A Select Issue in Bibliology: The Inspiration of Scripture
Updated: May 9
Upon this author’s research on the bibliological topic of The Inspiration of Scripture, it became clear that several schools of thought have emerged over the past century which threaten the foundational belief that the Bible is inspired by God and, thusly, his recorded, authenticated word. The attacks on this basic doctrinal belief threaten all of Christianity by reducing Scripture to a mere narrative of man about God, rather than the true Word of God to man. If the basis of the Christian faith can be eroded to nothing more than a book full of man’s opinions or fallacies, this adds fuel to postmodern relativism, pluralism, atheism, and the like, and undermines the claims of the Bible’s inerrancy and infallibility.
The goal of this paper is to indicate that much of the postmodern debate regarding the inspiration of the Bible is fueled by faithless and Trinitarian-dissected interpretation. In order to read the Bible as the inspired, true and incorruptible Word of God, one must have the Holy Spirit residing within to teach and interpret, as well as have an adequate Christological understanding of God coming to man and man’s response. This paper will demonstrate that, though the Bible is the fully inspired, written Word of God, it equally requires inspired interpretation, based upon faith-filled, Trinitarian pneumatology, in order for the reader to accept this divine inspiration, and thusly, the resulting inerrancy and infallibility of the Word. In an attempt to prove this thesis, biblical inspiration will be defined; commentary on the subject will be addressed; and Trinitarian pneumatology will be explored in defense of the same.
Biblical Inspiration: Exegesis and Definition
The entire foundation of the Christian faith rests upon the belief that the Word of God is true. The doctrines and claims of the church, including infallibility and inerrancy, find solidity in the Bible being the inspired, authentic, authoritative Word of God. The historical view of biblical inspiration, according to Henry, is rooted in “[t]he traditional theory that the Bible as a whole and in every part is the word of God written, [which] held currency until the rise of modern critical theories a century ago.” Much like a domino effect, critical theorists seem convinced if the Word of God can be proven, scientifically or otherwise, to be the work of human delusion or conspiracy rather than God-given inspiration, biblical inerrancy and church infallibility are then immediately disproved, making the Word of God, Christian doctrine and its faith void of authority in the postmodern age of atheism, pluralism, and the like. Henry continues:
It was soon apparent that scholars who abandoned the trustworthiness of biblical history had furnished an entering wedge for the abandonment of doctrinal elements…The [contemporary revolt] attacks the historic view of revelation as well as inspiration, affirming in deference to the dialectical philosophy that divine revelation does not assume the form of concepts and words—a premise that runs directly counter to the biblical witness.
G. K. Beale asserts that prophets, such as John, were “commissioned to write” the truth by God; “words cannot be separated from concepts” and both within the Bible are “absolutely authoritative;” and, “Christ’s words…come from the divine being whose character is without flaw, including his knowledge of all things” (Rev 1:4-3:22, 4:1, 19:9-11, 21:5, 22:6). B. B. Warfield simply placed the burden of proof on the Bible’s illegitimate critics in his statement, “Not a single case of disharmony [within the Bible] can be proved.” However, since the trustworthiness of the Bible stands as its own testimony of defense, this paper will first exegete integral passages on inspiration in an attempt to define the term thoroughly and build an adequate argument for the same.
A study of biblical inspiration holds challenges similar to the concept of the Trinity—although addressed throughout Scripture and foundational to an understanding of it, the actual word is not mentioned. Inspiration is described in the New Testament—by both Peter and Paul—but only twice (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20-21).
Every Scripture is God-breathed (given by His inspiration) and profitable for instruction, for reproof and conviction of sin, for correction of error and discipline in obedience, [and] for training in righteousness (in holy living, in conformity to God’s will in thought, purpose and action)…(2 Tim 3:16).
[Yet] first [you must] understand this, that no prophesy of Scripture is [a matter] of any personal or private or special interpretation (loosening, solving). For no prophecy ever originated because some man willed it [to do so—it never came by human impulse], but men spoke from God who were borne along (moved and impelled) by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet 1:20-21).
