The Christian Life: Assurance of Salvation (2)

And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. 1 John 5:11-13

These verses make the case for two truths:

(1) Salvation (eternal life) belongs to those who “have the Son.” The Son is Jesus. Those who have trusted in Jesus as the one and only Savior from sin, “have the Son.” Conversely, those who have not trusted in Jesus “do not have eternal life.” They are not saved.

(2) God wants us to know that we have eternal life, or are saved.

But how do we know that we have the Son? John answers that question in a few verses found in chapter two of this same short epistle.

Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, "I know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him.
1 John 2:3-5

These three verses are bookended with words about “knowing Him” (the Lord). Knowing the Lord is another way of saying that a person is saved. What do these verses say about how we know that we know the Lord? It is as we obey the Lord, by keeping His commandments, that we know that we know Him.

Understand: salvation is NOT based on our obedience! Salvation is based on faith alone in Christ alone. But assurance of salvation is based (in part) on how we live as a result of being saved. One vitally important way we know that we have trusted in Christ is that we obey Him.

Granted, no one obeys the Lord perfectly. But those who know the Lord earnestly desire and strive to obey Him. Those who profess faith in Christ and yet do not have a desire to obey Him are self-deceived.

Next time: One other evidence that we know we are saved.

The Christian Life: Assurance of Salvation (1)

As a footnote to the previous post about assurance of salvation, God wants His children to know that we are saved. If that were not so, why is the following in the Bible:

1 John 5:11-13 And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. 13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

There are four categories of assurance of salvation:

1. Not saved but believe you are saved.

2. Not saved and know you are not saved.

3. Saved and not know you are saved.

4. Saved and know you are saved.

#1 is the worst category to be in. Why? Because if you think you are saved, though you are not, there is a reduced chance that you will respond to the gospel, since you think you are already saved. Praise God that He still saves people out of this category. (I was once in this category.)

#2 is lost, which is not good, but because you know you not saved, it is more likely that you will respond to the the gospel.

#3 is a good category to be in because at least you are saved. However, it is not the best category to be in, since you lack the assurance of salvation God wants His children to have (1 John 5:11-13).

#4 is obviously the best category to be in because you are saved, and know it!

For more on assurance regarding how the saved can know they are saved, and how that assurance affects how one lives the Christian life, stay tuned.

The Christian Life: The Lordship of Christ

Living the Christian life begins with, and is dependent upon, acknowledging and submitting to the Lordship of Christ. Though none of us does this perfectly, we are commanded to do so pervasively.

Salvation is more than “fire insurance."  Salvation is not merely an escape hatch from the fires of Hell.  Jesus died not only to rescue His people from the penalty of sin (justification when we are born again and believe), but from the power of sin (sanctification as we grow in grace throughout our lives), and ultimately, from the presence of sin (glorification when we are in Heaven).  Christ’s call on our lives is not merely to believe in order to receive passage out of Hell and into Heaven.  He died and rose to save His people from Himself, that is from His wrath, and from our pre-salvation bondage to sin itself.

Salvation is a call to discipleship. As believers in Christ we are called to be disciples of Christ (Matthew 28:18-20), followers of Christ (Matthew 4:19), and imitators of Christ (John 13:15).  Those who are truly redeemed are not only saved from Hell, but they are also given new hearts (Ezekiel 11:19, 36:26).  When God writes His law on the hearts of those He saves (Jeremiah 31:33), those He saves will each be given a heart and desire to lovingly and gratefully obey Him  This desire to follow Christ is the evidence of true salvation.

Salvation and “assurance of salvation.” The truly redeemed cannot lose their salvation because of sin, since Christ died for all the sins of all of His people. However, those who do not accept the call to discipleship and are not willing to follow the Lord Jesus Christ, will have to answer the same question Jesus posed to some earlier disciples in Luke 6:46, “Why do you call Me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do the things which I say?”  Though even the most dedicated servant of God still sins, those who do not seek to walk in obedience to the Lord have no room for assurance of their salvation (1 John 2:3-6).  It is unlikely that those, in whom a lack of desire to obey the Lord is dominant, are saved.

