A Faith to Live By

Understanding Christian Doctrine

Donald MacLeod

• Publisher: Christian Focus Publication
• Year: 2016
• eBook ISBN: 9781845506759

1

The Inspiration of Scripture

We must begin this study in Christian doctrine by saying a word or two about the use of the mind in religion and by emphasising the importance of applying rigorous Christian thought to every area of our Christian lives. We aren't called simply to enjoy some particular experience. We are called upon to think through all the implications of our faith, girding up the loins of our minds (1 Pet. 1:13) and presenting our bodies to God in what Paul calls ‘reasonable’, or even ‘logical’, service (Rom. 12:1). This means that we have to apply Christian thought to evangelism, to worship, to church government and even, of course, to our own personal witness. But it surely implies above all that we apply Christian thought to the question of what it is we believe, and why it is we believe it.

There are three main reasons why it is important to apply our minds to Christian doctrine.

First, because of the demands of personal witness. We can testify to our faith only if we know first of all what we believe. Supposing we were challenged, can we tell what our view of God is, or our view of the world in which we live? Can we tell men what we mean when we say, ‘You must be born again’? Can we answer the question, ‘How do I become a Christian?’ We can never bear effective personal witness unless we know what the gospel actually is.

Secondly, we need to know why we believe what we believe. Can we, as Peter urges us, give a reason for the hope that is in us (1 Pet. 3:15)? It isn't enough to know what we believe. We must know the grounds for our beliefs. That is especially important today when our fellow-men are so sceptical and so cynical. They want to know the logic of our particular position. If we are to answer them we must know the Biblical reasons for believing in the deity of Christ, life after death and so on. We must also, of course, know how to answer common objections to those doctrines.

The third reason for studying Christian doctrine is its importance for our personal religion. For the sake of our own souls we must know the full content of the Word of God. I say that because it seems to me that many of our most pressing problems in areas of personal faith are due simply to ignorance. Problems of assurance, problems with depression and problems in coping with such traumas as bereavement often stem either from ignorance of Christian doctrine, or from a failure to apply it. The same is true of the church itself. Many of its problems are really problems in relationships, and these are often the result of a defective Christology. We simply fail to live our lives in the light of the fact that in Christ God shows Himself as the One whose nature it is to put the interests of others before His own.

The importance of knowing Christian doctrine being clear, we must now embark on the study of the first of the topics before us, the inspiration of scripture. There are two chapters on the Bible both because of its fundamental importance, and because there are two distinct emphases to make. There is, first, the emphasis on God's own activity in relation to His Word. But there is also a second side: the human side, or the input of the character and personality of the men through whom the Bible came.

First, the divine side, the inspiration of the Bible. I want to begin by looking briefly at the Bible's own claims, and in particular at three New Testament passages which speak of Holy Scripture in the most exalted terms.

2 TIMOTHY 3:16

Verse 16 is particularly important, but I want to look at the whole context from verse 15 downwards. It reminds us of the function performed by the Bible. It is able, we are told, to make us wise unto salvation (2 Tim. 3:15); and it makes the man of God perfect (2 Tim. 3:17). Taken together, these statements mean that scripture gives us a saving knowledge of God and fully equips us for the life of discipleship.

But how is it able to do so? Because it is inspired by God. In the Greek there is simply one word, theopneustos, made up of the word theos for God and the word pneuma for breath. The literal meaning is that all scripture is breathed out by God, or God-breathed. There are three points worth noting with regard to this proposition.

First of all, the word theopneustos points not so much to inspiration as to expiration. The meaning is not that God breathed into the Bible. It is that God breathes out the Bible. It is the breath of God. The word inspiration is a Latin word, borrowed from the Vulgate, not from the Greek New Testament. It has its own value, but the idea here is certainly not one of God breathing into the Bible but of God breathing out the Bible. According to this, the subject of inspiration is not the human author, but the book itself: the scripture is breathed out by God. We are familiar today with the idea of inspired men: for example, poets, composers of music and great orators. These men are said to be inspired and to give inspired performances. But the Bible doesn't speak in this way. It speaks of the quality of theopneustos, of God-breathedness, as a quality of the actual book itself.

Secondly, the Bible has this quality invariably and inalienably. Inspiration is completely independent of our feelings with regard to the Book. The Bible won't allow the idea that somehow when you enjoy this book, or when this book moves you, or when this book comes at you, then it is inspired. The Bible's position is that even when this book is, so far as our experience goes, as dead as dead can be and as dry as dry can be (and that can sometimes happen) it is still theopneustos. It is still the breath of God. That does not depend on our human emotions at all, and it does not vary with our human emotions. The Bible does not become God's word when it encounters us ‘existentially’. The Bible is always God's Word.