However, in both instances, the concept of inspiration refers not only to the reception of divine revelation but to the art of interpreting and the ability of communicating this revelation to other people. More specifically, biblical inspiration includes writing this divine communication down into what is now known as the Holy Scripture. The Pontifical Biblical Commission (commission) defines revelation as “the fundamental act of God by which he communicates who he is and the mystery of his will…at the same time rendering human beings capable of receiving revelation.” Divine revelation is an essential element to biblical inspiration. It is important to note that not only does God send the communication, he must, by the inner working of his Spirit or divine power, render the human capable of understanding and expressing the communication (Gal 3:19-20). Erickson states, “…the writer is the object of inspiration; however, the quality of inspiredness [sic] is communicated to the writing as well…much like…revelation [is] both [in] the revealing and the revealed.” The intermediary writer must be enabled, and illumined, by God in order to correctly relay the intended message as God’s own words, not those orchestrated independently from a member of the Trinity.
An example of this divine enablement to both hear and translate is illustrated in Paul’s telling (and Luke’s writing) of his road to Damascus encounter where he heard intelligible words from the Lord, but the witnesses “did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me” (Acts 22:9). This account affirms that Paul was enabled, supernaturally, to understand the Lord’s communication, while the bystanders were not, until he presumably informed them. The subtle differences in the retelling of the encounter by Paul, and, thusly, the recording by Luke, can easily be explained, not as errant, but as a live example of the art of inspiration itself (Acts 9:1-19, 22:6-12, 26:12-18). Paul’s inspired communication, being an enlivened encounter fully engaged with the audience, situation or context at hand, proves divine revelation at work as Jesus taught, “…do not be anxious beforehand what you are to say, but say whatever is given you in that hour, for it is not you who will be speaking, but the Holy Spirit” (Matt 10:19-20; Luke 12:11-12; Mark 13:11, ESV).
The inference to the Word being inspired by God himself is an integral theme throughout the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, established by the frequent pattern of God speaking and man writing it down. This is the substance of the Bible itself and Jesus used the same pattern to establish the Gospel (Gen 1:3, Rev 19:9, 22:6). According to the commission:
Inspiration…is presented as the action by which God enables certain persons, chosen by him, to transmit his revelation faithfully in writing. Inspiration presupposes revelation and is at the service of the faithful transmission of [it] in the biblical writings.
To write God’s spoken word is a balanced command given in the Scriptures and patterned thusly: “The Lord said to Moses, Write these words..,” or, in another instance, “the Lord answered me and said, write the vision…” (Exod 34:27; Is 8:1; Hab 2:2). This pattern appears prominently in the apocalyptic genres or prophesy, for example, “Write therefore the things you see, what they are…and what is to take place hereafter” (Rev 1:19). The commission terms this a “phenomenology of the ‘God-human author’ relationship,” where:
God is the only author of revelation and…the books of Sacred Scripture…are inspired by him. God is the “author” of these books…but through human beings he has chosen. These do not write under dictation but are “true authors”…who employ their own faculties and abilities.
The psalmist of 45:1 links speech and writing together when he poetically states, “My heart overflows with a goodly theme; I address my psalm to a King; my tongue is like the pen of a ready writer” (Ps 45:1). However, since all of Scripture is God-breathed, inspiration is not limited to genres within the biblical context, but encompasses the entire canonized Bible (2 Tim 3:16). With regard to the New Testament, the commission states:
…[W]e observe a particular situation: [these writings] manifest a relationship of their authors with God only through the person of Jesus…According to our sources, Jesus did not write anything himself, and he did not dictate anything to his disciples. …The personal relationship with the Lord Jesus, practiced with a living and informed faith in his person, constitutes the basic foundation for…“inspiration” that makes the apostles capable of communicating, in speech or in writing, the message of Jesus, “the Word of God.”
In Matthew 22:43, Jesus confirms David was “speaking by the Spirit” when the psalmist said, “The Lord said to my Lord,” assuring that the phenomenon of communicative influence by the Holy Spirit is echoed throughout the Old and New Testaments (Matt 22:43, NIV; Ps 110:1, NLT; 2 Sam 23:2; Acts 2:30; 1 Cor 12:3; Rev 1:10, 4:2).
