JESUS CHRIST: GOD-MAN - Vital Christianity

76
The irony is that such a view reduces inspiration to a mantic (mystical as in divination)
approach, the very thing liberals have accused conservatives of teaching. Such an approach also
reduces inspiration to a purely human endeavor of piecing together what "might have happened."
Without careful attention to words the whole endeavor of biblical inspiration comes tumbling
down as there is no safeguard against the latest theory or "discovery."
There are no justifiable grounds for the separation of form and content. The whole
enterprise of exegesis supposes their conjunction.
Inspiration does not mean that the words are inspired rather than their content, but that
there is no such thing as the one without the other. The biblical message does not consist of
general abstractions which can come in all forms. Rather it relates to what is said and done by
God in the working out of His purpose of grace and judgment. Thus it has the characteristic of
historicity and particularity. While it can be argued that at times what is said might have been
expressed in other ways; it is, in fact, put in this particular way. Although this may seem
accidental, it is not, for words give form to the story or message. Thus the form is not expendable
since it makes content possible.
Verbal inspiration is important in that it shows us that Scripture is dealing with God's
word and work in history, not with abstract truths or insights. This leads to a serious reckoning
with the humanity of the writers as the background, circumstances, style, even the vocabulary
(i.e. Luke's use of medical terms gives credence to his claim to be a physician) are looked at
closely. All such information gives us insight into the meaning of what is written. Exposition is
not approached in general. There is painstaking linguistic study, translation, exegesis, and
interpretation. Only such an approach provides an objective reference. Thus fanciful conjecture
must yield to factuality.
Inspiration, Infallibility and Inerrancy
Biblical inspiration implies infallibility. Historically the word "infallibility" meant
"reliability in achieving an end" or "entirely trustworthy for the purposes for which it is given."
This is a good definition as long as the "purposes" are discovered inductively and not arbitrarily
narrowed to salvific matters, as if to imply that the Bible is not trustworthy when it impinges on
matters of history, science—the external world.
It is the broadening definition of infallibility which makes a clear distinction between
what is religious or spiritual and what is scientific or factual that has led to the coinage of the
Word "inerrancy." The purpose is to protect the Bible from undue accommodation to the
prevailing liberal approach to truth claims. The meaning is used in the narrower sense of "that
which does not lead into error" or "that which does not contain error."
Theological and spiritual giants have held to the view that the Bible is infallible or
inerrant. Augustine (A. D. 396-430) stated that