THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CANONICITY OF THE SCRIPTURE

AND INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURE

BY

SAMUEL GIDEON STEPHEN

07892

SUBMITTED TO

REV. ASS. PROF. TUNDE AREMU

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE

COURSE
BIBLIOLOGY AND THEOLOGY PROPER
MST 521

AT

ECWA THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,

IGBAJA KWARA STATE

FEB., 2018

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

MEANING OF BIBLIOLOGY 1

MEANING OF BIBLE 1

MEANING OF SCRIPTURE 2

INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE 2

Necessity of Inspiration 2

False Views of Inspiration 4

Biblical View of Inspiration: Verbal Plenary 6

CANONICITY OF THE BIBLE 8

Definition of Canonicity 8

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CANONICITY AND INSPIRATION

OF THE SCRIPTURE 9

CONCLUSION 12

BIBLIOGRAPHY 13

2
 INTRODUCTION

The concepts of Bible canon and inspiration are virtually synonymous. The connection
between what God revealed and how the human writers committed this revelation to paper and
its subsequent development into canonical Scripture inspired a complex debate among Christians
for many centuries past. Thus the criteria and history of canonicity rightly have been inextricably
related to the issue of biblical inspiration. Since the Reformation, Protestant doctrine on biblical
inspiration has been a corollary consequent to the accepted circumstances of canonization,
whether of Old Testament or of New Testament. The purpose of this paper is to discuss
Canonicity and Inspiration of the Scripture and the relationship between them.

MEANING OF BIBLIOLOGY

The term Bibliology comes from the Greek word biblos, meaning “book”. It literally
means, “The study of the Book” with the “Book” being the Bible.1 Bibliology often includes
such topics as revelation, inspiration, inerrancy, canonicity, illumination and interpretation.

MEANING OF BIBLE

The English word bible is derived from the Greek word biblion, which means “book” or
“roll.”The name comes from byblos, which denoted the papyrus plant that grew in marshes or
river banks, primarily along the Nile. Writing material was made from the papyrus plant by
cutting the pith of the plant in one-foot strips and setting it in the sun to dry. The strips were then
laid in horizontal rows with rows of vertical strips glued to the horizontal rows in a criss-cross
fashion similar to the way plywood is constructed today. The horizontal rows were smoother and
became the writing surface. Sections of these strips were glued together to form a scroll up to
thirty feet in length. Eventually, the plural form biblia was used by Latin-speaking Christians to
denote all the books of the Old and New Testaments.2

1
R. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early
Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 40.
2
F. F. Bruce, The Books and the Parchments (London: Pickering & Inglis, 1971), 87.

3
 MEANING OF SCRIPTURE

The word translated “Scripture” comes from the Greek word graphe, which simply
means writing.” In the Old Testament this writing was recognized as carrying great authority
(e.g. 2 Kings 14:6; 2 Chron. 23:18; Ezra 3:2; Neh. 10:34). The “writings” of the Old Testament
were eventually collected into three groups called the Law, Prophets, and Writings (or Psalms),
and constituted the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament. These writings—the Scriptures—
were formally combined into the Old Testament canon.

In the New Testament the Greek verb grapho is used about ninety times in reference to
the Bible, while the noun form graphe is used fifty-one times in the New Testament, almost
exclusively of the Holy Scriptures. In the New Testament the designations vary: “the Scriptures,”
designating collectively all the parts of Scripture (e.g., Matt. 21:42; 22:29) or individual parts of
the Scriptures (Mark 12:10; 15:28; John 13:18; 19:24, 36; Acts 1:16; 8:35; Rom. 11:2; 2 Tim.
3:16); “the Scripture says,” fairly synonymous with quoting God (e.g., Rom. 4:3; 9:17; 10:11;
Gal. 4:30; 1 Tim. 5:18). They are also termed “Holy Scriptures” (Rom. 1:2) and “the Sacred
Writings”, 2 Tim. 3:15). The classic passage 2Timothy 3:16 stresses that these writings are not
ordinary writings but are in fact “God-breathed” and as such they are authoritative and without
error in all that they teach.3

INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE

Necessity of Inspiration

Inspiration is necessary to preserve the revelation of God. If God has revealed Himself
but the record of that revelation is not accurately recorded, then the revelation of God is subject
to question. Hence, inspiration guarantees the accuracy of the revelation. Inspiration may be
defined as the Holy Spirit’s superintending over the writers so that while writing according to
their own styles and personalities, the result was God’s Word written—authoritative,
trustworthy, and free from error in the original autographs. Some definitions by prominent
evangelical theologians are as follows.