The words inspiration (n.) or inspire (v.) are derived from the Latin term inspiro or, “to breathe.” Noah Webster’s amplified definition includes the following:
[T]he act of breathing into any thing; the infusion of ideas into the mind by the Holy Spirit…or the communication of the divine will; to infuse into the mind…with new life; to…suggest ideas or monitions supernaturally—in this manner, we suppose the prophets to have been inspired and the Scriptures to have been composed under divine influence or direction.
In 2 Timothy 3:16, the term for “God-breathed” or “inspired by God” is theopneustos, from theos (God) and pneo (breathe out), which “relates directly to God’s spirit” and “expresses the sacred nature of the Scriptures…and their power to sanctify believers.” According to Henry, “The word theopneustos…literally God-‘spirated’[sic]…affirms that the living God is the author of Scripture and that Scripture is the product of his creative breath.” Paul attributes the context of revelatory inspiration to all, or every, Scripture (2 Tim 3:16). Peter equates Paul’s epistles as being authoritatively on par with “the rest of the Scriptures,” linking part what is now known as the New Testament canon into the revelatory inspiration of God (2 Pet 3:16). Jesus, himself being the Word of God, referred to the authority of Scriptures in his wilderness debate with Satan, saying, “It is written…” (John 1:1; Matt 4:4, 7, 10). He introduced himself in the first person account of Isaiah and stated, “Scripture must yet be fulfilled in Me…” (Is 61:1-3; Luke 4:17-19, 22:37). Jesus also attested everything written in the Law would be accomplished and, when teaching, referenced the authority of Scripture by asking, “Haven’t you read…” (Matt 5:17-18; 19:4-5). Erickson concludes, “Evidently, in Jesus’ mind anything that the Old Testament asserted was what God said…Whatever the Bible said, he identified as having the force of God’s own speech; it was authoritative.” Further, Jesus established his own authority and that of his apostles when he stated, “No one comes to the Father except through me,” and “whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me…” (John 14:6, 15:20, 17:20; Luke 10:16).
Within this section, the term inspiration has been explored and biblical exegesis has shown the concept as evident throughout the Old and New Testaments as the preferred, consistent and authoritative manner that God wishes to relay His revelation to man—through chosen speakers or writers. Inspiration refers not only to the reception of divine revelation but to the art of interpreting and communicating this revelation to others, whether spoken or written. Erickson defines biblical inspiration as “that supernatural influence of the Holy Spirit on the Scripture writers that rendered their writings an accurate record of the revelation or that resulted in what they wrote actually being the Word of God.” This author defines inspiration as divine communication, imparted by God to the recipient who is enabled by God to receive it and relay it to others according to God’s will. Biblical inspiration is this in its written form, the collection of which has been canonized by the church in the Old and New Testaments. For the purposes of this paper, inspiration may also mean the “faithful transmission of God’s revelation in writing.”
Biblical Inspiration: Theoretical Viewpoints
Within this section, various viewpoints will briefly be set forth in the attempt to generate a basic overview of the debate regarding biblical inspiration. The thesis this paper defends includes the assertion that an element of inspired interpretation is required in order to accept biblical inspiration as the genuine and authoritative Word of God. Walvoord states, “In the twentieth century more than any previous period of the Christian era there is a rising tide of unbelief and rejection of the authority of Scripture.” Critical theorists cannot bypass the precept set forth in Deuteronomy 30:19, that one is to choose life over death, nor can they escape the fact that the “Word God speaks” penetrates to the dividing line of the soul and spirit (Heb 4:12). Pink offers the following on critical challenges regarding biblical inspiration:
A writing that is inspired by God self-evidently implies, in the very expression, that the words are the words of God. To say that the inspiration of the Scriptures applies to their concepts and not to their words; to declare that one part of Scripture is written with one kind or degree of inspiration and another part with another kind or degree, is not only destitute of any foundation or support in the Scriptures themselves, but is repudiated by every statement in the Bible which bears upon the subject…To say that the Bible is not the Word of God but merely contains the Word of God is the figment of an ill-employed ingenuity and an unholy attempt to depreciate and invalidate the supreme authority of the Oracles of God. All the attempts which have been made to explain the rationale of inspiration have done nothing toward simplifying the subject, rather [they have] tended to mystify. …What the Bible teaches about its own inspiration is a matter purely of Divine testimony, and our business is simply to receive the testimony and not to speculate about or seek to pry into its modus operandi. Inspiration is as much a matter of Divine revelation as is justification by faith. Both stand equally on the authority of the Scriptures themselves, which must be the final court of appeal on this subject as on every question of revealed truth.
