Sunday Musings On Why We Do What We Do

That the immutable written word’s delivery by immediate inspiration into a sin cursed world put the Scripture into a comprehensive, adversarial context cannot be underestimated. Everything and everywhere the pure word of God touched and was carried suffered under the devastation of the curse. And indeed, if left up to historic, sin-cursed methods, the immediately inspired word would not have survived its initial writing let alone its first copying. It is wholly impossible that such a unique book could survive as the sole exception to the ravages of such an all-corrupting environment if not for divine intervention. God alone, against such overwhelming corrupting pressures, can make the Scripture and keep the Scripture what the Scripture says about itself – inspired and preserved.

After the singular process of immediate inspiration, the Holy Spirit teaches the covenant keeper through the inspired product confirming in the mind of the saint what He initially said to the penmen. This is why the Church hears in Scripture the same words as were heard by the original writer. Both the original writer and subsequent believing readers hear the witness of the same Holy Spirit. The singular transgenerational witness of “one Spirit in the bond of peace” in and through the word creates the unity of one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, Eph. 4:4-6. What the Spirit said by immediate inspiration and the Spirit Himself are inseparable. Scripture is the witness of the Spirit written by secondary authors, the penmen.

Since the inception of immediate inspiration, by necessity, the Holy Spirit has been teaching the saints its content, because Scripture to be understood must be “spiritually discerned.” Considering Scripture the voice of the Holy Spirit is foundational to having a high view of the intrinsic nature of Scripture and shifts the emphasis of any discussion of the written word away from its historicity to its Christocentricity. History, which in post-critical thought is the ultimately determinative qualifier of Scripture is rather simply the God ordained context for immediate inspiration’s delivery. History, in the providence of God, was predestined to provide the events the Holy Spirit would interpret by immediate inspiration thus producing what is called theologically grammatical/historical special revelation, that special revelation is both word and event.

With Scripture, the word of God, in hand, the Holy Spirit informs us about what He has given us telling us in part about Scripture’s own immutability and purity. And it is His voice in Scripture that creates a conflict in our minds, a tension either to overcome or to succumb to. That is, we are incapable of demonstrating an unbroken line of manuscript custody between the autographs and our current Greek NT. So, the Holy Spirit, through the word, is telling the Church one thing, while at the same time the Church cannot historically, empirically prove the word of God to be true.

This objection, for many, has been considered the principal defeater of pre-critical Bible defense. But pause for a moment and consider how shallow this objection is.

  1. This is a negative polemic based on the unknown, fundamentally conceding that history and God’s providential hand are sequestered.
  2. Furthermore, the providential preservation of Scripture cannot be classified, categorized, or easily referenced. A revealed work, Scripture’s preservation reflects the complexity of God’s eternal decree in the flow of redemptive history.
  3. Providential preservation is evidence of an algorithm of Divine proportion, according to the eudokia, “good pleasure” of God and therefore is beyond the scope of human genius and ingenuity. If ever the words of Jeremiah 55:8-9, ring true, it is in the work of God’s providential preservation: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

What the Holy Spirit teaches us in Scripture is by analogy the answer sheet of an infinitely long Divine equation. To know the equation is to have comprehensive knowledge of the mind of God. The Holy Spirit who “searches the deep things of God” informs the spiritual man of the mind of God in His word regarding “all things that pertain to life and godliness.” Keeping with the analogy, understanding the answer sheet does not answer all our questions on how we arrived at the answer, but this should not be considered problematic. We trust God.

            So how do we handle interlocutors? Our apologetic is based on what we are informed of by the Holy Spirit in His word, and from that grounding we interpret the historical, empirical data. Only from this perspective can the covenant keeper have any confidence that his or her interpretation of the evidence is correct.

Published by Dr. Peter Van Kleeck, Sr.

Dr. Peter William Van Kleeck, Sr. : B.A., Grand Rapids Baptist College, 1986; M.A.R., Westminster Theological Seminary, 1990; Th.M., Calvin Theological Seminary, 1998; D. Min, Bob Jones University, 2013. Dr. Van Kleeck was formerly the Director of the Institute for Biblical Textual Studies, Grand Rapids, MI, (1990-1994) lecturing, researching and writing in the defense of the Masoretic Hebrew text, Greek Received Text and King James Bible. His published works include, "Fundamentalism’s Folly?: A Bible Version Debate Case Study" (Grand Rapids: Institute for Biblical Textual Studies, 1998); “We have seen the future and we are not in it,” Trinity Review, (Mar. 99); “Andrew Willet (1562-1621: Reformed Interpretation of Scripture,” The Banner of Truth, (Mar. 99); "A Primer for the Public Preaching of the Song of Songs" (Outskirts Press, 2015). Dr. Van Kleeck is the pastor of the Providence Baptist Church in Manassas, VA where he has ministered for the past twenty-one years. He is married to his wife of 43 years, Annette, and has three married sons, one daughter and eighteen grandchildren.

2 thoughts on “Sunday Musings On Why We Do What We Do

  1. nice article! very much enjoyed it

    with a grain of salt:
    couple of possible edits:
    on point (3) “…according to the eudokia, “good pleasure” of God and…”, it may sound better as “…according to “the good pleasure”(eudokia) of God and…”, or just leave the Greek word out altogether.
    In the second to last paragraph, I think a typo is present:”…but his should not be considered problematic.” Should “his” be “this”?
    God bless.

    Like

Leave a reply to Dr. Peter Van Kleeck, Sr. Cancel reply