3
R. M. Brown, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1978), 482.

4
 Benjamin B. Warfield: “Inspiration is, therefore, usually defined as a supernatural
influence exerted on the sacred writers by the Spirit of God, by virtue of which their
writings are given Divine trustworthiness.4
Edward J. Young: “Inspiration is a superintendence of God the Holy Spirit over the
writers of the Scriptures, as a result of which these Scriptures possess Divine authority
and trustworthiness and, possessing such Divine authority and trustworthiness, are free
from error.5
Charles C. Ryrie: “Inspiration is … God’s superintendence of the human authors so that,
using their own individual personalities, they composed and recorded without error His
revelation to man in the words of the original autographs.6
There are several important elements that belong in a proper definition of inspiration: (1)
the divine element—God the Holy Spirit superintended the writers, ensuring the accuracy of the
writing; (2) the human element—human authors wrote according to their individual styles and
personalities; (3) the result of the divine human authorship is the recording of God’s truth
without error; (4) inspiration extends to the selection of words by the writers; (5) inspiration
relates to the original manuscripts.

The English word inspiration in its theological usage is derived from the Latin Vulgate
Bible in which the verb inspiro appears in both 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:21. The word
inspiration is used to translate theopneustos, a hapax legomenon (meaning it appears only once
in the Greek New Testament) found in 2 Timothy 3:16. Theopneustos means “God-breathed”
and emphasizes the exhalation of God; hence, spiration would be more accurate since it
emphasizes that Scripture is the product of the breath of God. The Scriptures are not something
breathed into by God; rather, the Scriptures have been breathed out by God.

4
B. B. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed,
1948), 131.
5
E. J. Young, Thy Word Is Truth (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 27.
6
Charles C. Ryrie, A Survey of Bible Doctrine (Chicago: Moody, 1972), 38.

5
False Views of Inspiration

Natural Inspiration. This view teaches that there is nothing supernatural about biblical
inspiration; the writers of Scripture were simply men of unusual ability who wrote the books of
the Bible in the same way that an individual would write any other book. 7 The writers were men
of unusual religious insight, writing on religious subjects in the same way men like Shakespeare
or Schiller wrote literature.

Spiritual Illumination. The illumination view suggests that some Christians may have spiritual
insight that although similar to other Christians is greater in degree. In this view any devout
Christian, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, can be the author of inspired Scripture. Adherents to
this view suggest it is not the writings that are inspired; rather, it is the writers who are inspired.
Schleiermacher taught this view on the Continent while Coleridge propounded it in England.8

Partial or Dynamic Inspiration. The partial inspiration theory teaches that the parts of the Bible
related to matters of faith and practice are inspired whereas matters related to history, science,
chronology, or other non-faith matters may be in error. In this view God preserves the message
of salvation amid other material that may be in error. The partial theory rejects both verbal
inspiration (that inspiration extends to the words of Scripture) and plenary inspiration (that
inspiration extends to the entirety of Scripture). Despite their teaching of the presence of errors in
Scripture, partial theorists teach that an imperfect medium is a sufficient guide to salvation. A. H.
Strong was a proponent of this view.9

Problematic questions may be posed to adherents of this view: what parts of the Bible are
inspired and what parts contain errors? Who determines what parts of the Bible are trustworthy
and what parts contain errors? (Errantists differ with one another on their listings of errors.) How
can doctrine be separated from history? (For example, the narratives about Jesus’ virgin birth
contain both history and doctrine.) How can the Bible be trustworthy in one area while in error in
another area?