The Christian Life: An Introduction

As important as doctrine and theology are (and they are most certainly important), if doctrine and theology have no relationship with how Christians live our lives, we have missed the mark!

Do not misunderstand: no one is saved by how we live. What we contribute to our salvation is sin—which doesn’t save, but serves rather to condemn. It is only as one is aware of one’s guilt before the thrice-holy God that one is aware of how desperately one needs a Savior. Praise God, He has supplied a Savior! The one and only Savior supplied by God is Jesus, the only begotten Son of God. He became a human being:

• so He could live for us—the life God requires of us, that we have all failed to live.

• so He could die for us—to pay the penalty for our sins.

• so that He could rise from the dead for us—defeating sin, death, Hell, and Satan on our behalf.

• so that He could ascend back into Heaven for us—where He ever lives to intercede for us.

Jesus did everything to save us. We contribute absolutely nothing to our salvation.

We receive the full benefit of what Christ did for us through faith alone, in Christ alone.

But due to our sin, no one would ever believe. So God regenerates those Jesus came to save, and in so doing, gave the redeemed new hearts. These new hearts have saving faith in Christ and a desire to turn from sin (in what the Bible calls repentance). So while we are responsible to believe in Jesus (a belief that includes repentance), faith and repentance are also gifts from God.

We can therefore not take any credit for salvation—including the faith and repentance by which we receive Christ. All credit and glory belong to the triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

NOW—once we are saved, we are responsible to live the redeemed lives we have been given, not to earn or even to retain salvation, but to validate that we have indeed been born again by God.

In the next series of blogs we’ll consider what this Christian life looks like.

Doctrine of Revelation: Hermeneutics (Biblical Interpretation) (4)

Here are the last two of eight principles of biblical interpretation.

7. Interpretation v. Application. There is only one correct interpretation of a passage (what the passage means), but there may be many different applications (how it directs one’s life).  As long as the interpretation is correct, and as long as the applications I might derive from the interpretation do not alter the interpretation, there may be a number of legitimate applications.

For example: Proverbs 11:1 is about weights and measures in business. That is the interpretation. However, there are other applications to the truth of God’s disdain for dishonesty and imbalance. So while the passage is about honest weights and measures, there is an application to be honest in all things.

 8. Do not formulate doctrine on narratives alone. The Word of God accurately records what is written in it, but God does not sanction or endorse all the events that are recorded. For this reason, only when what is recorded in a narrative (story) passage is also found in a didactic (teaching) passage, should we formulate any doctrine or conclusion about how we are to live.  

For example: Genesis 12 and 20 record Abraham lying about his relationship with Sarah (calling her his sister instead of his wife).  Genesis 26 records Isaac doing the same thing. I must not conclude, therefore, that lying is okay based on these accurate narratives of the Patriarchs’ sins. In didactic portions like Revelation 21:8, we read that liars will be cast into the lake of fire.

These are the last two of eight principles of biblical interpretation.  They are not an exhaustive list of all principles of biblical interpretation. Remember that while the Holy Spirit illuminates the redeemed to be able to understand the Bible (1 Corinthians 2:14), that does not mean every believer will accurately interpret the Bible correctly every time.  We are responsible to interpret the Bible accurately (1 Timothy 2:15).  I pray that these eight principles of biblical interpretation will help us do just that.

Doctrine of Revelation: Hermeneutics (Biblical Interpretation) (3)

Remember: the Holy Spirit supernaturally illuminates the redeemed to be able to understand the Bible (1 Corinthians 2:14), but we remain responsible to interpret it accurately (2 Timothy 2:15). Here are the next two of eight principles of biblical interpretation.

5. Recognize what kind of literature you are reading. Poetry in the Bible needs to read like poetry.  The Bible contains sarcasm, hyperbole (exaggeration), and symbolism.  To read it as though it were an encyclopedia of religion is to misunderstand it.  

