Inspiration's Implications (Part 2 of 2)
Inspiration’s Implications (Part 2 of 2)
Continuing on from last week, I’m going to give you 3 more implications that flow out of the doctrine of inspiration (that the Bible is God-breathed).
Scripture is…
Efficacious
Simply put, we should expect the Bible to do things. If God’s word calms the storm (Mark 4), raises the dead (John 11), creates the universe (Genesis 1), and puts flesh on dry bones (Ezekiel 37) then we should expect some effects from it when it’s read.
Jeremiah 23:29 makes this clear:
Is not my word like fire, declares the LORD, and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?
I think this one is pretty clear without too much explanation (but we’ll circle back to it in a few weeks anyway).
Sufficient
In talking about the canon of scripture a few weeks ago – what’s contained in the Bible, I said that in God’s kindness, He doesn’t give us too much or too little. He doesn’t tell us everything we want to know, but what we need to know.[1] Deuteronomy 29:29 says as much.
This should be logical to us. John ends his gospel by saying If I wrote everything Jesus said and did, it wouldn’t fit, not just in my book, but in all the books in the world.
Whenever we speak, we say what’s relevant for the point we’re trying to make. Well, most of us do… We all know people who say everything they can possibly think of. Maybe that’s why I started a Substack…
In preparing and editing each post, believe it or not, I cut a bunch of material. Because I want to focus on what’s relevant to you guys, not things that aren’t.
So again, going back to the point of scripture – knowing God – and what it is – His self-revelation to us – helps to understand the content of scripture.
Millard Erickson is helpful here.
The knowledge about was for the purpose of knowledge of. Information was to lead to acquaintance; consequently, the information revealed was often quite selective. For example. We know relatively little about Jesus from the biographical standpoint. We are told nothing of his appearance, his characteristic activities, his interest, or his tastes. Details such as were ordinarily found in biographies were omitted because they are not significant for faith. How we relate to Jesus is quite independent of whether he was tall or short, or whether he spoke in a tenor or a bass voice. The merely curious are not accommodated by God's special revelation.[2]
So when we speak of sufficiency, we want to say the Bible has what we need for what God requires of us. It’s not sufficient for everything – I had to fix my car the other day and I went to Youtube instead of the Bible for that information – and it didn’t affect my view of sufficiency at all. Because God doesn’t require a car that starts.
Rather, scripture claims to: [3]
Make us wise for salvation (2 Tim 3:15) – show us how to be saved.
Be sufficient for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness, so the man of God may be complete and equipped for every good work (2 Tim 3:16-17).
Grant us all things pertaining to life and Godliness (2 Peter 1:3-4).
Meaning, scripture is not sufficient for diagnosing electrical systems in a car. But it is sufficient to tell me to love and serve my wife, perhaps by fixing her car. And to train me to respond righteously when I realize the tools I have on hand aren’t the ones I actually need.
I think we tend to betray a proper understanding of sufficiency in a couple of ways.
A while back, I was meeting with a younger pastor, we were talking about Bible education, and he mentioned a few conversations where people in his church – either in good faith or argument – said, “Well, show me in the Bible where it says…” and then whatever axe they had to grind. And after he said those words a few times, I realized he didn’t have a “bible content” issue, but a sufficiency issue.
Here’s what I mean. The Westminster Confession talks about inspiration (and thus sufficiency) covering things “either expressly set down in scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from scripture.”[4]
For example, let’s say someone says, “Show me in the Bible where it says abortion is murder,” how do you answer that? Because there’s no verse in the Bible that says, “Abortion is murder.” Rather, you have passages like:
Psalm 139 – we are handcrafted in the womb
Exodus 21:22 – Laws about what happens if you cause a woman to prematurely give birth.
Luke 1:41 - John the Baptist recognizes Jesus in utero.
None of those verses are saying “abortion is murder”. And yet, I’m very comfortable saying the Bible teaches abortion is murder because it is deduced from scripture by good and necessary consequences. We don’t need an explicit verse to claim sufficiency
I think we also miss the boat on sufficiency when we say things like “God spoke to me” or “God told me.” I don’t know if this is bad theology or just imprecise language. Mabea mix of both depending on the person.
