Why Are Styles, Form, Interest, Focus Different

a Approaches to Inspiration (i Mechanical Dictation  God dictated His words to the writers of the biblical passage like a boss may dictate a memo to his secretary. Problems: Why are styles, form, interest, focus different Paul’s stating: this is not from the Lord but from me (ii Illumination  God worked in the human writers to raise their spiritual insights to such a point that their expressions demonstrated both genius and truth. Problems: Nothing divine Nothing authoritative (iii Dynamic  God instilled in the human writers His perfect information, then allowed them to compose the work using that information through a means they deemed proper. (iv The Biblical material itself seems to suggest a variety of modes of inspiration. Some places are mechanical dictation “thus says the Lord” 10 commandments Illumination—psalms, proverbs (v In suggesting that there is a variety in how the writers were inspired, I am not suggesting a conclusion as to how inspired they were. (vi The Plenary Umbrella  God moves in the writer so that he protects even the selection of the words of the writer, though the writer’s style, personality, and perspectives still are present in the work. b Approaches to Inerrancy (i Errant and in Need of Change—feminist Christians say it is written from Patriarchal perspective and that must change (ii Errant but Authoritative  The Bible is not revelation, but a pointer to God.--feeling (iii Unqualified Inerrancy (naïve inerrancy)  Does not distinguish between what the Bible records and what it is recommending. (cannot recognize hyperbole, figures of speech, etc)

(iv Functional Inerrancy  The Bible fulfills the purpose that it was designed to carry out. Factuality not included (concern is ethics, faith, and practice) Different from errant but authoritative because it will say that even some ethics faith and practice is wrong (v Intentional Inerrancy  The Bible completely, perfectly, and without errors says exactly what God and the Original author intended it to say. (room for issue of perception) (see Chicago Statement of Inerrancy)  Explanations and Qualifiers  Takes seriously the human perceptions and limitations— recognizes there are some things biblical writers will not speak to because they aren’t answering those questions (ie. Sun moving around earth)  Focuses on purpose, but argues for factuality too.—why was the author writing is important, but there has to be factuality behind it as well. Ie. Exodus—God had to deliver in order to be a delivering God.  Coherence and correspondence when proper  Limited to Original Autographs  Not a side-step  Assumes we can achieve agreement on content. (1 Sam. 13:1—KJV takes text as they have it. NIV, Holman, etc. look at other text around it and reconstruct what the ages probably were. ESV just leaves it blank by placing ellipses)  Distinguish what the text affirms, versus what it reports. (the bible isn’t wrong—what the bible is reporting is wrong)  1 Corinthians 15:29  Jude 14  Must Understand the difference in Hebrew and Greek thought. (ie. Order of Temptations in Luke, Matthew)  Must remember the limits of perception.  Avoid slippery-slope arguments—let them speak for themselves