For example: If I were reading a poem about a man’s love for his wife and it said, “Your teeth are like the stars shining in the night sky,” I would know that the woman’s teeth were not stars.  I would realize that the author was speaking figuratively, not literally. Likewise, when I read in the Psalms that God “covers us with His feathers,” I realize that God is not a heavenly chicken. I understand that the psalmist is speaking figuratively, not literally.

If I hear a person say he was so mad he “could have killed his boss” (as inappropriate as those words are!), I know he isn’t really homicidal—he was just really angry.  In the same manner, when Jesus instructs us to cut off our hands and gouge out our eyes if they cause us to sin, I must understand that He doesn’t want us to physically maim ourselves, but to be serious about avoiding sin.  

6. Learn to diagram sentences. Much of the Bible, especially the writings of Paul, contains long and complicated sentences with, at times, several digressions.  We must be able to grasp the subject and predicate,[1] or else the many digressions are likely to confuse our understanding of the basic meaning of the text.

For example: In 2 Peter 3, Peter talks about the fact that Jesus will return, just as He promised He would.  The fact that Jesus hasn’t returned yet is not because He is “slack concerning His promise,” but rather because He is giving time for more people to come to saving faith.

Look at 2 Peter 3:14-16. This is one sentence. There are ten commas, a semicolon, and an en dash. This sentence is long enough with enough digressions, that one could easily miss the point: that we must be diligent to be found by Christ in peace when He returns. Ironically, Peter digresses from that point and ends up speaking about how hard it is to understand Paul’s writings!

Note:
[1] The subject is the primary noun (person, place, or thing) of the sentence. The predicate is the primary verb (action word or statement of being) of the sentence.

Doctrine of Revelation: Hermeneutics (Biblical Interpretation) (2)

Remember: the Holy Spirit supernaturally illuminates the redeemed to be able to understand the Bible (1 Corinthians2:14), but we remain responsible to interpret it accurately (2 Timothy 2:15). Here are the next two of eight principles of biblical interpretation.

3. Grammatico-Historical Method. Because the Bible was written long ago in another culture and in a language other than 21st century American English, we must seek to understand what the words in a passage meant to those who wrote them in their historical setting. We must not interpret scripture based on modern usage of words or modern culture.

For example: When Jesus pronounced several “woes” on the Pharisees in Luke 11, we must understand the term “woe” in the setting in which Jesus used it, rather than as we might use it today. To us, “woe” is a term used to describe sorrow.  When a Biblical prophet used the term “woe,” he was pronouncing the strongest form of denunciation or curse. 

Paul’s many references to circumcision are confusing and embarrassing to many modern readers, but in Paul’s time circumcision was vitally important and understood within a religious, rather than a medical or private, context.

Even words in older English translations can be misleading.  When the King James Bible was translated in 1611, the word “rent” meant something different from what it means to people today.  To us it means use for a price. To them it meant tear or rip. So when we read, “he rent his coat in twain,” we should not think he was using his clothing for a price, but instead, that he tore his coat in two.

4. Progressive Revelation. The writers and characters in the earliest writings did not know what God would reveal later in history.  More details of God’s grace were known to Paul than to Abraham, for instance.  As God revealed more of Himself and His plan for His people, the picture became clearer.  Therefore, while not discounting the revelation of God in the Old Testament, we must give special attention to how the later pieces of God’s revelation complete the earlier pieces.  The New Testament provides commentary on the Old Testament.  

For example: Genesis 4 does not make it clear what made Abel’s sacrifice acceptable and Cain’s unacceptable. Hebrews 11:4 clarifies it, saying the issue was faith.  

King David had many wives. Though God allowed it, in the New Testament it is clear that God’s plan since creation was for a man to have only one wife (Matthew 19:1-8).