7
Alan Richardson, Christian Apologetics (New York: Harper, 1948), 207.
8
A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology (Valley Forge, Pa.: Judson, 1907), 204–8.
9
Ibid, 205–206.

6
Conceptual Inspiration. This view suggests that only the concepts or ideas of the writers are
inspired but not the words. In this view God gave an idea or concept to the writer who then
penned the idea in his own words. According to this view there can be errors in Scripture
because the choice of words is left to the writer and is not superintended by God. In response,
however, it is noted that

Jesus (Matt. 5:18) and Paul (1 Thess. 2:13) both affirmed verbal inspiration. Pache rightly
concludes, “Ideas can be conceived of and transmitted only by means of words. If the thought
communicated to man is divine and of the nature of a revelation, the form in which it is
expressed is of prime significance. It is impossible to dissociate the one from the other.”10

Divine dictation. The dictation view states that God dictated the words of Scripture and the men
wrote them down in a passive manner, being mere amanuenses (secretaries) who wrote only the
words they were told to write. This claim would render the Bible similar to the Koran which
supposedly was dictated in Arabic from heaven. Although some parts of the Bible were given by
dictation (cf. Ex. 20:1, “Then God spoke all these words”), the books of the Bible reveal a
distinct contrast in style and vocabulary, suggesting the authors were not mere automatons. The
beginning student in Greek will quickly discover the difference in style between the gospel of
John and the gospel of Luke. John wrote in a simple style with a limited vocabulary, whereas
Luke wrote with an expanded vocabulary and a more sophisticated style. If the dictation theory
were true, the style of the books of the Bible should be uniform.

Neo-Orthodoxy Opinion. The neo-orthodoxy view emphasizes that the Bible is not to be exactly
equated with the Word of God because God does not speak in mere propositions. God does not
reveal mere facts about Himself; He reveals Himself. The Bible is not the substance of the Word
of God, but rather the witness to the Word of God. It becomes the Word of God as the reader
encounters Christ in his own subjective experience. Moreover, the Bible is enshrouded in myth
necessitating a demythologizing of the Bible to discover what actually took place. The historicity
of the events is unimportant. For example, whether or not Christ actually rose from the dead in
time and space is unimportant to the neo-orthodoxy adherent. The important thing is the
experiential encounter that is possible even though the Bible is tainted with factual errors. In this

10
Rene Pache, The Inspiration & Authority of Scripture (Chicago: Moody, 1980), 58.

7
view the authority is the subjective experience of the individual rather than the Scriptures
themselves.

To these views the evangelical Christian responds with contrasting points. The Bible is
the objective and authoritative Word of God whether or not a person responds to it (John 8:47;
12:48). Furthermore, there are no objective criteria for evaluating what would constitute a
“legitimate” encounter with God. Additionally, who would be capable of distinguishing myth
from truth?

Biblical View of Inspiration: Verbal Plenary

Christ’s view of the Bible.18 In determining the nature of biblical inspiration, nothing could be
more significant than determining the view Christ held regarding the Scriptures. Certainly no one
ought to hold a lower view of Scripture than He held; His view of the Scriptures ought to be the
determinant and the norm for other persons’ views. That is the foundational argument of R. Laird
Harris. In defending the inspiration of the Scriptures he does not use 2 Timothy 3:16 or 2 Peter
1:21 as the primary argument (although he recognizes their validity); he instead argues from the
standpoint of Christ’s view of the Scriptures.11

1. Inspiration of the whole. In His use of the Old Testament Christ gave credence to the
inspiration of the entire Old Testament. In Matthew 5:17–18 Christ affirmed that not the
smallest letter or stroke would pass from the law until it would be fulfilled. In verse 17
He referred to the law or the prophets, a common phrase designating the entire Old
Testament. In this rather strong statement, Jesus affirmed the inviolability of the entire
Old Testament and thereby affirmed the inspiration of the entire Old Testament.
2. Inspiration of the words. In defending the doctrine of the resurrection to the Sadducees,
Jesus quoted from Exodus 3:6 (significant because the Sadducees held only to the
Pentateuch), “I am the God of Abraham.” In this response Jesus’ entire argument hinged
on the words “I am.” Jesus was apparently supplying the verb which the Hebrew text
only implies.
3. Inspiration of the letters. In a number of His statements Christ reveals that He believed
the letters of Scripture were inspired. In Matthew 5:18 Jesus declared, “Not the smallest

11
R. Laird Harris, Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1969), 45.

8
 letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law until all is accomplished.” The term
“smallest letter” refers to the Hebrew letter yodh, which looks like an apostrophe (’).

