Teaching Tuesday | Lesson 5: Theology of the Bible with John Cueto

Welcome to Hub City Vineyard. To get connected

or to give online, go to connect .hcv .church

or give .hcv .church. If at any point during

this message you feel called to make a change

in your life, text CHANGEME to 9700. Thank you

and enjoy the message. Welcome to the Teaching

Tuesday session for May 2025. Today we're talking

about the theology of the Bible. Not the events

or information in the Bible, not how the Bible

is preserved or translated, not even how to interpret

the Bible, all of that is for other sessions.

Now today we're talking about the book itself,

and in particular two properties of the Bible,

inspiration and inerrancy. Taken together, these

two attributes inform us as to why the Bible

is the most important book in human history,

and the most important book for every individual

human. The information we're looking at today

is built from dozens of scripture verses, so

it's time to pull out that systematic theology

book again. You can find everything we're talking

about in our previous resource, Systematic Theology

by Wayne Grudem, or the alternative one to the

right, Christian Theology by Miller J. Erickson.

They're both excellent resources, and because

Grudem and Erickson come from slightly different

theological perspectives, you may find that using

them together gives you a much more complete

understanding of many topics. I'm going to use

Erickson's method of presenting today, since

we used Grudem's last time. Now, two quick disclaimers

before we start. The first is this. It's the

same one that I gave for our session on interpreting

the Bible. We're going to be approaching this

from a conservative evangelical perspective.

That's theologically conservative, meaning we

believe that the Bible means what it says, and

evangelical, meaning that we are Protestants

with a focus on evangelism. We also have to acknowledge

that there will always be a certain element of

mystery when it comes to understanding God. I'm

going to present what I feel are the most reasonable

understandings of inspiration and inerrancy along

with my reasoning. You might feel like the categories

aren't what you would choose, or maybe you're

torn between two of the options. Don't take that

as me implying that you're unreasonable in any

way or wrong. If people agreed on everything

about theology, there'd only be a single church.

Instead, treat disagreements as a chance to research

a topic and evaluate your position. Second disclaimer,

as you can already tell, this is some heavy nerd

stuff today, so make sure to take a break every

10 minutes to eat some beef jerky and lift weights.

Alright, let's get started. So, inspiration and

inerrancy. Why these two things out of all the

different properties of the Bible? Well, the

Bible is one item in a category of things called

revelation, which refers to God revealing information

about himself. The general idea is that God is

so big and so complicated that as humans, we

could understand or discover or figure out so

little about him that he must reveal himself

to us or we could never understand him. And there

are three categories of revelation. There's general,

special, and personal or private. And if we want

to understand why the Bible is so special and

so important, we need to understand these three

first. Well, general revelation refers to the

ways that God reveals himself in a universal,

timeless sense to everyone, everywhere, all the

time. You know, think about Psalm 19, which says,

The heavens declare the glory of God. The skies

proclaim the work of his hands. When you look

at the massive scale of the universe and the

beauty of the earth, you know somewhere deep

inside yourself that there's a big, powerful,

intelligent, and artistic creator behind it all.

General revelation is less specific than the

type of revelation we get from the Bible, though.

All of that tells you that there's a God, but

not specifically the Christian God. But don't

discount it, it's incredibly important. Now the

second type of revelation that isn't the Bible

is called personal or private revelation. This

is when God reveals information to an individual,

but it is a heavily debated topic among theologians.

Nobody really disagrees that God can reveal information

to an individual, but there is a lot of disagreement

over the frequency and type of information. I

believe firmly that God guided me to children's

ministry through a series of events in response

to my prayers, but there's a lot of potential

for coercion or abuse when people go around telling

others, God told me to tell you this. There's

no verification or accountability, so we need

to exercise extreme discretion if we believe

we've been given personal revelation. We're going

to come back to this at the very end when we

talk about why the Bible is our final source

of authority. Now we get to special revelation.

This is information about God delivered directly

from God, recorded in a way that is accessible

to all people in the Bible. Unlike general revelation,

it's very specific. So when the Bible talks about

God creating the universe, there's no guess that

it's the Christian God it's talking about. And

because it's unchanging and available to everyone,

the information we learn from general and private

revelation can be verified against it. But first,

we need to know why scripture is trustworthy.

