Inspiration and Sufficiency; 1 John 2:12
Sometimes we get into
conversation with people who ask: How do I know that you are right? How do you
know that the Bible is right? And then we appeal to the Bible and say that the Bible
says. Immediately the response it that we can’t do that, it’s
circular reasoning; that we can’t use the Bible to prove the Bible. But they
are wrong, because if we use any system to prove the Bible then what we are
saying is that that system has authority over the Bible. But if the Bible is
the very word of God, God’s revelation to man, to what higher authority can we
appeal to validate God? There is none. Se we need to be careful not to fall
into the trap of validating the wrong question when we are talking to people.
We can show why the Bible validates itself as the Word of God but we are not
going to some external system to prove that the Bible is the Word of God.
2 Timothy 3:16, 17 NASB “All Scripture is inspired by God
and profitable for teaching…” In the Greek what we have is an adjective, pasa [pasa] andf the noun graphe [grafh], meaning “all Scripture.” Then that is followed by
an adjective theopneustos [qeopneustoj]. There is no verb there. There is no “is” in the
first phrase of the verse. There is an adjective modifying a noun, then another
nominative adjective, theopneustos,
linked by a conjunction to another nominative adjective. That has led some
people, to want to translate this (you have to supply the “is”) with an “is”
but where should that “is” go? Should it be translated “All Scripture is
inspired by God and profitable,” or should it read, “All Scripture inspired by
God is profitable.” There is a vast difference in the meanings of those two
sentences. If it is “All Scripture is inspired” then you are saying stating
that every single verse is breathed out by God and is also profitable. But if
you are saying that “All Scripture inspired by God” then there may be some
Scriptures that aren’t inspired by God. There are some translations that have
taken it that way. What we have here grammatically is that there are two
predicate adjectives, they should be treated as predicate adjectives and the
“is” should be inserted prior to the noun theopneustos.
It is a point of grammar that when you have the head noun followed by a second
anarthrous noun—theopneustos does
not have the article with it—
then the second more general noun is taken as a predicate
adjective. So it should be translated, “All Scripture is breathed out by God
and is profitable for teaching…”
“…for
teaching [doctrine], for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.”
Doctrine is the principles
extracted from the Scripture so that we can understand it. We are designed to
think categorically; we learn everything categorically. What we do with
doctrine is compare Scripture with Scripture and put together what the Bible
teaches on a particular subject as we go from Genesis to Revelation. “Reproof”
means that is challenges us where we are wrong. Everyone at some point or
another is going to have their toes stepped on. It is not always a pleasant
experience to have the spotlight of the Word of God shine on our lives. And “for
training in righteousness” is application. Notice the chain of events: it
starts with doctrine and ends in training. [17] “so
that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” The word “adequate”
in the Scriptures is the word artios
[a)rtioj] which
means qualified, proficient or competent. The word for “equipped” is exartizo [e)cartizw] which means to be educated, edified and prepared. It
is a training manual to teach us how to think first and act second. Action
should follow the way we think. So 2 Timothy 3:17, 17 emphasises the fact that God
is the source of Scripture, it has a purpose and that is to change our lives
that we may be prepared, proficient and equipped to do what God wants us to do.
Somebody always raises the
objection at the this point: Yes, but the problem isn’t God, the problem is He
is doing it through men, fallible sinners, so how can God guarantee truth from
error? So we look at the mechanics in 2 Peter 1:20, 21 NASB “But
know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is {a matter} of one’s
own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of
human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” Understanding
what God says isn’t based on our subjective frame of reference. God
communicated the prophecies of the Old Testament to communicate something
specific. It is objective revelation and you can’t just go into the Scriptures
and try to make them mean whatever you want it to mean. It wasn’t even a matter
of the prophet’s interpretation. God gave the prophets information and they communicated
that information, they didn’t interpret it first and then give it. They gave
exactly what God gave, so the prophecy wasn’t a matter of individual
interpretation. Prophecy in Scripture did not generate from the will of the
prophet in the Old Testament, it came because he was moved. The Greek word is phero [ferw], it is used of the wind blowing and pushing a sail
boat across a lake. There you have unseen activity but nevertheless it is
moving the craft in a particular direction. The men were moved by the Holy
Spirit who spoke from God. They didn’t write their experiences, they wrote what
God told them to write. We see from this verse that prophecy does not originate
from any act of human will, that the Holy Spirit is the agent of revelation,
that what men wrote did not originate from them but from God, and that in the
process God prevented the sin nature of the writers from diverting,
misdirecting, confusing or misleading them in some way so that they would
record something in error.
There is a fallacy in the
assumption that if man is involved it is going to guarantee error. If that is
true then Jesus could not have been impeccable because the incarnation and
second person of the Trinity involved a sinner. Her name was Mary. But God
guaranteed that that which was born from Mary was without sin.
Did Jesus use the Scriptures
in a merely general way? Did He just use the Scriptures as though they were
just generally true and to draw general principles from them? Or did He
emphasise the minutia of the Scriptures?