Paul’s view of the Bible.

1. Inspiration of the Old and New Testaments. In 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul prefaced his remarks
with “the Scripture says.” Then he quoted from Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7,
thereby ascribing the status of Scripture to both the Old and New Testaments. Paul was
saying that the New Testament is as much the inspired Word of God as the Old
Testament.
2. Inspiration of the words. In Paul’s classic statement found in 2 Timothy 3:16, the apostle
reminds the reader that all Scripture is “inspired by God.”
3. The entire Scriptures are God-breathed. Young clarifies: “If Paul means ‘every
Scripture,’ he is looking at the various parts of the Bible, that is, he is considering
Scripture distributive.

Peter’s view of the Bible. Peter’s teaching concerning the Scriptures coincides with Paul’s
teaching. In 2 Peter 1:21 Peter emphasizes that no Scripture is produced as a result of human
will; rather, it is the product of the superintending power of the Holy Spirit. Peter identifies the
Scriptures as “the prophetic word” (v. 19), “prophecy of Scripture” (v. 20), and “prophecy” (v.
21); he declares that the Scripture is “something altogether reliable."12 In verse 21 Peter explains
why the Scripture is reliable. Like Paul, Peter affirms that Scripture has its origin with God.
Although men penned the words of Scripture, they did so as they were carried along by the Holy
Spirit.13

Peter therefore acknowledges his belief in verbal inspiration inasmuch as it was the Holy
Spirit who guided the writers of Scripture in their selection of words. This truth could be
illustrated by a man who goes to the department store in a shopping center. Because he is in a
hurry to get to the second floor he walks up the escalator. Although he is walking, the escalator is

12
F. William, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 2nd
ed., rev. F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago, 1979), 138.

9
carrying him along, bringing him to the second floor. Similarly, although the writers of Scripture
penned the words according to their educational abilities and their own distinctive styles, the
Holy Spirit was carrying them along, ensuring the accuracy of all they were writing.

The strongest defense for the verbal plenary inspiration of the Scriptures is the testimony
of Jesus Christ. He testified to the inspiration of the entire Scriptures, the various books of the
Old Testament and the actual words of Scripture as they had been originally recorded. The fact
that He based His arguments on the precise wording of Scripture testifies to His exalted view of
Scripture. In addition, Paul acknowledged that all Scripture was God-breathed; man was a
passive instrument, being guided by God in the writing of Scripture. Peter’s statement was
similar in emphasizing that, in their passivity, men were carried along by the Holy Spirit in the
writing of Scripture. The testimony of each of these witnesses draws attention to the verbal
plenary inspiration of Scripture.

CANONICITY OF THE BIBLE

Definition of Canonicity

The New and Concise Bible Dictionary shows that the word “canonicity” signified a rod
or rule by which things were tested. It is thus used by Paul in Gal. 6.16; Phil. 3.16. As to the
scriptures the expression refers to what books should be included: the ‘canon’ of scripture is
often spoken of, and the books are called ‘canonical’ or ‘uncanonical.’14 If the Scriptures are
indeed inspired by God then a significant question arises: Which books are inspired?
Historically, it was important for the people of God to determine which books God had inspired
and which ones were recognized as authoritative. Other definitions are also reviewed as follows:
F.F. Bruce defines the ‘canon of Scripture’ as “the list of books contained in scripture, the
list of books recognized as worthy to be included in the sacred writings of a worshipping
community.”15

In the ecclesiastical context, ‘canon’ should be defined as “the list of writings

acknowledged by the Church as documents of the divine revelation.”16

14
A New and Concise Bible Dictionary. (formerly published by George Morrish of London) Bible Truth
Publishers: Addison, Illinois, USA., p. 152.
15
Bruce F.F., The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity, 1988., 17.
16
Hanson, R.P.C. Origen’s Doctrine of Tradition. (London, 1954), 93, 133.