Doctrine of Revelation: Hermeneutics (Biblical Interpretation) (1)

As we have seen, the Holy Spirit inspired the writing of Scripture, and supernaturally preserved (and continues to preserve) Scripture. Likewise, the Holy Spirit illuminates the regenerate to understand the scripture.  That the Holy Spirit illuminates does not preclude the necessity of we who study the Bible to work diligently to interpret the Bible accurately.  Let’s face it, there many cults and isms whose existence is based on misinterpreting the Bible. It is with that in mind that we will now consider eight principles of hermeneutics (biblical interpretation).  These are also found in our GBC discipleship materials in Book Three.

Here are the first two:

 1. The importance of context. No passage of Scripture can be correctly interpreted by itself.  Each needs to be understood within the context that it is found.  There is an immediate and a general context. The immediate context is made up of the verses just before and just after the one in question.  The general context refers to what the Bible as a whole says about the subject matter.  If our interpretation of any passage is in contradiction to any other passage, we have erred.  For example: Look at Mark 11:24.  

Therefore I say to you, whatever things you ask when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you will have them.

If this was all a person knew about prayer, he would think prayer was a way to get “whatever” he might want, simply by believing.  If he looked at the immediate context, he would learn from verse twenty-two that his faith must be in God. That helps a little more, but it still doesn’t tell the whole story. The general context of the Bible tells us that we are to pray according to God’s will.

John 15:7 If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you.

1 John 5:14-15 Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us, whatever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we have asked of Him.

This is a classic example of the importance of context.

 2. Allow the clear, simple, and explicit to interpret the unclear, complex, and implicit. There are passages that are more clear and passages that are less clear.  We need to understand the complex in light of the simple, not the other way around.  If we have to stretch the interpretation of an otherwise clear passage to accommodate our interpretation of a less clear passage, we are likely mistaken.  

For example: In some cases the Bible interprets itself clearly (e.g., the lampstands and stars in Revelation 1:12 & 16 are clearly interpreted in v.20). Other passages, though not directly interpreted, are obvious (e.g., the Lamb in Revelation 5, though not named, is clearly the Lord Jesus). When studying portions that are not as clear (especially prophecy), care must be taken that they are not interpreted in a way that challenges or changes the interpretation of the passages that are clear.

Doctrine of Revelation: Inerrancy explained (2)

Last time we presented four of eight common misunderstandings of inerrancy. The last four follow: [1]

5.   Inerrancy does not require exact quotations of the OT in the NT.  Though NT citations of OT scriptures are not always exact, they do not change the meaning; they are often based on translations of the OT that were available to NT writers; and they are inspired by the same Holy Spirit who inspired the OT writers.

6.   Inerrancy does not demand that the exact words of Jesus be contained in the Bible.  Jesus likely spoke in Aramaic; the NT was written in Greek.  Therefore, the original manuscripts were translations in the first place.

7.   Inerrancy does not guarantee that every incident is completely recorded.  The synoptic gospels give different perspectives on the same events, and not every aspect of everything recorded in the Bible is exhaustive.

8.   Inerrancy does not guarantee the accuracy of sources cited by biblical authors.  Inerrancy only guarantees that the writers are accurately cited.  The sources cited may have been in error. For example, Paul cites an extra-biblical source who said “all Cretans are liars” (Titus 1:12). Paul correctly cited the source, but that does not mean that the source was correct that all Cretans actually are liars.

Why is the doctrine of revelation so important?  What we know about God is limited to His revelation of Himself.  If we are wrong regarding the revelation, we will be wrong about God!

Nest time: Hermeneutics

Note:
[1] This section is based on Charles Feinberg’s, “The Meaning of Inerrancy,” in Inerrancy (edited by Norman Geisler).

Doctrine of Revelation: Inerrancy explained (1)

The doctrine of inerrancy is often misunderstood. The following addresses eight common misunderstandings of inerrancy:[1]

1.   Inerrancy does not demand strict observance of the rules of grammar.  There are errors in grammar.  Rules of grammar are man-made and formal.  They do not necessarily need to be followed by the writers of Scripture. 

