(5) Verbal Inspiration. The controversy among orthodox divines respecting what is called verbal inspzratton, appears to arise, in a great measure, from the different senses affixed to the phrase.
The real question, and the whole question at issue, may be stated thus: did the work of the Divine Spirit in the sacred penmen relate to the language they used, or their manner of expressing their ideas; and if so, how far, and in what wayf All those with whom we are concerned in the discussion of this question, hold that Divine in spiration had some respect to the language em ployed by the inspired writers, at least in the way of general supervision. In recording what was immediately spoken with an audible voice by Jehovah, or by an angel interpreter ; in giving ex pression to points of revelation which entirely surpassed the comprehension of the writers; in recording prophecies, the minute bearings of which they did not perceive; in short, in com mitting to. writing any of the dictatcs of the Spirit, which they- could not have otherwise accurately .expressed, the sacred writers were supplied with the words as well as the matter.
Even when Biblical writers made use of their own faculties, and wrote each one in his own manner, without having their mental constitution at all disturbed, they were yet always secured by celestial influence against the adoption of any forms of speech, or collocation of words, that would have injured the exhibition of Divine truth, or that did not adequately give it expression. The characteristic differences of style, so appar ent among the sacred writers, were employed by the Holy Spirit for the purposes of inspiration, and were called forth in a rational way. The writers, being acted upon by the Divine Spirit, expressed themselves naturally, and while the Di vine influence adapted itself to whatever was pe culiar in the minds of inspired men, it constantly guided them in writing the sacred volume. The Holy Scriptures were written, not under a par tial. or imperfect, but under a plenary and in fallible, inspiration, and were entirely the result of Divine intervention, and are to be regarded as the oracles of Jehovah.
(6) Plenary Inspiration. (a) The doctrine of a plenary inspiration of all Scripture in re gard to the language employed, as well as the thoughts communicated, ought not to be rejected without valid reasons. The doctrine is so ob viously important, and so consonant with the feel ings of sincere piety, that those evangelical Chris tians who are pressed with speculative objections against it frequently, in the honesty of their hearts, advance opinions which fairly imply it. This is the case, as we have seen, with Dr. Hen derson, who says, that the Divine Spirit guided the sacred penmen in writing the Scriptures; that their mode of expression was such as they were instructed by the Spirit to employ; that Paul ascribes not only the doctrines which the Apostles taught, but the entire character of their style, to the influence of the Spirit. He indeed says,
that this does not always imply the immedtate communication of the words of Scripture; and he says it with good reason. For tmntedtate properly signifies, acting without a medium, or zvithout the intervention of another cause or means, not acting by second causes.
03) Now those who hold the highest views of inspiration do not suppose that the Divine Spirit, except in a few instances, so influenced the writers of Scripture as to interfere with the use of their rational faculties or their peculiar mental habits and tastes, or in any way to supersede secondary causes as the medium through which his agency produced the desired effect.
In regard to this point, therefore, there ap pears to be little or no ground for controversy. For, if God so influenced the sacred writers that, either with or without the use of secondary causes, they wrote just what he intended, and in the manner he intended, the end is secured; and what they wrote is as truly his word, as though he had written it with his own hand on tables of stone, without any human instrumentality. The very words of the Decalogue were all such as God chose. And they would have been equally so if Moses had been moved by the Divine Spirit to write them with his hand. The expression, that God immediately imparted or communicated to the writers the very words which they wrote, is evidently not well chosen. The exact truth, is that the writers themselves were the subjects of the Divine influence. The Spirit employed them as active instruments, and directed them in writing, both as to matter and manner. They wrote 'as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.' The matter, in many cases, was what they before knew, and the manner was entirely conformed to their habits; it was their own. But what was written was none the less inspired on that ac count. God may have influenced and guided an apostle as infallibly in writing what he had be fore known, and that guidance may have been as really necessary, as in writing a new revelation. And God may have influenced Paul or John to write a book in his own peculiar style, and that influence may have been as real and as necessary as if the style had been what some would call a divine style. lt was a divine style, if the writer used it under Divine direction. It was a thyme style, and it was, at the same time, a human style, and the writer's own style, all in one. Just as the believer's exercises, faith and love, are his own acts, and at the same time are the effects of Divine influence.