And that's where the doctrines of inspiration

and inerrancy come in. So we'll start with inspiration,

which refers to how God gave us the text of the

Bible through the Holy Spirit. Consider Moses

writing the first five books of the Bible. It's

not hard to imagine him writing down everything

that happened in his life as it happened, including

the conversations he had with God. But what about

the events that happened when he was a baby?

How does Moses know about the conversations between

God and Abraham? How Adam and Eve were formed

and then sinned against God? Or what God did,

said, and thought as he was creating the universe?

Fortunately for us, the Holy Spirit had people

record the answer multiple times throughout the

Old and New Testament. Erickson highlights six

verses that give us a good picture of how that

was accomplished. The first is Jeremiah 30, 4.

It says this is the message the Lord gave concerning

Israel and Judah. The second is 2 Samuel 23,

2. The Spirit of the Lord speaks through me.

His words are upon my tongue. 2 Peter 1, 20 -21.

Above all, you must realize that no prophecy

in Scripture ever came from the prophet's own

understanding or from human initiative. No. Those

prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit and they

spoke from God. Next is 2 Timothy 3 .16. It says,

Acts 1 .16. This was predicted long ago by the

Holy Spirit speaking through King David. And

finally, Acts 3 .18. But God was fulfilling what

all the prophets had foretold about the Messiah,

that he must suffer these things. Taken together,

it's clear that the biblical authors were not

writing on their own. They were guided or inspired

by the Holy Spirit. Things like prophecies, predictions

about the future, and information, these weren't

things that humans figured out. This was information

delivered directly from God. But there's a second

part to the how that the Bible isn't clear on.

Just how much control did the Holy Spirit have

over people during the process of inspiration?

Christian and Jewish theologians have spent a

lot of time thinking about this, and Erickson

groups the possibilities into five categories.

Let's look at them ordered by the least to most

amount of control, and figure out which is the

most reasonable. First, there's the theory of

intuition, which says there's zero control by

the Holy Spirit. People who push this view see

the biblical authors as spiritual geniuses who

produce great works of religious literature,

like Shakespeare writing plays or Michelangelo

painting. Much like different artists paint different

styles, there's nothing inherently true about

the Bible because it just reflected the Jewish

style of spirituality. This makes the Bible a

storybook, not the word of God, so I think we

can exclude this one outright. There's also the

theory of illumination, which argues that all

the Holy Spirit did was heighten the author's

natural gifts so that they were more aware of

what was happening around them spiritually. You

know, it's like in college when you were studying

for finals and you drank six Monster Energies

in one morning. Not that I'd know anything about

that. But again, it was just humans writing down

their observations of the spiritual world and

holds no inherent truth. It's marginally better

than intuition because at least it's based on

a perception of reality and the Holy Spirit is

doing something, but not by much, so I think

we should exclude this one too. Now we get to

three options that are more compatible with Christianity,

and the first one is called dynamic. This theory

says that the Holy Spirit would tell the authors

to write down certain events, facts and information,

and then allow them to do so freely using words

and ideas of their choice. Think of it like the

Holy Spirit saying, Hey Moses, get your sheepskin

and write about that time you went to get the

Ten Commandments. The verbal theory takes that

to the next level and has the Holy Spirit communicating

specific words and phrases that the author should

include. Say you're Matthew writing the account

of the Sermon on the Mount. The Holy Spirit is

going to make sure you're recording exactly what

Jesus said, but then when you describe the other

disciples' reactions, it's a little closer to

the dynamic theory. You know, it gives Matthew

some freedom to describe things in his own words.

And then finally, there's the dictation theory,

which essentially turns the biblical authors

into the Holy Spirit's typewriter. In this theory,

the Holy Spirit delivered the entire Bible to

them word for word. There was no room for any

human emotion or expression. So, which theory

of inspiration is the most reasonable? Well,

we already said that the first two are incompatible

with Christianity. They basically reduce the

Bible to fiction and opinion, so they're out.

And the dictation theory is very unpopular with

most theologians because it denies the personal

touch that we see in many places. We see warmth

and passion across Paul's letters. They're so

distinct from the wisdom that we see in Proverbs

and the deep joy and pain present in the Psalms.