2.   Inerrancy does not exclude the use of figures of speech or particular literary styles.  The Bible contains many different kinds of writing, including poetry, symbolism, and even hyperbole.  If a reader insists that all sections of Scripture be read and interpreted in the exact same manner, he will encounter problems.  However, by interpreting various sections of Scripture based on the literary style in which the passage is written, there will be no problem.

3.   Inerrancy does not demand historical or numerical precision.  An example of this is differing records of numbers in the Bible.  There is no a contradiction when one writer records that two persons were present at an event and another writer says there was one. If the latter recorded there was only one, it would be a contradiction.  The difference in numbers does not negate the accuracy of the point being conveyed, since the numbers are not the purpose of the scripture. 

4.   Inerrancy does not demand the technical language of modern science.  For example, the Bible records the sun rising in the east.  Scientifically, the sun does not rise or set because the earth rotates.  Those who fault the Bible on these grounds must also throw out all the great poetry that speaks of sunrises or broken hearts, since these are not scientifically accurate.  The Bible is not a science text.  Though it does not present scientific data, neither does it oppose scientific data.

The last four next time.

Note:
[1] This section is based on Charles Feinberg’s, “The Meaning of Inerrancy,” in Inerrancy (edited by Norman Geisler).

Doctrine of Revelation: Inerrancy Intro

The Doctrine of Inerrancy stems from the fact that all Scripture is inspired by God (i.e., God-breathed). The logic from inspiration to inerrancy, and then to authority is as follows.

Since all of the Word of God (the Bible) is the literal words of God, they must be inerrant because God is inerrant. The next step is that because God’s Word is inerrant (because it is the very words of God), the Word of God is also supremely authoritative because God is supremely authoritative.

Here are three Qualifications on the Doctrine of Inerrancy.[1]

1.   Inerrancy applies to all areas of Scripture as originally written.  This allows for the understanding that the copies and translations we have are not inerrant, but that they accurately reflect the originals, which are inerrant.  This we believe, first, because God is faithful to preserve His Word, and second, because textual criticism demonstrates how accurately the Bible has been copied and translated throughout the centuries.

2.   Inerrancy is intimately tied to hermeneutics.[2]  This affirms that the Scripture is always true, though we can err in our interpretation of Scripture.

3.   Inerrancy is related to Scripture’s intention.  There are things recorded in the Bible that are not approved by God.  For example, the Bible accurately records sinful actions that are wrong.

Notes:
[1] This section is based on Charles Feinberg’s, “The Meaning of Inerrancy,” in Inerrancy (edited by Norman Geisler).
[2] Hermeneutics is the science/discipline of interpretation, particularly, but not limited to Scripture. 

Doctrine of Revelation: Preservation and Illumination

Before moving on to the doctrine of inerrancy, let’s briefly consider the doctrines of Preservation and Illumination:

The writing of the Bible is by inspiration, which we have covered adequately. Next in the chain of events is preservation. The Holy Spirit has supernaturally preserved the Bible so that what we read today is accurate, reliable, and inerrant. This is important because critics and scoffers routinely allege that the Bible has been changed over the centuries, and is therefore inaccurate, unreliable, and errant. That bold charge is completely without evidence, much less, proof. The evidence to the contrary is striking. Besides the sheer volume of manuscripts dating very closely to the originals (which we admittedly do not have), and their striking similarity to today’s translations defies the critics. No other ancient literature comes within miles of this kind of accuracy. The Bible has not changed. This is the doctrine of preservation, accomplished supernaturally by the Holy Spirit of God.

The third and last component is the doctrine of illumination, by which the Holy Spirit gives readers the ability to understand (and believe) the scriptures. 1 Corinthians 2:14 clearly states:

“But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

The natural (unregenerate) man can read the words, but the spiritual meaning of the Bible is beyond the unregenerate. The Bible is spiritually understood only by those who are born again by the Holy Spirit. So as inspiration refers to the work of the Holy Spirit as the scriptures were written, illumination refers to the work of the Holy Spirit as the scriptures are read.  The Holy Spirit bears an inner testimony to the reader that the scripture is true, and enables the reader to understand the spiritual truth contained therein.  This is not new revelation beyond, or in addition to the Bible. It is spiritual illumination of what has already been revealed in the inspired Word of God.