Because there’s this idea out there that the Bible isn’t actually enough, and God will speak to you individually and directly and tell you what you should do. Christian publishing is flooded with books on Discerning the Voice of God. It runs the gamut from the likes Wayne Grudem to Henry Blackaby (fellow Christians whom I respect, but just disagree with here -this newsletter isn’t about throwing people under the bus).
Most of them would claim that God does still speak to people, but not in a way that’s equal to scripture. I believed this for a long time.
That God, kind of, suggests things. It’s not really sinful to go against it because it’s not the Bible. But I just saw it as arrogant for us to try and gag God and say He can’t speak anymore.
But listen, if God’s work has the authority to raise the dead and create the world, is that word really a “suggestion?” Isn’t His word efficacious and full of power?
And more than that, if you can go directly against the word of God and it not be sinful, then how do you define sin? And does that mean things are sinful for you but not for me? That doesn’t seem fair.
This idea of ongoing prophecy – or ongoing revelation – it doesn’t fit with what we know about scripture.
And to say this isn’t arrogant. God wants it to be clear what he has told us and called us to (spoiler alert for the next point). He doesn’t want you questioning late at night, “Wow, was that thought the voice of God, or did I just eat some bad shrimp at dinner?” He’s kind, so He’s limited His speech to a book. So we know what He requires with full assurance.
At the end of the day, we have 3 options with ongoing revelation – or prophecy as some would call it.
“Ultimately the claim of continued prophecy inevitably collides with the sufficiency of Scripture. There seem to me to be only three alternatives:
(1) The prophecy contradicts Scripture, in which case it is false and must be rejected.
(2) It repeats the words of Scripture, rendering it unnecessary and disqualifying it of the status of new prophecy, for the Bible has already spoken on the matter. While the words would be self-evidently edifying and clearly the Word of God, it could not be said to be new, direct revelation.
Or (3) it adds to Scripture, in the context of the closed canon of the New Testament, contradicting the words of the apostle that Scripture has been given "that the man of God may be equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:17), and implying that the Bible is not sufficient to guide us to heaven.”[5]
“So are you saying God is not active in His people’s lives?” Not at all. I’m saying let’s get better theology, or at least better language, to talk about how God guides us. He’s definitely active, just not by giving new revelations.
This leads to the final point, I already mentioned. The Bible is
Clear
God’s convinced His Bible can be understood clearly.
When Jesus was questioned, He often responded, “Haven’t you read the Bible on this?” Which isn’t a very good response if the scriptures aren’t clear. [6]
He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him: (Matthew 12:3)
Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? (Matthew 12:5)
He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, (Matthew 19:4)
And more than that, Christians are given the Holy Spirit to overcome the blinding effects of sin that make the truths of scripture seem foolish (1 Cor 2:14). We have supernatural help in understanding.[7]
Now, of course, clarity is not the same as simplicity. In speaking of Paul’s letters, Peter writes:
…There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
The Bible says parts of the Bible are difficult to understand. But they’re not impossible to understand.[8]
But not everything is clear in your first reading. We grow in our understanding of scripture.[9] But this is partially why God gave the church pastors and teachers. Scholars and students to help equip His people to know Him through His word.
Goodness gracious, through reading and rereading the Bible, I’m constantly discovering new things in the Bible I’ve never noticed before, or giving depth to my current understandings. But that’s because I’m constantly in and around the word. Either reading and studying the Bible, or reading books about the Bible, listening to podcasts about the Bible, and talking about the Bible with others. We need to be Bible-saturated people.
It’s not easy, but it’s doable.
And at the end of the day, God gave us His word so we might know Him. So we should expect to be able to know Him through His word. We should expect that level of clarity. And we keep working at it until we have it.
[1] Thompson, The Doctrine of Scripture, 160.
[2] Erickson, Christian Theology, 202.
[3] Thompson, The Doctrine of Scripture, 158–60.
[4] Thompson, 166.
[5] Letham, Systematic Theology, 204.
[6] Thompson, The Doctrine of Scripture, 119.
[7] Grudem, Systematic Theology, 108.
[8] Thompson, The Doctrine of Scripture, 131–33.
[9] Thompson, 136.