Date: April 2003 Title: How We Got Our Bible (Part II)

Recording Revelation - “Scripture”

        Once God has selected a recipient and communicated something, the second step is “recording” the message for posterity in written form – “Scripture.”  Here we are talking about the original written account by the recipient in the original language.  The vast bulk of the Old Testament writings were originally produced in Hebrew.  18^th-19^th century critical denials of Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch were made on the false assumption that no written languages existed in Moses’ time (ca. 1400’s B.C.).  Now it is known that the Sumerians were very literate long before Moses’ time, the Egyptians had a complete phonetic script before their first dynasty, and literature was well developed in the Middle East of Abraham’s time.

        A phonetic "alphabet" is a series of symbols in which each symbol represents a sound (language).  Our word “alphabet” came from the first two letters of the Hebrew and Greek alphabets (aleph/alpha & beth/beta), which suggests a common origin or connection, perhaps the Phoenician alphabet.  Early writing materials include stone, clay tablets, wooden tablets, papyrus, parchment, animal skins, and ostraca (broken pottery).  Multi-lingual documents, such as the Rosetta Stone and Behistun Inscription, provided tools by which known ancient languages could be used to open up other ancient unknown languages.

        While the Greek word translated “Scripture” (graphe) is, simply, the word for “writing,” it is obvious that the word was intended to distinguish a certain special kind of written material - written material which is “inspired” by God.  Inspired “Scripture” is what you have when an original revelation from God is written down in the language and thought forms of the recipients (either ancient Hebrew or first-century Judaism in a Greco-Roman world).  The Old Testament Scriptures assert that God communicated with certain individuals and these major figures left behind written records to guide those who would come after them.  Thus, we read that Moses (Exodus 24:4), Joshua (Joshua 24:26), and Samuel (1Samuel 10:25) “wrote,” as did David (Psalm 3-5, etc.) and Solomon (1Kings 4:32).  Much of the Israelite kingdom era material was originally recorded by prophets who lived during each reign and kept records (cf. 1Chronicles 29:29; 2Chronicles 9:29), with final compilations produced by major inspired figures.  After Judah’s return from Babylon, Ezra was a skilled scribe (Ezra 7:6,10) and may have written Chronicles and the book of Ezra, as well as editing and finishing earlier records.  The New Testament books also claim to be based in "eyewitness" accounts of actual events that were widely known (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 2:22; 10:37; 26:26; 1Corinthians 15:1-8; Hebrews 2:3,4; 2Peter1:16; 1John 1:1).  But, if fallible humans wrote those original records of what God revealed, how do we know they conveyed it accurately into written form?  This is where the question of “inspiration” enters.

Inspiration

     "Inspiration” refers to the supernatural influence on the human writers by which they communicated and/or recorded what God wanted us to know.  "Inspiration" means one Divine Editor overseeing and guiding the development of contents.  In the Bible, inspiration is stated and assumed on the basis of statements like “and the Lord said to . . .” or “Thus says the Lord, . . . .“  The New Testament writers refer to inspiration in Second Timothy 3:16 (theopneustos - “God-breathed”) and Second Peter 1:21.  While the Bible never explains in detail the “process” of inspiration (2Peter 1:21 comes the closest), there are several theories or explanations of “inspiration” discussed today.  Jesus promised to “remind” the Apostles later on, by the Holy Spirit, of what He had said to them (John 14:26).

        There are several views of “inspiration” – how and to what extent it applies.  The partial inspiration theory allows for errors in science & geographical matters, which raises questions about identifying what is/is not inspired.  The verbal inspiration theory emphasized inspired "words" and holds to a very “high” view of inspiration, but does not account for the various levels of “literary” quality (grammar, vocabulary, etc.) present (as between Gospel accounts).  The plenary inspiration theory emphasized inspired "writers."  This "idea/conceptual" theory also expresses a high view of inspiration, but allows for each writer's personality and vocabulary to come through.  The Bible is, in one sense, a “human” document, since numerous writers were involved and critical studies do reveal different levels of literary ability - some writings have better grammar and vocabularies than others (personal differences).  Portions were written during different historical periods and in different cultural settings.

        Several lines of argument attest the Bible’s claims of inspiration.  First of all, the Bible claims to represent the very words of God in some instances (Genesis 1:3; Exodus 3:4-7ff; 1Samuel 15:10,11).  Secondly, the Bible is not simply a collection of 66 unconnected writings, but contains a unified theme from Genesis to Revelation (salvation through a Messiah to appear in history).  There is also a unity of “typology,” with symbols, events, and people pointing ahead to related truths (ex. Genesis 22; Numbers 21:6-9 & John 3:14,15).  The Bible also maintains a general ethical unity - behavior and attitudes that are “righteous / sinful” tend to continue to be so throughout Scripture and history.  Third, numerous predictive prophecies are specific and fulfilled in detail later on.  Fourth, although the Bible reflects various cultures over the centuries, its message still shows a remarkable correspondence with our contemporary life (sin, human nature, morality).  Fifth, accusations that the Bible simply is a fictitious glorification of Jewish seem absurd when it is realized that the Bible is painfully honest about the Jewish people and their heroes - the good and bad are presented in a believably balanced fashion.  On the other hand, the histories of other nations were usually doctored up or edited to fit a humanistic agenda - patriots tend to glorify their nation, while opponents denigrate a nation and over-emphasize its faults.  (to be continued)