God could have snapped his fingers and just poofed

the Bible into existence, but he didn't. He wanted

that human element. But God didn't want too much

of the human element, and so we also have to

reject the dynamic option. There are clearly

places in the Bible where single words are so

important to our understanding of God that he

had to have ensured that a specific word or phrase

was used. Think of Jesus saying, before Abraham

was, I am, in John 8, 58. That I am is fundamental

to our understanding of Jesus as the preexistent

second person of the Trinity because it is how

God named himself to Moses. No other words could

have been used there, so the verbal option seems

to be the best way to understand inspiration.

Now we come to inerrancy. Erickson defines that

as the doctrine that the Bible is fully truthful

in all of its teachings. A loose understanding

of inerrancy gives us a pass to ignore God's

clear commands in Scripture, but an overly strict

view holds the Bible to a standard that neither

God nor the human author is intended. And as

we learned last session when we briefly talked

about postmodernism, different people have different

definitions of true. So let's look at another

spectrum of five options and see which one emerges

as the reasonable choice. This time we're going

to start with the strictest option first. It's

called absolute inerrancy. This option claims

that every word of the Bible is 100 % factually

true, including historical and scientific matters.

When the Bible says that the angel of the Lord

killed 185 ,000 Assyrians, it says he killed

exactly 185 ,000 Assyrians, not 184 ,999 ,000,

not 185 ,001 Assyrians, exactly 185 ,000. Anything

that we think is a discrepancy is a mistake on

our part. It's very straightforward, but also

very rigid. Full inerrancy is almost the same

as absolute inerrancy, but with one tiny concession.

Everything theological is 100 % factually true

word for word, just like absolute inerrancy.

But historical and scientific matters are also

true, but presented in a phenomenal sense, meaning

they are true in the way they appear to the human

eye. So when the Bible says the angel of the

Lord killed 185 ,000 Assyrians, it could have

been 184 ,999 or 185 ,032 Assyrians, but it's

presented as a nice round number. Limited inerrancy

takes one more step down. It says that all theological

matters are still regarded as 100 % factually

true word for word because that's the Bible's

purpose, but... Historical and scientific matters

reflect humanity's understanding at the time

the book was written. They might have been a

little bit wrong on lots of little things, but

that doesn't matter because the Bible is not

a history book or a science textbook. Inerrancy

of purpose is where we start to get into dangerous

territory. Now, the only thing that is 100 %

factually true word for word is the information

that gets someone into a relationship with Jesus.

Everything else is just a means to an end. Did

Jonah really get swallowed by a giant fish? Did

Jonah even exist in the first place? Someone

who is a proponent of this thought doesn't really

care. Jesus was able to use the story to explain

a point, and that's good enough. Whether it really

happened, whether Jonah ever existed, doesn't

matter as far as they're concerned. And then

we end with the one that's called accommodated

revelation, but I like to refer to it as, who

knows? People in this school believe that God

exists and that he communicated some of the information

in the Bible. But since it came through people,

we don't really know what parts are true and

what parts aren't. They might say you could read

the Bible. You don't have to read the Bible.

What's it really matter? God knows we screwed

it all up and he's going to do whatever he's

going to do anyway. So who knows? Well, what's

the verdict on these different theories? Well,

accommodated revelation can be rejected outright.

because it's incompatible with inspiration. An

inerrancy of purpose paints each of the three

members of the Trinity as liars in different

ways, but God is fundamentally truthful. Now

that might make absolute inerrancy sound tempting,

and there are some Christians out there who will

tell you that if you hold any position other

than absolute inerrancy, you're going straight

to hell. But it's simply not a reasonable choice.

We have examples like the giant metal bowl built

for the temple in 2 Chronicles that is described

as 10 cubits in diameter. and 30 cubits in circumference.

You know, God invented math when he created the

universe. He's not going to get a simple calculation

like that wrong. It's clearly an approximate

number meant to be easy for people to understand

and remember. That's phenomenal language, not

an error. And so the decision comes down to the

final two. Are the historical and scientific

facts in the Bible true phenomenally, or does

the Bible play loose with facts? You know, in

a future session, we're going to look at biblical

archaeology. But let me summarize that entire

session in one sentence. There has never, ever

been a single scientific or historical finding

that has disagreed with information presented

in the Bible when it is taken phenomenally. For

instance, during the flood, the Bible says that

great faults of water opened up from under the

earth. Scientists dismissed this as nonsense.