This illumination is not given in the same degree to all believers. All believers must grow in our understanding of Scripture. Additionally, the Holy Spirit grants deeper understanding to those He has gifted to preach and teach.

Next: Considering inerrancy

Doctrine of Revelation: Two more incorrect views

I cannot help but wonder how many of you who have been following these blog posts about the Doctrine of Revelation ever dreamed there is as much to this subject as there is! I pray that these blogs have helped you to appreciate how important this matter is.

Let’s consider two other views of Revelation and Inspiration.

First, the Roman Catholic View.  Vatican II (1962-65) contains the dogmatic constitution on divine revelation.  The Roman Church teaches that there are two sources of knowledge: reason and faith, which correspond to general and special revelation.  However, the Roman Church, underestimating the effects of sin, gives too much weight to reason, or general revelation.  Further, when explaining their understanding of special revelation, the Roman Church places too much emphasis on the authority of the church (the Roman Church), and too little upon the scriptures.  The Roman Church places Scripture and their own church tradition on level ground.  They do not even see the two as two sources of revelation, but as two aspects of one revelation.  This is grave error.  Further, the Roman Church continues to assert that the leadership of the Roman Church alone is sufficient to correctly interpret Scripture.

Second, the Neo-orthodox View.  Championed by Karl Barth,[1] this view has two subcategories.  (1) There is no general revelation, because this would lead to a naturalistic theology.  (2) Special revelation is in Christ alone. The scriptures are not so much revelatory, but we each receive revelation via a “dynamic encounter” as we read them under the influence of the Holy Spirit.  This kind of subjectivism removes the objectivity of the Bible as the only reliable and authoritative source of special revelation.

Note:
[1] While Karl Barth (pronounced, ‘Bart’, 1886-1968) was aberrant in some of his views, leading to subjectivism regarding scripture, it is unlikely that he had this in mind.  It seems more likely that while he was seeking to counter the liberalism of his day, he incorrectly estimated the outworkings of some of his theology.

Doctrine of Revelation: Inspiration and the Perfections of Scripture

The Doctrine of Inspiration and the Perfections of Scripture was introduced by the Reformers to counter the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church regarding authority.  The Roman Church insists that the Bible and the traditions of the Church are on equal ground regarding inspiration, inerrancy, and authority.[1]  The Reformers insisted on the doctrine known as Sola Scriptura, or scripture alone.  They did not insist that the scriptures are the only thing a believer may read or study, but that Scripture alone is inspired, inerrant, and authoritative.  The Reformers separated the perfections of Scripture into four subcategories:

1.   The Necessity of the Scriptures.  The scriptures are necessary to provide the Church an objective rule, or canon,[2] for Christian doctrine regarding faith and practice.

2.   The Authority of the Scriptures.  The scriptures are authoritative because they are inspired by God and, therefore, inerrant, because God is inerrant.  No church gives the scriptures authority; the scriptures give the Church her authority.

3.   The Clarity (Perspicuity) of the Scriptures.  Those who would keep the layman from reading the Bible claim that the scriptures are so complicated that only the clergy should dare read them.  The Reformers insisted that the scriptures are clear enough for all believers to read and understand.  The Reformed position does not say that all the scripture is equally understood easily, but that the scriptures necessary for one to understand salvation are clear.

4.   The Sufficiency of the Scriptures.  The Roman Church insisted that the scriptures are not enough, and that the traditions of the Roman Church complete the scriptures.  The Reformed position insists that the scriptures are sufficient. Traditions are not equal to, nor do they complete, the scriptures.  Rather, traditions must be subject to the scriptures; and in any case in which tradition is at odds with Scripture, tradition must change or be discarded.

Notes:
[1] The Roman Church is not the only group that makes this error.  Many others unwittingly fall into this error when they unofficially elevate their traditions to a level of virtual biblical authority.
[2] The “canon” of the scripture refers to the “rule” or “standard” by which it is considered to be Scripture.

