Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 35:138 (Apr 1878)
Article: The Extent Of Inspiration
Author: Ezra P. Gould

BSac 35:138 (April 1878) p. 326

The Extent Of Inspiration

Prof. Ezra P. Gould

Mr. Sanday, in his generally admirable book on the Gospels in the Second Century, speaks of the demand for a restatement of the doctrine of revelation or inspiration, inductive in its nature, and bringing out what inspiration is, not what it ought to be. I suppose that he means by this a theory based on a careful observation of the facts of Scripture, and such as to comprehend all these facts, as far as they can be ascertained, instead of a theory reasoned out from the nature of things, real or supposed. If we analyze the popular theory of inspiration, we shall see, I think, what Mr. Sanday has in his mind when he speaks of what inspiration ought to be. We have, first, the underlying fact assumed by all believers in inspiration, that the Bible is a revelation from God. Following this assumption, we have next the idea that it must therefore be perfect, like everything else proceeding from God’s hands. And finally, perfection is made to mean infallibility — the absence of all errors of whatever kind. This is the popular idea of inspiration, and the short-hand method for its proof, which involves infallibility in inspiration, proving the one from the other in the nature of things.

If we examine, now, the modification of this view generally adopted by scholars, we find that they make a distinction between the substance and the form of revelation, holding that the former is divine and the latter human, and that inspiration and infallibility belong to the former only. This distinction is partly deductive, proceeding from the general law of economy in the use of the supernatural; the minor premise being that this is all that is necessary for the

BSac 35:138 (April 1878) p. 327

accomplishment of God’s purpose in revelation. But it is also partly inductive, being forced upon scholars by a consideration of the facts in regard to the manifest human character of the books of the Bible as a whole, in their literary form, and the individuality of the several parts. A modification of this view supposes that the elevated mental state of the writers communicates itself to their style; and this, too, proceeds partly from what is seen to be natural in the circumstances, and partly from observation of the otherwise unaccountable excellence of the literary quality of these books.

But we are witnessing a still further modification of the common view of inspiration, which separates not only between the substance and the form, but also between different classes of things included in the substance itself. We may make a distinction here, in order to show the general line of division adopted, between facts and ideas — between historical and scientific facts, for instance, and their moral, r...