words of that fourteenth Psalm from which he quotes “all” and “none.” All have gone astray, none are righteous, and on that “all” and “none” he makes the predicate of his treatise. Every word has its significance with him, each one a marvellous word. Romans 10:12 : “For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.” How do you know? Well, I base it on one word of the Old Testament - “whosoever.” “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” Paul, in another instance, as I have already shown, bases an argument on the singular instead of the plural of a noun (Galatians 3:16), and Christ based His argument on the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet, and on the stroke of a letter (Matthew 5:18).