Dr. Clark explains that God, in his omnipotence as the creator of all things, controlled every event so that each prophet’s literary style and mentality were precisely fitted to speak God’s words. The writing of the Scriptures was not an event of mechan-ical dictation. Dr. Clark says, “Between Moses and God Omnipotent there was an inner union, an identity of purpose, a cooperation of will such that the words Moses wrote were God’s own words and Moses’ own words at the same time.” Since God is omni-potent, and since he guides our every thought, it is perfectly reasonable that he should use a certain person’s literary style in the writing of his Revelation. It is crucial to note that God inspired and has given us the very words, not a general idea. His message to us is concise, specific. Dr. Clark writes,

Assertions of plenary and verbal inspiration abound from Genesis to Revelation. The best known, of course, is, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” A better and more literal translation would be, “All Scripture has been breathed out by God.” It is to be noted, as orthodox theologians have repeatedly pointed out, that what God breathed forth were the words written on the manuscript. The verse does not say that God inspired the thoughts of the authors, nor even their speech. It is Scripture, the written words that God breathed out. Of course the verse does not deny that God inspired the thoughts of the authors. The point simply is that, whatever else God did, he also breathed out the written words. (111)

Dr. Clark emphasizes the fact that God has inspired specific words, and this is very important. We should take care to remember this as we read the Scriptures. One of the aspects of God’s words is that they are eternal. Matthew 24:35 says, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.” God’s words are spirit and life. John 6:63 says, “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.” John 6:68 says, “But Simon Peter answered Him, ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.’” None of these verses mention feelings, emotions, or experience. God has given his revelation to us using words. It is essential that we have a proper understanding of the origin of words. The liberals denied that God Himself speaks, and that He speaks using words. On pages 118-119, Dr. Clark explains that language is not an evolutionary development from animal sounds. Rather, man was created in the image of God, and is capable of reasoning. This image of God, according to Dr. Clark, is fundamentally human reason, and language is the expression of reason. The assertion that language is indeed an evolutionary development from animal sounds fits very well with the idea that language cannot express divine truth. This evolutionary viewpoint is obviously quite problematic, since it makes God completely unknowable. Additionally, many people have a miscon-strued concept of the relationship between words and life. Many are quick to assert sayings such as, “life is deeper than logic.” The Scriptures, however, speak exactly opposite. John 1:1-5 says,

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Here we see that logic, the Logos, the Word, is deeper, more fundamental than life. The Word was in the beginning, before anything was created. All things were made through the Word. Additionally, all things continue to be upheld by the Word of God. Hebrews 1:3 says, speaking of Christ, “who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.” God’s revelation to us is the very words of Scripture, and these words are tremendously powerful indeed.

          Dr. Clark realizes that the doctrine of verbal inspiration is vital to Christianity. It has been viciously attacked through the years in various ways. In Luther and Calvin’s time, the truthfulness of the Scriptures was not officially denied by the Roman Catholic Church. Because of this, they did not treat the issue as heavily as the doctrine of justification. However, we must realize that the doctrine of Scripture must be discussed before you can discuss any other doctrine. “How do you know?” is the most important question. The word “God” is meaningless apart from Scripture. In the nineteenth century people began to systematically deny verbal inspiration. Julius Wellhausen and other German rationalist theologians held that the Bible was merely a collection of human documents, and that a great deal of the Bible was mythological. Human reason was to be trusted above all else. Yes, the Liberals admitted that the Bible contains the word of God, but only in the sense that part of it was true, and part of it was false. Liberalism undercuts the very foundation of Christianity. In the mid twentieth century, after liberalism had ultimately failed, a new way of thinking emerged. Seeing the collapse of liberal-ism and the need for a new basis on which to stand, Neo-orthodoxy surfaced. Like liberalism, Neo-orthodoxy uses many of the same words as orthodox Christianity, but with new, changed meanings. For example, the word salvation came to mean a psychological experience with the personality of Jesus, rather than a cleansing from sin by the blood of Christ on the cross and being given everlasting life. With regard to Scripture, the Neo-Orthodox claim that the Bible is a record of revelation. By this they mean that the prophets received revelation in the form of historical events and experiences, but not words. To the Neo-orthodox, having an existential “encounter” is what matters most of all. The Neo-orthodox approach greatly undermines Christianity. We must remember that heresies creep in on ambiguity, and that clarity is essential. In more recent years, another attack has been unleashed against the doctrine of verbal inspiration in the form of Neo-liberalism. People such as Cornelius Van Til, followed by others such as Richard Gaffin, teach that we cannot know God’s truth. All we can have, according to them, is an analogy of the truth. These people assert that the Bible gives us a record of events. Rather than saying that God has breathed out the very words of Scripture, the Neo-liberals claim that the prophets and apostles viewed events, and wrote about them. Geerhardus Vos taught this view, which is ironically named Biblical Theology. One of the results of this error is that the Bible contains not one systematic theology, but many different theologies. Paul interpreted the events he saw and came up with a system of theology, Peter interpreted the events he saw and formed his own theology, etc. This eliminates the idea of systematic revelation. There is no authority left, because when we read the Bible, we are in the same position as the apostles, and must interpret the events as we read about them.      