What one chooses to believe, accept or respect regarding God’s word includes an element of submission to divine authority. What one sets out to disprove, deny, or invalidate, in an intent contrary to God’s word, contains an element of rebellion. These are the baselines of humanity within the sphere of divinity and they are inescapable regardless of academic debate or time period, particularly when the subject reflects a judgment of the eternal character of God, such as the truth of his word. The primary motive behind an adequate analysis of biblical inspiration should be to seek the fullest extent of the truth within the phraseology, which includes the whole counsel of Scripture, and that of God’s own granting (Acts 20:27). This is a cyclical argument interwoven within the very existence of the book itself. Walvoord explains, “Much of the difficulty expressed in the opposition of unbelieving liberals to the inspiration of the words of Scripture is caused by the fact that inspiration as a supernatural work of God is not subject to rational analysis.” The very nature of the Bible requires faith to approach it and a relationship reliant upon God for understanding it, as the Creator’s ways are higher than those of the created and wisdom is granted from above (Jas 1:5; Prov 3:5-6; Josh 24:14-15; Is 35:5, 42:7, 55:8-9; Mark 9:24; John 3:16; Luke 11:31, 49, 21:15; Acts 6:3, 10). The breath of God is all-encompassing to begin with, as is what he speaks with it (Gen 1:1-4; John 1:1).
In Warfield’s God-Inspired Scripture, he refutes the notion presented by Dr. Cremer, who, as Warfield states, “was led to take an entirely new view…of the meaning of theopneustos, according to which it defines Scripture in [2 Timothy 3:16], not according to its origin, but according to its effect—not as ‘inspired of God,’ but as ‘inspiring its readers.’” However, this debate over the meaning of theopneustos is limited somewhat deistically by Warfield (in God-Inspired Scripture) to the origin and secularized Greek usage of a single word (theopneustos), not necessarily in consideration of the passage’s context or the whole counsel of the Word of God regarding the concept conveyed. Warfield concludes:
From all points of approach alike we appear to be conducted to the conclusion that it is primarily expressive of the origination of Scripture, not of its nature and much less of its effects…It does not express a breathing into the Scriptures by God…What it affirms is that the Scriptures owe their origin to an activity of God the Holy Ghost and are in the highest and truest sense His creation.
This author maintains there is an element of both in the living, breathing Word of God, where, primarily, Scripture is inspired of God, but, in addition, an element of inspiration affects the writer and the readers regarding both personal interpretation and the relaying of it to other people. Fillmore poetically describes this continuing, outworking process within creation in John 5:17:
God-Mind is the living power back of all nature, causing the flowers to bud and bloom and the grass to spring up…Jesus explained the outer working of this law in a very few words when he said, “My Father worketh even until now, and I work.”
The communication of the Spirit of God cannot be limited by the confines of man simply in an attempt to define the undefinable. What would be the purpose of God attempting to communicate with his created at all if there were no element of correct interpretation of such communication? If God can influence a writer to write, this process begins with the writer foremost as a listener to hear his intent, and then so express it with words or expository dialogue or speech. Therefore, it is also possible and highly likely that he can influence such additional listeners, readers, or writers, to process, utilize and apply the translated message also according to his will and intent (Heb 1:3, 4:2, 12).