10
 Miller says that the word ‘canon’ means:
(1) A straight rod or bar, used especially to keep things straight; a straight-edge, or a bar
of wood or metal having one side true to a straight line, and used for testing surfaces,
edges, etc., and for ruling; (2) a measuring-rod; (3) a rule or line used by carpenters and
masons for measuring or for keeping things straight. (4) As a metaphor, it means
“anything that serves to regulate or determine other things; a rule.” (5) A standard or
testing rule in ethics, art, music, or language (grammar, rhetoric, logic). ‘The term was
applied in antiquity to the principle of art, fixing the proper length of the finger of a
statue, the height of the face, the proportions of the limbs, etc.’ (6) A standard, or rule, or
conduct, living, action, or judging. (7) A boundary line or limit.17

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CANONICITY AND INSPIRATION OF THE

SCRIPTURE

The term canon came to be used as a way of expressing the standard by which a written
document was measured for inclusion in the collection of sacred (i.e., inspired) writings. Thus,
authors have expressed canonicity in the following ways:

Those writings which conform to the rule or standard of divine inspiration and
authority.18
The set of writings regarded as authentic and definitive for Scripture’s contents.19
The list of books that the church acknowledges as inspired Scripture, hence normative for
faith and practice.20
For the longest time during the early days, “inspiration and canonicity have been closely
bound up together in Christian thinking: books were included in the canon, it is believed,
because they were inspired; a book is known to be inspired because it is in the canon.”21 Bruce
comments on the understanding of inspiration in the early days of Christianity:

By inspiration in this sense is meant that operation of the Holy Spirit by which the
prophets of Israel were enabled to utter the word of God. The vocabulary was theirs, the

17
Miller, H.S. General Biblical Introduction. Houghton, New York: The Word-Bearer Press, 1937, 87.
18
Gleason Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), 73.
19
William D. Barrick, “Canonicity,” in Basic Christian Doctrine (unpublished paper).
20
David. F. Farness, NT Introduction syllabus (Fall, 2009), 88.
21
Bruce, Canon of Scripture, 19.

11
 message was his. Only certain individuals, and only occasionally to them, was this
enablement granted.22
However, in each case these expressions of canonicity all relate these writings back in
some way to the concept of inspiration. No careful study of canonicity can proceed without a
clear acknowledgement of this relationship. Far too often, we tend to link canonicity with a set of
criteria by which individual books are measured without identifying what those criteria were
intended to discern. At the end of such studies, we’re left with the unwarranted—indeed,
unbiblical—assumption that at the end of the day, the church, through its various criteria and
“tests,” came to determine the biblical canon.

Two major concepts of “canon” have developed over the centuries which represent this
canon/inspiration relationship. The first we could call the active ecclesiastical view. It is
associated with the Roman Catholic Church. This approach holds that the “canon” is the
authoritative collection of writings. The key distinction with this view is that the authority of this
canon rests on the ecclesiastical body as the collecting agency. The agency designates or declares
a writing canonical and thus authoritative. In other words, it actively determines the canon, and a
writing cannot be said to be “canonical” (and thus authoritative) until the body designates it as
such.

The second view we could call the passive ecclesiastical view. With this view, the
“canon” is considered the collection of authoritative writings. In other words, the writings
themselves have inherent authority, and they are deemed canonical not in an active sense by an
ecclesiastical body, but passively through the agency’s recognition of their authority. The
writings, being inspired, are inherently authoritative, and the ecclesiastical body comes to
recognize such authority as the writings give evidence of inspiration.

It should be obvious that only the second view has biblical warrant. If canonicity is
determined by a book’s inspiration, then no human or ecclesiastical agency can determine or
make a book canonical. Only God can determine a book’s canonicity, and since a book was
inspired at the moment of its writing, it was also canonical at that moment as well, regardless of
how long it took for God’s people to recognize it.