Thirdly, according to this statement theopneustos belongs to the whole of scripture: to the Bible in its entirety. Every scripture, we are told, is breathed out by God. Pasa graphe: every single scripture! Whatever is scripture has the quality of theopneustos. Now that does not mean that every part of God's Word is equally interesting, or that every part of God's Word is equally stimulating, or equally elevated, or equally moving. The Gospel of John, for example, is far more elevated than the book of Esther. But the Gospel of John is not more inspired than the book of Esther. The book of Esther, the Epistle to the Romans and the Gospel of John all share equally in this quality of divine expiration. God has breathed them all out. If you can say of something, ‘It is written’, then you mean, ‘It is God-breathed’. The inspiration defined here – the expiration – belongs to every single entity that qualifies for the designation ‘scripture’: to Old Testament and New Testament, to doctrine and history, to theology and precept, to experience and ethics. Every chapter and every verse have the quality of theopneustos.

2 PETER 1:20-21

The second passage I want to look at is 2 Peter, chapter one, from verse 20 downwards. Here the Apostle is discussing prophecy. He begins with a negative point: prophecy is not a matter of ‘private interpretation’ (2 Pet. 1:20). These men were not simply giving their own opinions: not even their own expert opinions. Nor did prophecy come ‘by the will of man’ (2 Pet. 1:21). It wasn't a case of a man saying, ‘I'm going to prophesy.’ The initiative did not lie with man at all. You see that so often with regard to such figures as Moses and Jeremiah and Jonah. We can almost say of them that they were dragged kicking into this particular ministry. It wasn't their own choice. And when they spoke, the message they proclaimed wasn't from themselves at all.

But then there follows the great positive statement: men spoke as they were carried by the Holy Spirit. The emphasis in this sentence falls firmly on the word men: ‘carried by the Holy Spirit men spoke from God.’ We'll come back to this emphasis on the human side of scripture in the next chapter. But for the moment the concern is this: these men spoke from God, and they spoke as men carried by the Spirit of God.

Both points are important. They spoke from God. The prophet was the spokesman of God. He had had an audience with God. The very word prophet means to speak forth. These men were taken into God's audience chamber, they were told God's secrets and they came forth as God's spokesmen. There is an interesting illustration of that in the story of Moses and Aaron, when Moses protests, ‘Lord, I'm not eloquent.’ Among other things God says to him, ‘In that case, Aaron can be your prophet’ (Exod. 4:16). In other words, ‘Aaron can be your spokesman. You just tell him what to say.’ That was the prophet's function. He spoke from God and he spoke for God: ‘I will put my words in his mouth’ (Deut. 18:18).

But then there's also this marvellous picture: they spoke as men carried by the Spirit. We could almost say they were ferried by the Spirit. Now when you're carried, you aren't led and you aren't prompted. There's a degree of passivity here: an emphasis on the controlling influence of the agent doing the carrying. In the production of scripture God superintended and supervised the whole process, so that as the human agents thought and spoke and wrote, and as they used their sources, He was in control, setting them down at His own chosen destination and ensuring that they spoke exactly what He intended them to speak.

JOHN 10:35

We have, then, two pictures so far. We have theopneustos, the word of God ex-pired; and we have these great prophets literally carried by God himself.

We turn now to the Gospel of John and the tenth chapter, from verse 34 downwards. Here we find the Lord's own view of scripture. He has been challenged because He's been making astonishing claims on His own behalf, claiming in effect to be God (theos). Not surprisingly, the Jews accuse Him of blasphemy. Jesus, in reply, uses a very interesting argument. ‘Look,’ He says, ‘it cannot always be wrong to apply the word god to a man, because in your own scriptures, in the book of Psalms, the word god is applied to your own rulers.’ That's the Lord's argument: ‘Is it not written in your law, “I said, Ye are gods?” ‘(Ps. 82:6). Now, He says, ‘You can't accuse me of saying something that is always blasphemous when in your own scriptures your rulers are addressed as gods by God himself.’ What I'm interested in for the moment is this: the Lord adds, ‘Scripture cannot be broken’ (John 10:35). This is a great statement about the Bible itself: scripture cannot be violated. The word which occurs here is the word used for breaking a commandment. The Bible, in the judgment of Jesus, has the authority of law: absolute and infallible authority. It can't be wrong. It can't be false. It can't mislead. It can't deceive. It can't be violated. That is the Lord's own testimony.

There is nothing I can say which is more important than this. Let me put it to you this way. We evangelicals are often accused of what's called ‘bibliolatry’, that is, the worship of a book. ‘Ah, you worship the book, this dead book,’ they say. ‘You have a paper Pope. You are bibliolaters.’ Well, I say, It's not bibliolatry. It's Christolatry! It's the worship of Christ. Christ has said this Book is infallible. He has attested it as the unbreakable Word of God, and it is because of His testimony, given through the apostles and given in His own words before us here, that I personally believe in the full, final, infallible authority of scripture. I cannot see how one can be loyal to Christ and yet defy him on something as fundamental as His view of the status of the Bible.

