Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 9
September 12, 1957
NUMBER 19, PAGE 5

Parable Of The Boy Who Wrote A Letter

C. D. Crouch, Baxterville, Miss.

Is The Word Of God Inspired?

Now, please do not consider this merely a silly question, and refuse to read any further. I fully believe the Bible to be the word of God, and I just as firmly believe it is INSPIRED. I am just asking the question here to cause some people to think. Paul, an apostle of Christ, wrote, "But unto us God revealed them through the Spirit." (1 Cor. 2:10.) The things he mentioned were things that man could never know without a revelation. The same apostle said concerning the gospel he preached, "it is not after man. For neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came to me through revelation of Jesus Christ." (Gal. 1:11,12.) And we are told that the twelve apostles received the Spirit, on the day of Pentecost, "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Acts 2:4.) The Bible being the word of God, and inspired of God, it must be truth. "God's word is truth." (John 17:17.) The Bible being true, the gospel was addressed to men by the apostles, and they spoke as the Holy Spirit guided them. The message they spoke reveals God's love for sinners, and mercy also.

Can Men Understand The Bible?

This is not to be considered a silly question, either. I think we are agreed that the Bible is inspired scripture, and we must also agree that the apostles preached to men on earth, who were unsaved men, at the time the preaching was done. Since the Holy Spirit was preaching through the apostles, the Holy Spirit preached to unsaved men. QUESTION: Could those men understand what the Holy Spirit preached to them through the apostles? Honest, now, could they understand it? If they could not understand it, why did the Holy Spirit preach through the apostles to them, in language that they could not understand? What was the purpose of the Holy Spirit in preaching to the unsaved? But, if the Holy Spirit preached to the unsaved through the apostles in a way that the unsaved could- and did understand, why is it that preachers today contend that the unsaved can not understand it? The apostles preached to the unsaved "as the Spirit gave them utterance," and we have an inspired record of that preaching. We are agreed that the Bible is inspired, that the apostles "spoke as the Spirit gave them utterance;" and since the Bible tells us what the apostles preached to unsaved people, why can not unsaved people today understand what was preached to unsaved people by inspired men? What could have been the purpose of the Holy Spirit in giving us this record, if indeed men can not understand what is written? You have heard men preach that we can preach the word, but men can not understand what is preached UNLESS THE HOLY SPIRIT GOES INTO THE HEARTS OF SINNERS AND ENABLES THE SINNERS TO UNDERSTAND. Now, what about that? The Holy Spirit preached the word first; the Holy Spirit inspired the recording of that word; we can preach the same word of God that the apostles preached, but it is argued that men can not understand it. IF NOT, WHY can't men understand it now???

A Parable Of A Boy And His Girl Friend

Once upon a time a boy wrote his girl friend a letter, in which he poured out his heart to her. Of course he told her he loved her, and that she was the only girl he could ever love. He wrote this in language that he thought was simple, and which he thought, at the time he wrote it, that she could understand. But after writing the letter and starting it on is way, he decided that she couldn't understand it, and so he made a great deal of haste to be on hand when the letter arrived, so he could make her understand the letter. Did the boy use good judgment? Did he act as though he thought the "girl friend" had good sense? If he could not write a letter that she could understand, is it likely that he could explain to her what he wanted her to understand? And if he made a complete failure in his first effort (when he wrote the letter) is it not likely that he would make as complete a failure in his next effort (trying to explain things in person)?

The application of the parable is this: The Holy Spirit has written for us the word of God. He has told us of God's love for man. He has told us of God's offer of mercy. He has told us what we must do to be saved. He has appealed to us by the mercy of God to turn from our sins. Now the theory of a direct operation of the Holy Spirit upon the heart of the sinner to enable him to understand the word, makes the Holy Spirit's writing the Bible for us as useless and as senseless as the boy writing a letter to his girl friend and then going to her to explain it. If the Holy Spirit made a failure in his first effort (writing the Bible) how do we know he can succeed in another effort (the direct operation on the heart of the sinner)? And yet, there are people who argue that man, unconverted man, can not understand what the Holy Spirit has written for us.

The Direct Operation Theory Would Make Void The Word Of God

You have heard it argued that "the word of God is only the letter of religion," and that it is a "dead letter" until the Holy Spirit comes to "energize" it. It is argued seriously by some that it is a "dead letter" and can not be understood, until the Holy Spirit comes into the heart of man, thus enabling him to understand it. If that theory be true, then the word of God is still a "dead letter," because it is argued that the Holy Spirit comes into the heart of the sinner, directly, and performs a miracle on the sinner. The theory says the Spirit operates on the sinner, enabling him to understand the word; and the word being a "dead letter," and having no miracle wrought on it, it remains a "dead letter." The word of God, being a "dead letter," is wholly useless in the conversion of sinners according to the theory of a direct or immediate operation of the Holy Spirit on the heart of sinners. The Holy Spirit, according to that theory, does the work of converting sinners to Christ, and the word of God is useless. But, the theory says the Holy Spirit does this work on the sinner, without a medium, and thus enables the sinner to understand the word of God, which they contend is a "dead letter." Well, if there is no miracle wrought on the word to make it alive, and a miracle is wrought on the sinner to give him life, the word o; God remains a "dead letter" and wholly useless in converting sinners. WHY WILL PEOPLE NOT THINK? WHY WILL THEY ACCEPT A THEORY THAT MAKES VOID THE WORD OF GOD?