Doctrine of Revelation: Autographs & Inerrancy

Is inspiration limited to the autographia (original manuscripts) or are the copies also inspired?  Some argue that if only the originals are inspired, and since we no longer have them, the Bible we have is not inspired or authoritative.  This is not a problem, however, because we know that the copies are almost completely accurate.  This can be verified by the fact that there are so many copies, written so close to the date of the original writings, that so closely agree with each other. 

Though the copies are not inspired, the Word of God is inspired.  Orthodoxy insists that the copies and accurate translations are reliable, because God has not allowed any error that would do damage to the message of the text.  Errors in our copies are limited to numerical discrepancies or other inconsequential matters.

Inspiration and Inerrancy. This is a necessary point that follows inspiration.  Because the Word of God is inspired, or “God-breathed,” it must therefore be inerrant, since God is inerrant.  Because the Word of God is inerrant, it must therefore be supremely authoritative, because God is absolutely authoritative.

Doctrine of Revelation: The Extent of Inspiration

Having considered three views of inspiration, let’s dive a little deeper to consider the extent of inspiration. 

The first consideration in the extent of inspiration is about Partial vs. Plenary Inspiration.  Proponents of partial inspiration insist that portions of Scripture are not inspired.  Those who dismiss portions of Scripture usually claim that some portions are scientifically incorrect, because they insist that said sections were pertinent only to the culture of the original writer/recipients, or that they are the personal opinions of the authors, and therefore not inspired or authoritative. Proponents of plenary inspiration agree with Scripture that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16).  If we are going to pick and choose which parts of Scripture are inspired, by what authority dare we do so? Once we dismiss one verse, where do we end?

Partial inspiration is incorrect.  Plenary inspiration is correct.

The second consideration in the extent of inspiration is about Thought Inspiration vs. Verbal Inspiration. Proponents of thought inspiration allege that God inspired the thoughts and allowed the writers to concoct their own presentation.  Verbal inspiration, which is the orthodox view, insists that every word, though written by men from their own vocabulary and literary style, is the exact word that God chose.[1] 

This becomes important when translating Scripture.  Proponents of thought inspiration readily employ the “thought-for-thought” or  “dynamic equivalency” method of translation.  Those who insist on verbal inspiration understand the importance of a “word-for-word” method of translation. This is important when choosing a Bible translation to read and study.  It is safest by far to use only “word-for-word” translations for study.

Thought inspiration is incorrect.  Verbal inspiration is correct.

Doctrine of Revelation: Inspiration Intro

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.  2 Timothy 3:16-17

That the scriptures are inspired means that they are God breathed. Like breath, God’s Word is breathed out by Him. This is significant because God exalts His Word equal to His name! (Psalm 138:2) We are to revere God’s Word as we revere God Himself—not the pages and ink, but the very words that make up the Bible. Every word in the Bible is God’s Word. The Bible is not man’s word about God. It is quite literally, God’s word to man.

How is the Bible inspired? Here are three views regarding inspiration.

1.   Dynamic Inspiration is upon the writers, not their writings.  This view makes the writings more the product of the human writers than of God.  This leaves the door open to too much humanity (and therefore error) being in the scriptures.  This view is incorrect.

2.   Mechanical Inspiration is a matter of God dictating to the writers.  This removes the personality of the writer altogether.  While this may support divine authorship of the scriptures, it also misses the mark, for as one can plainly see, there is something of the personality of the writers to be found in their writings.  This view is incorrect.

3.   Organic Inspiration requires a necessary relationship between God as the primary author and the human writer as a secondary author.  This allows for perfect divine inspiration, while accounting for the differences in style among the authors.  According to this view, every word of Scripture is precisely the word God wanted, though He sovereignly used chosen men with their particular personalities and vocabularies to produce the finished product.  This view is correct.