It isn't only here that the Lord makes this kind of claim. He reminds us in the Sermon on the Mount that He came to fulfil the law and then adds, ‘One jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled’ (Matt. 5:18). Similarly, He rebukes the multitude by saying, ‘You do err, not knowing the scriptures’ (Matt. 22:29). And He fights the devil with the same weapon, ‘It is written’ (Matt. 4:4). Equally significantly, there is no record of His ever finding fault with the Bible.

Now the point, surely, is this. We're told often that in the Old Testament in particular there are deficiencies of theology and even deficiencies of morality. We're told that it contains sub-Christian teaching. Well, I can only say, If that's the case, Jesus Christ didn't see it. In fact, He said, ‘Scripture cannot be broken.’ For me, belief in the God-givenness of the Bible is simply an aspect of devotion to Christ. I believe in inspiration not because I can prove the Bible to be inerrant, but because the Lord and His apostles attest it as being inspired, as coming to us through men carried by God, and as having an infallible authority. It is on this self-attestation of God's Word that we rest our doctrine of scripture.

ALTERNATIVE VIEWS OF SCRIPTURE

Our view of the Bible is not the only one on offer, as all of you know. I don't want to waste your time by going into other views in detail, but there are at least three which are widely current and deserve a brief notice.

First, there is what may be called the liberal view. The better term, I suppose, is modernist. This view minimises the divine element in scripture and sees the Bible as an essentially human document. It would say that at best the biblical authors were only experts in their own fields, and their authority only the authority of genius. In its extreme form (in the teaching of, for example, Rudolf Bultmann) the gospels are regarded as in their entirety works of the free creative imagination, with not even a historical core. All is mythology unless proved otherwise. Such an approach may seem very alien to us, but it is the assumption behind much of the RE taught in Scottish schools today. Our children are told from a very early age that the Bible is ‘just a human book’.

Then there is the Barthian view, now going out of fashion, but still prevalent in some quarters. The essence of this view is that the Bible becomes the Word of God. This idea reflects the existential philosophy which lay behind Barth's theology. Sometimes you had a living, transformational encounter with scripture and in that moment it became the Word of God. This is why Barth's early theology was known as the theology of paradox. The Bible was deemed to be full of errors and contradictions, full of bad theology and even full of bad ethics and bad morality. The paradox was that God could take this very human thing, with all its errors, and work wonders. This meant that Barth had a vested interest in maximising the defects of the Bible; and that's why, although in Barth there are many evangelical notes, his whole view of scripture was so destructive. He accepted the most extreme critical views, because the more defective the Bible was, the more glorious the paradox. It's just as if we were to argue that the greater a sinner a preacher is, the more glorious it is that God should use him. To me, this is a fundamentally unbiblical approach to the Word of God and so, although I can follow Barth in some things, I can't follow him at all in his doctrine of scripture. Thirdly, there is the neo-evangelical view, which is becoming increasingly popular and influential even in high academic circles. It is called neo-evangelical because it no longer stands four-square on the idea of plenary or full inspiration, preferring instead a theory of partial inspiration. Those who hold this position say, ‘We have a high view of scripture, but we don't regard it as infallible and we don't think it is in-errant. It is inspired only in certain areas.’ Unfortunately, it isn't always easy to know in what areas! The general position is that it's inspired in its doctrine, but not in its historical statements; or inspired in what the authors intended to say, but not in the assumptions which they made.

THE EVANGELICAL DOCTRINE

Over against these views, I'm driven (not by obscurantism, I hope, but by Christolatry) to the historic evangelical doctrine which was assumed by the church for centuries, and crystallised in the magnificent work of B. B. Warfield of Princeton in the late nineteenth century. That doctrine is encapsulated in three particular words. You can take them all, or you can choose the one that you think best.

First, it may be said that the Bible is marked by infallible inspiration. This means either that the Bible is never deceived, or that the Bible never deceives. The trouble with it is that it is negative. Even a railway timetable may be said to be infallible in the negative sense that it contains no errors. But that does not make it inspired. The word infallible, then, has its uses...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Endorsements
• Preface
• 1. The Inspiration of Scripture
• 2. The Humanness of Scripture
• 3. The Deity of Christ
• 4. The Trinity
• 5. Divine Pre-ordination
• 6. Creation
• 7. What is Man?
• 8. Sin
• 9. The Covenant
• 10. The Incarnation
• 11. The Atonement
• 12. Justification
• 13. What is Faith?
• 14. Full Assurance
• 15. Be Filled with the Spirit
• 16. Holiness
• 17. Under Law?
• 18. Christian Liberty
• 19. Christian Baptism
• 20. Christ's Kirk
• 21. The Lord's Supper
• 22. The Last Days
• 23. The Second Coming
• 24. The Resurrection
• 25. Hell
• 26. Heaven
• Scripture Index
• Subject Index
• Persons Index
• Christian Focus Publications