Joseph Cunningham has quoted the foundation of John Wesley’s pneumatology: “God is a Spirit—not only remote from the body, and all the properties of it, but likewise full of all spiritual perfections, power, wisdom, love and holiness…[o]ur worship should be suitable to his nature.” In Habakkuk 2, it is clearly the Lord’s idea to communicate through a human for the sake of reaching other people (Hab 2:1-2). This pattern is exemplified in the person of Christ and his chosen disciples, and in the Great Commission, which is to continue this process to the end of the age (Matt 28:16-20). Further, 2 Timothy 3:16, includes every Scripture, some of which was not written when Paul made the statement, thus blending “nature, effect and origin” within both Paul and the formulation of Scripture (2 Pet 3:16). Contextually, the passage includes a list of the continuing, inner- and outer-working effects of God-breathed Scripture within the receptive person, and, consequentially, outward through relationship (i.e. conviction, discipline). As further reference, 2 Peter 1:20-21 makes it clear that the interpretation of prophesy is not originated with man, but “spoke from God” as the prophet was “borne [phero] along by the Holy Spirit.” The very nature of prophesy is that it proposes something in the future God will carry to its fulfillment; man is not capable, independent of divine orchestration. The interpretation, then, is inspired; the circumstance develops; and the fulfilment of prophesy is ushered in over the course of time, which would suggest a word that owes both its origin and completion to God. Part of what establishes biblical inspiration and inerrancy is fulfilled prophesy, such as Christ being the Messiah (Mark 8:29). When the concept of biblical inspiration is evaluated within the whole counsel of the Bible, its completion includes inspired interpretation to meet the original intention. Divine communication is an ongoing dialogue between the Creator and the created, having its authority grounded in the original message, or the Word of God as ultimate and guiding truth.
Walvoord details several contemporary philosophies regarding inspiration including natural, dynamic, concept theory, degrees of inspiration, and dictation theory. Natural inspiration strips the Bible of revelation, and thusly, its authority; this is an “extreme liberal” view.  Dynamic inspiration attributes a special, almost artistic quality to the Bible such as to say it is inspired writing similar to that of Shakespeare, but it limits the divinity of the Word of God. The concept theory claims “supernatural ideas” exist in the Bible, but they are phrased in the human authors’ “own words.” Degrees of inspiration place the level or phrases of biblical inspiration solely upon the discretion of the reader, allowing a “pick and choose” approach to “truth”, which limits the full authority of God’s Word. Finally, dictation is the “most extreme conservative view…that all parts of the Bible were dictated by God and that the human authors were no more than stenographers.” In contrast to the aforementioned viewpoints, Merrill Unger offers the following view:
[I]t is possible to formulate a doctrine which accords with all the…Scriptural facts…[t]his is called verbal, plenary inspiration. By verbal inspiration is meant that in the original writings the Holy Spirit guided in the actual choice of the words used. On the other hand, the human authorship is preserved…but without the intrusion of error. By plenary inspiration is signified that the accuracy…is extended to every portion of the Bible, so that it is, as a whole and all its constituent parts, infallible as to truth and final as to divine authority.
The commission concurs regarding the gospels and emphasizes relationship with Christ as their source:
The respective biblical writing comes from God through its author’s living faith in God and through the relationship of this author with a specific form (or with different forms) of divine revelation. It is not rare that a biblical text bases itself on an earlier inspired text and participates in this way in the same divine provenance.
In light of the above viewpoints and commentary, this paper has shown that the term biblical inspiration rests upon the whole counsel of the Word of God (thusly, biblical), and that inspiration includes not only an element of faith to accept, but an element of divinity in the granting of that faith. Without faith, biblical authority is diminished within the human viewpoint assumed within the approach. This author maintains the Bible is the fully inspired, written Word of God, however, its interpretation must be inspired by God to include an adequate element of faith within the reader, wherein the only possible errant or fallible quality can be present (Eph 2:5-9; Matt 6:9; Mark 10:18; John 6:65). Inspired interpretation is a precursor to obedience and the personal realization of the Word of God as authoritative truth, including inspiration, infallibility and inerrancy within both concept and word usage.