They said it was proof that the Bible is fiction,

that we should all just become atheists. Until

the invention of ground -penetrating radar allowed

them to image the ocean floors. Guess what they

found? They found those water vaults sitting

below, and now they estimate that there is as

much water in vaults stored below the oceans

as there is in the oceans. The Bible is true.

And so ultimately... full inerrancy emerges as

the best choice. Now, if you're a big nerd like

me, you enjoy studying stuff like this just for

the sake of learning. However, it's not unreasonable

to ask whether learning about inspiration and

inerrancy have a practical application. In other

words, how does my understanding of those two

things impact my daily life as a Christian? Well,

if we properly understand the Bible as a source

of revelation that comes directly from God and

is 100 % true, We have an absolute source of

authority that every other source can be measured

against. General and personal or private revelation

always come through a human lens, and humans

make mistakes and misunderstand things. For instance,

if someone comes up to you and tells you that

God gave them a message for you, it needs to

be weighed against the Bible. If what they say

disagrees with the Bible in any way, you have

to discard it. Now, I hate this example. but

it's incredibly powerful, and I've heard it a

lot of times from our teenage girls. They're

dating a boy, and he tells them that God said

they're going to get married someday, so they

might as well have sex now since they're basically

already married. Well, God's intentions for sex

only within marriage are clear in the Bible,

and God isn't going to give someone a personal

message that contradicts the Bible. Not only

can that message be ignored, but it should serve

as a red flag that somebody would lie about God

speaking to them to get sex. Another example

is one that goes beyond individual harm to potentially

destroying families, communities, churches, and

denominations. The debate over whether there

are modern -day apostles. Now, you're going to

find differences of opinion on this throughout

denominations and even within the vineyard denomination.

So I want to be charitable and state that I'm

not questioning anyone's sincerity, calling them

a heretic, saying they're uneducated, or even

saying that I think they're unreasonable. But

my personal conviction is that there are no modern

-day apostles. and I believe scripture is clear

on that matter, and I'll explain why I think

that's so important. First, if we look at the

original apostles, we see a pattern. You had

the twelve, Jesus' closest disciples, who, except

for Judas, would go on to become the original

apostles. After Judas died, we see in Acts 1,

12 -26, that the remaining eleven selected two

candidates, prayed over the choice, and then

allowed God to select Matthias by casting lots.

Later, in Acts 9, 1 -30, we see Jesus calling

Saul, later known as Paul, and this call being

confirmed by the original apostles when Paul

went to Jerusalem. So we can begin to construct

a criteria for being an apostle, someone directly

chosen by Jesus and acknowledged by the other

apostles. And those 13 men were it. There are

no other apostles chosen in the New Testament,

and even the early church fathers who studied

under the apostles didn't dare call themselves

apostles. That would have been unthinkable. Furthermore,

we see that the apostles had the ability to do

miracles on demand. Not the miracles we see today,

where we pray and the Holy Spirit may or may

not perform an action based on whether it aligns

with God's plan, but they were guaranteed instant

miracles like when Peter heals the crippled man

on the temple steps in Acts 3. Why is this such

a big deal? Well, we determine what counts as

scripture because it was written by an apostle

or written using the testimony of an apostle.

They had the authority to explain and elaborate

on scripture, perhaps in areas where Jesus didn't

speak. A person claiming to be an apostle is

claiming to have that authority, essentially

bypassing the Bible as the final authority. And

I'll tell you this, I have never once heard a

person claiming to be a modern -day apostle that

didn't go against Scripture at least some small

way, but most go against Scripture in massive

ways, and many seem to be pushing for fame and

personal gain. They also can't do miracles on

demand. Con artists like Benny Hinn stack the

audience with paid actors and gullible marks

to make it appear like they do, but under controlled

conditions, their power suddenly disappeared.

Let's use this as an area where we allow the

Bible to be the final authority as it ought to

be in every area. That's going to wrap us up

for tonight, so I'll toss my contact information

back up on the screen along with the links to

see the slides. I've also got the Erickson book

back up in case you enjoyed how he broke down

the theories of inspiration and inerrancy and

want to study further using his book. As always,

I love hearing your questions, suggestions, and

feedback, as well as your future topic ideas.

Thank you for listening, and God bless.