22
David, NT Introduction syllabus 89.

12
Thus, we must remember a fundamental truth regarding canonicity:

The only true test of canonicity is the testimony of God the Holy Spirit to the authority of
His own word.23

Numerous theologians have written on this point, and their writings are instructive to us.
Thus, I have included a number of passages which fill out the critical importance of
understanding this truth:

Canonicity is determined by God. A book is not inspired because men make it canonical;
it is canonical because God inspired it…. Canonicity is determined or established
authoritatively by God; it is merely discovered by man.24
When the Word of God was written it became Scripture and, inasmuch as it had been
spoken by God, possessed absolute authority. Since it was the Word of God, it was
canonical. That which determines the canonicity of a book, therefore, is the fact that the
book is inspired by God. Hence a distinction is properly made between the authority
which the Old Testament possesses as divinely inspired, and the recognition of that
authority on the part of Israel.25
The Church no more gave us the NT canon than Sir Isaac Newton gave us the force of
gravity. God gave gravity, by His work in creation, and similarly He gave us the New
Testament canon, by inspiring the individual books that make it up.26
The church, in both Jewish and Christian eras, has served as custodian of and witness to
the contents of the inspired Scriptures, but the latter do not derive their authority from any
ecclesiastical body. Canonization was not a matter of the closing of a list of entries, partial or
final, but a recognition of the inherent canonical quality and qualification of each portion as it
became available. Thus canonicity, an innate authenticity by virtue of divine inspiration, may be
viewed as antecedent to canonization, the acknowledgement of the authenticity and authority of
the writings of the community of believers.27

23
Archer, OT Introduction, 85.
24
Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, rev. and exp. Ed. (Chicago:
Moody Press, 1986), 221.
25
E. J. Young, “The Canon of the Old Testament,” in Revelation and the Bible, p. 156.
26
J. I. Packer, God Speaks to Man: Revelation and the Bible (Westminster Press, 1965), 81.
27
Milton C. Fisher, “The Canon of the Old Testament,” in EBC, 12 vols., ed. Frank E. Gæbelein (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 1:386.

13
 CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this paper discussed the correlation that exists between the Canonicity and
the Inspiration of the Scriptures (Bible). There is a connection between what God revealed and
how the human writers committed this revelation to paper. However, in each case these
expressions of canonicity all relate these writings back in some way to the concept of inspiration.
This paper views two major concepts of “canon” which have developed over the centuries which
represent this canon/inspiration relationship. The first we could call the active ecclesiastical view
and the second view we could call the passive ecclesiastical view. If canonicity is determined by
a book’s inspiration, then no human or ecclesiastical agency can determine or make a book
canonical. Only God can determine a book’s canonicity, and since a book was inspired at the
moment of its writing, it was also canonical at that moment as well, regardless of how long it
took for God’s people to recognize it.

14
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Beckwith, R. The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in
Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985).

Brown, R. M. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, 4 vols. (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1978).

Bruce, F. F. The Books and the Parchments (London: Pickering & Inglis, 1971).

F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity, 1988).

Gleason, A. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994).

Harris, R. L. Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1969).

Miller, H.S. General Biblical Introduction. (Houghton, New York: The Word-Bearer Press,
1937).

Milton, C. F. The Canon of the Old Testament,” in EBC, 12 vols., ed. Frank E. Gæbelein (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 1:386.

Norman, L. G. A General Introduction to the Bible, rev. and exp. Ed. (Chicago: Moody Press,
1986).

Pache, R. The Inspiration & Authority of Scripture (Chicago: Moody, 1980).

Packer, J. I. God Speaks to Man: Revelation and the Bible (Westminster Press, 1965).

Richardson, A. Christian Apologetics (New York: Harper, 1948).

Ryrie, Charles C. A Survey of Bible Doctrine (Chicago: Moody, 1972).

Strong, A. H. Systematic Theology (Valley Forge, Pa.: Judson, 1907)

Warfield, B. B. The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1948).

William, F. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature. 2nd ed., rev. F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: Univ. of
Chicago, 1979).

Young,E. J. Thy Word Is Truth (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957).

15