Trinitarian Pneumatology and Modern Application
Critical postmodern viewpoints regarding inspiration, which tend to discredit the authoritative stance of the Bible, include a dissection of the Trinitarian nature of God as a person, referencing the Holy Spirit, not as “he,” but as “it.” Proper biblical theology rests upon the nature of God as a tri-part person. Pneumatology is the study of the Holy Spirit and the things he does or the words he speaks as a person, not as a thing separate from God or Christ, but as a member one with them. Trinitarian pneumatology links the Spirit with the Trinity, as God, to the Son, through the Scriptures to man. Divisive pneumatology is done in the vein of rebellion to thwart any earthen obedience to the Holy Spirit as God, or full authority, including the Bible as a guide. Jeremy Begbie states the importance of Trinitarian pneumatology in the study of biblical inspiration:
It is when biblical inspiration is viewed outside the whole sweep of the triune God’s reconciling work that distortion easily arises…There is the ecclesiological dimension of the Spirit’s acts which should remind us of the corporate character of biblical inspiration. Spirit and Church are of course linked very closely in the New Testament corpus…[W]e must also speak of a liberating word of the Spirit: “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom” (2 Cor 3:17). Perhaps the most thorny issue in biblical inspiration concerns human freedom…In Trinitarian terms, the Spirit is “God present to the world as its liberating other, bringing it to the destiny determined by the Father, made actual, realized in the Son.” [In consideration of the Holy Spirit and the New Testament church] we should draw attention to the diversity and specificity of the Spirit’s acts which are so striking…
There is supreme freedom within the Holy Spirit and the church of Christ, perhaps nowhere more plainly stated than in John 16:7 and 1 John 2:26-28. In an attempt to disprove biblical inspiration via a dissecting of proper Trinitarian pneumatology, it would appear the actual attack may be against true and genuine freedom in Christ, to do the Father’s will upon the earth. Biblical inspiration includes an element of outworking which is to continue until the second coming of the Lord (Matt 28:16-20). Inspiration includes and conveys a holy destiny upon the earth, via Christ’s church, including the present day, postmodern world.
This paper has demonstrated the Bible to be the fully inspired word of God through exegesis of two primary passages regarding the same (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20-21); a proper definition of the phraseology, biblical inspiration; and an overview of both historical and contemporary theoretical viewpoints on the subject. Trinitarian pneumatology has been addressed as a precursor to the acceptance of biblical inspiration, which includes the whole counsel of the Word of God and an inclusive consideration of the Holy Spirit as a conjoined member of the Trinity. This approach presents the Word as eternally applicable and certainly authoritative today. It has been shown that biblical inspiration is a lasting, unchangeable truth, and that any fallibility or error rests within the motive of the individual interpretation of it. Full, complete, divinely intended biblical inspiration is a dialogue which requires inspired interpretation, a Trinitarian pneumatology, and a measure of faith in which to participate.
Cunningham, Joseph W. John Wesley’s Pneumatology: Perceptible Inspiration. New York: Ashgate, 2014.
Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999.
Fillmore, Charles. Mysteries of John. Unity Village, MO: Unity School of Christianity, 2008.
Pink, A. W. The Divine Inspiration of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Generic NL Freebook, n. d. Accessed April 17, 2018. http://www.liberty.edu.
Pontifical Biblical Commission and Gerhard Ludwig Muller. The Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture: The Word That Comes from God and Speaks of God for the Salvation of the World. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 2014.
Beale, G. K. “Can the Bible be Completely Inspired by God and yet Still Contain Errors? A Response to some Recent ‘Evangelical’ Proposals.” Westminster Theological Journal, Vol. 73:1 (2011): 1-22.
Begbie, Jeremy. “Who is this God? Biblical Inspiration Revisited.” Tyndale Bulletin 43, no. 2 (1992): 259-282. Accessed April 17, 2018. http://www.liberty.edu.
Herrick, Greg. “An Introduction to Christian Belief: A Layman’s Guide.” Bible.org. Accessed April 19, 2018. https://bible.org/seriespage/4-pneumatology-holy-spirit.
McDill, Matthew. “B. B. Warfield and the Inspiration of Scripture.” Faith and Mission 21 (Summer 2004): 77-87. Accessed April 17, 2018. http://www.liberty.edu.
Scott, James W. “The Inspiration and Interpretation of God’s Word with Special Reference to Peter Enns.” Westminster Theological Journal 71, no. 1 (Spring 2009). Accessed April 17, 2018. http://www.liberty.edu.
Unger, Merrill F. “The Inspiration of the Old Testament.” Central Bible Quarterly 1, no. 4 (1958): 1-4. Accessed April 17, 2018. http://www.liberty.edu.
Walvoord, John F. “Contemporary Problems in Biblical Interpretation Part One: Is the Bible the Inspired Word of God?” Bibliotheca Sacra 116, no. 461 (1959): 3-14. Accessed April 17, 2018. http://www.liberty.edu.
Warfield, B. B. “God Inspired Scripture.” Alpha and Omega Ministries. Accessed April 17, 2018. http://www.aomin.org/THEOPNEU.html.