Matthew 5:17, 18 NASB “Do not think that I came to
abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For
truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter
or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” He is referring
first of all to the Law and the Prophets, and that is the term that referred to
the Old Testament Scriptures. Often the Old Testament was just referred to as
the Law and the Prophets, and that covered all three sections of the Hebrew
Scriptures. Jesus came to bring to pass that which they prophesied, to fulfil
them.
John 10:22ff NASB
“At that time the Feast of the Dedication took place at Jerusalem; it was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple
in the portico of Solomon. The Jews then gathered around Him, and
were saying to Him, ‘How long will You keep us in
suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.’ Jesus
answered them, ‘I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My
Father’s name, these testify of Me. But you do not
believe because you are not of My sheep. My sheep hear
My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me’… My
Father, who has given {them} to Me, is greater than
all; and no one is able to snatch {them} out of the Father’s hand.
I and the Father are one’.” In the English that loses a lot in translation. What
we find in the Greek is that when Jesus uses the word “one” it is a neuter
singular, not a masculine singular. If He had used a masculine singular it
would mean I and the Father are the same person, and
He does not say that. He uses a neuter which means I and the Father are one in essence; we share the essence of deity. He is
clearly claiming to have identical essence with the Father but that He is a
distinct person from the Father. [31] “The Jews picked up stones again to stone
Him.” They knew exactly what He was saying, and he is basing His argument on
the gender of the number. This is detail, not some general idea. Then as they
are picking up stones to stone Him Jesus uses an incredibly sophisticated
argument. [32] “Jesus answered them, ‘I showed you many good works from the
Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?’ [33] The
Jews answered Him, ‘For a good work we do not stone
You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out {to be}
God’. [34] Jesus answered them, ‘Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I SAID, YOU ARE GODS’? [35] If he called them gods, to whom the word of God
came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom
the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I
said, ‘I am the Son of God’?” He is quoting from a passage in the 82nd
Psalm. It is not a dominant psalm and not one most of us would go to to prove the deity of Christ, it is a relatively obscure psalm.
Jesus plucks out His defence from a relatively obscure psalm, and in that
context the psalmist is referring to the human leaders and judges of Israel and calls them by the name elohim. It is not God’s proper
name, Yahweh, but it is recognising
the fact that governing authorities have their responsibility delegated to them
by God. Jesus’ argument is incredibly shrewd and sophisticated. He is saying, if it is okay to call them gods and they were human, why
is it wrong for me to call myself the Son of God when I am the Son of God? He
says, “and the Scripture cannot be broken.” In other
words, you can’t violate the Scriptures because you are mad at me and want to
stone me. The Scripture has the final authority.
John 8:55-58 NASB
“and you have not come to know Him, but I know Him; and if I say that I do not
know Him, I will be a liar like you, but I do know Him and keep His word.
Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw {it} and was glad. So the Jews said to
Him, ‘You are not yet fifty years old, and have You
seen Abraham?’ Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham
was born, I am’”—imperfect tense of the verb, indicating He has continual
existence.
In Matthew 22:23-33 the
Sadducees wanted to confound Him is His interpretation of the Law. They made up
a story. The Sadducees didn’t believe in resurrection but they are going to
test Jesus on resurrection anyway. “Teacher, Moses said, ‘IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT
OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.’ Now
there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having
no children left his wife to his brother; so also the second, and
the third, down to the seventh. Last of all, the woman died. In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the
seven will she be? For they all had {married} her. But Jesus answered and said to them, ‘You are
mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the
power of God. For in the
resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels
in heaven. But regarding the
resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God:
‘I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF
ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB’? He is not
the God of the dead but of the living.’ When the crowds heard {this,} they were
astonished at His teaching.” When God was talking to Moses he said, present
tense, “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” These three men had already
been dead at least 350 years, and yet God is using the present tense. Jesus
bases His argument for the reality of resurrection on the present tense of that
verb.
The point is that Jesus
said that the most obscure details of Scripture are all equally infallibly
inspired. We see from these Scriptures that inspiration is verbal, the very
letters are important.
There are three corollaries
to the doctrine of inspiration that we must not forget. 1) Though every word is
equally infallible and authoritative not every word is equally applicable to
every believer. There are passage sin the Old Testament that were addressed to Israel only and don’t apply to us today. 2) If every word is
breathed out by God then it is the responsibility of the pastor-teacher to
investigate and exegete every word, the entire counsel of God. 3) If every word
is breathed out by God then the Bible is absolutely and totally sufficient for
salvation, spiritual growth and problem-solving. 2 Peter 1:3, 4 NASB
“seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life
and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory
and excellence. For by these He has granted to us His precious and
magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of {the} divine
nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust.”
So when John says “I am
writing to you little children” he is conscious of the fact that he is writing
the Words of God, and he is giving infallible, inerrant instruction to his
congregation on how to live the Spiritual life.