Doctrine of Revelation: Continuing Revelation

God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds… Hebrews 1:1-2

God’s revelation of Himself is absolutely essential. Had God not been pleased to reveal Himself to those who bear His image (human beings), we would know no more about God than so many amoebas. His revelation of Himself has been progressive, revealing more and more of Himself throughout the ages, all pointing to the most perfect revelation of Himself in the Person of Jesus Christ.

Before the revelation on Himself in Christ, God spoke in times past in various ways, but that revelation concluded with Christ and with the subsequent record of Christ in the Bible.

There is no further revelation of God beyond Christ and the scriptures. Yes, when Christ comes again and we see Him, our reception and understanding of Him will be enhanced as never before; but even then, it will not be a revelation of more of Christ as much as us simply having greater understanding of what has already been revealed in Christ.

Has revelation ceased?  God’s last word was God’s last word.  Jesus is God’s last word and the NT is the record of Christ.  There is therefore now no new revelation until the Lord returns.  All messages that claim to be from God must be checked by and agree with Scripture.  Therefore, as John Owen pointed out, if a supposedly new revelation disagrees with Scripture, it is false; and if it agrees, it is not new and is unnecessary.

Let us endeavor to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory both now and forever. Amen. 2 Peter 3:18

Doctrine of Revelation: General and Special Revelation

There are two types of revelation: General and Special Revelation.

First, General Revelation.  General revelation is also known as: natural, cosmological, and non-salvific revelation.  General revelation is given to all, generally.  It is about more than salvation but it does not reveal God’s plan for salvation.  It is incomplete, and because of sin and sin’s effects on man, it is even less comprehensible to man.  There is more of God to be seen in the general revelation, but man suppresses the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18-21).  Therefore, special revelation is necessary if man is to know God in a saving manner.  Believers, however, can see more of God in the general revelation than is perceived by non-believers.

Second, Special Revelation. Special revelation is also known as supernatural, soteriological, or redemptive revelation.  Unlike general revelation, special revelation is given only to the elect—and to all of the elect, who will all respond by receiving Christ eventually, though not always immediately, upon hearing the gospel the first time.

Special revelation reveals what is necessary for man to be saved by faith in Jesus Christ.  Before Christ and during the Apostolic age, special revelation was communicated by various means, including visions, dreams, and prophecies as recorded in the Bible. During the current Church age, special revelation is communicated through the Bible, by Christians sharing their faith, and by biblical preaching. 

Jesus Christ is the most complete revelation of God and salvation (John 14:9, Hebrews 1:1-3).

Doctrine of Revelation: Sufficiency and Perspicuity

Having walked through the installments of God’s progressive revelation of Himself, let’s now consider two truths about God’s revelation.

First, God’s revelation of Himself in the Scriptures is sufficient. God has revealed everything about Himself that we need to know.  Nothing additional is needed. That does not mean God has revealed everything there is to know or even everything we might like to know. Chapter 1, paragraph 6 of the London Baptist Confession of faith explains this better than I can:

The whole counsel of God concerning everything essential for His own glory and man’s salvation, faith, and life is either explicitly stated or by necessary inference contained in the Holy Scriptures. Nothing is ever to be added to the Scriptures, either by new revelation of the Spirit or by human traditions. [9]
[9] 2 Timothy 3:15–17; Galatians 1:8,9)

Second, although the Scriptures are not all easily understood, they are understandable.  There is a fifty-cent word for this: “perspicuity. ” A dictionary definition of this word is, “being clear or understandable.”  Again, not everything in the Bible is equally clear, but the essential message is abundantly clear.  We again quote from the Confession (Chapter 1, paragraph 7):

Some things in Scripture are clearer than others, and some people understand the teachings more clearly than others.[12]   However, the things that must be known, believed, and obeyed for salvation are so clearly set forth and explained in one part of Scripture or another that both the educated and uneducated may achieve a sufficient understanding of them by properly using ordinary measures. [13]
[12] 2 Peter 3:16  [13] Psalm 19:7; Psalm 119:130

Quotes from: 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith in Modern English,
 https://founders.org/library-book/1689-confession/