________. “Inspiration and Criticism.” In The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Edited by Samuel G. Craig. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948.
Helps Word-Studies. “2315 Theopneustos.” Biblehub.com. Accessed April 19, 2018. http://biblehub.com/greek/2315.htm.
Henry, C. F. H. “Bible, Inspiration of.” In the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. s.v.
Edited by Walter A. Elwell, 159-163. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.
NASB Lexicon. “2 Timothy 3:16.” Biblehub.com. Accessed April 19, 2018. http://biblehub.com/lexicon/2_timothy/3-16.htm.
 C. F. H. Henry, “Bible, Inspiration of,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 159-163.
 Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are in the Amplified Bible, Classic Edition (La Habra, CA: The Zondervan Corporation and the Lockman Foundation, 1987). Scripture quotations taken from the Amplified Bible (AMPC), Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by the Lockman Foundation. Used by permission. www.Lockman.org.
 G. K. Beale, “Can the Bible be Completely Inspired by God and yet Still Contain Errors? A Response to some Recent ‘Evangelical’ Proposals,” Westminster Theological Journal, Vol. 73:1 (2011): 1-22.
 Matthew McDill, “B. B. Warfield and the Inspiration of Scripture,” Faith and Mission 21, no. 3 (Summer 2004): 77-87. / B. B. Warfield, “Inspiration and Criticism,” in The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, ed. Samuel G. Craig (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948), 439.
 Pontifical Biblical Commission and Gerhard Ludwig Muller, The Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture: The Word That Comes from God and Speaks of God for the Salvation of the World (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 2014), 10.
 Ibid, 11.
 Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 186.
 Holy Bible, English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Good News, 2016).
 Pontifical Biblical Commission and Muller, Inspiration and Truth, 11.
 Ibid, 12.
 Holy Bible, New International Version (Biblica, 2011). / Holy Bible, New Living Translation (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2007).
 Rosalie J. Slater, Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language (Chesapeake, VA: Foundation for American Christian Education, 1995).
 Helps Word-Studies, “2315 Theopneustos,” Biblehub.com, accessed April 19, 2018, http://biblehub.com/greek/2315.htm.
 Henry, “Bible, Inspiration of,” 160.
 Erickson, Christian Theology, 181.
 Ibid, 169.
 Pontifical Biblical Commission and Muller, Inspiration and Truth, 11.
 John F. Walvoord, “Contemporary Problems in Biblical Interpretation Part One: Is the Bible the Inspired Word of God?” Bibliotheca Sacra 116, no. 461 (1959): 3-14, accessed April 17, 2018, http://www.liberty.edu.
 A. W. Pink, The Divine Inspiration of the Bible, Grand Rapids: Generic NL Freebook, n. d., accessed April 17, 2018, http://www.liberty.edu.
 Walvoord, “Contemporary Problems?”
 B. B. Warfield, “God Inspired Scripture,” Alpha and Omega Ministries, accessed April 17, 2018, http://www.aomin.org/THEOPNEU.html.
 Charles Fillmore, Mysteries of John (Unity Village, MO: Unity School of Christianity, 2008).
 Joseph W. Cunningham, John Wesley’s Pneumatology: Perceptible Inspiration (New York: Ashgate, 2014), 8.
 Warfield, “God-Inspired Scripture.”
 Walvoord, “Contemporary Problems?”
 Pontifical Biblical Commission and Muller, Inspiration and Truth, 13.
 Merrill F. Unger, “The Inspiration of the Old Testament,” Central Bible Quarterly 1, no. 4 (1958): 1-4, accessed April 17, 2018, http://www.liberty.edu.
 Ibid., 12.
 Greg Herrick, “An Introduction to Christian Belief: A Layman’s Guide,” Bible.org, accessed April 19, 2018, https://bible.org/seriespage/4-pneumatology-holy-spirit.
 Jeremy Begbie, “Who is this God? Biblical Inspiration Revisited,” Tyndale Bulletin 43, no. 2 (1992): 259-282, accessed April 17, 2018, http://www.liberty.edu. / Quoted within aforementioned source is: Colin Gunton, “The Spirit in the Trinity,” in The Forgotten Trinity: A Selection of Papers, 127.