          Thankfully, God has not left us to interpret events, but He has given us a sure word of prophecy by way of the words of Scripture. Second Peter 1:15-21 says,

Moreover I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things after my decease. For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain. And so we have the more sure prophetic word, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

In this passage, Peter is explaining that the words of Scripture are a more sure word of prophecy. They are more sure than anything, even Peter’s own “religious experience” in which he was an eyewitness of the transfiguration. Surely, no human has had a “religious experience” greater than being an eyewitness of the transfiguration! Yet, Peter tells us that the Scriptures are a more sure prophetic word than anything anyone has experienced. When we talk to people and just share personal opinions, we have nothing to offer. We might be wrong. God’s word, however, is a mighty hammer, and it never returns void. It either hardens or softens. Isaiah 55:11 says, “So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.” The Scriptures are more sure than feelings people may have, what scientists say, and what so-called experts have to say. This world is a dark place, and the only light we have is the Scriptures. In the Scriptures we have everything we need. Second Peter 1:3 says, “as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue.” The view that we cannot know truth, which is held by people such as Cornelius Van Til is agnostic. Dr. Clark says that the purpose of revelation is for God to communicate to man, and that man can pray to God. In this he is precisely correct. A revelation that cannot be known would be of no use to anyone. How wonderful it is that the almighty God has revealed information about himself to us, and that we can know it!    

          Dr. Clark clearly understands the significance that language is a gift from God, and that words are adequate for this purpose. The truth is communicated in words, and in words alone. Using words, God tells man about himself in the Bible, and man can speak to God in prayer. The results of denying verbal inspiration are detrimental to Christianity.

          The doctrine of verbal inspiration is closely linked to an additional important doctrine. Another aspect of the Scriptures that has been under attack in more recent decades is their rationality. As we shall see, irrationalism bears some serious ramifications.   

          In several different essays within the book, Dr. Clark addresses the fact that truth is rational. He explains that rationality preserves the distinction between truth and falsity. The Biblical doctrines are self-consistent and have met the test of logic. The test of logic is required in order for propositions to be meaningful. Scripture is a meaningful revelation in the rational mind of man. Logic, or reason, is a God-given faculty, and it is adequate for the task of the reception of Divinely revealed information, and the systematizing of the propositions into dogmatic theology. Dr. Clark says,

Language is capable of conveying literal truths because the laws of logic are necessary. There is no substitute for them. Philosophers who deny them reduce their own denials to nonsense syllables. Even where the necessity of logic is not denied, if reason is used in some other sense as a source of truth, the result has been skepticism. Therefore, revelation is not only rational, but it is the only hope of maintaining rationality. And this is corroborated by the actual consistency that we discover when we examine the verbally inspired revelation called the Bible. (85)

Dr. Clark rightly asserts that Christianity is a rational religion. Truth must be propositional. A proposition is merely the meaning of a declarative sentence. It is necessary that truth be relayed as a proposition, since a noun by itself is neither true nor false.      

          Dr. Clark’s insistence on the rationality of Scripture and the importance of logic is well founded. The Neo-Orthodox hate logic. As a result of this hatred, we have seen some extremely sinful situations indeed. An example of this is the tragedy of professed Christians killing their own unborn babies. The people who approve of such terrible sins as this have been taught the wicked lie that, “life is deeper than logic” and, “life is green, theory is gray.” Once these ungodly notions are adopted, God’s Word is no longer the authority. Instead, subjective feelings become the guide. Some evil women today “feel” that abortion is permissible in God’s sight under certain circumstances, while on the contrary, the Scriptures clearly say, “Thou shalt not kill.” The consequences of hating reason and appealing to subjective feelings are grave, to be sure.

          When the Scriptures are correctly exhorted and preached, or when a theological books is written, logical deductions are necessary. When deductions are correctly drawn from the propositions in Scripture, we can safely say that these deductions are truth. Chapter one of the Westminster Confession of Faith says, “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture.” The deductions spoken of in the Westminster Confession are done using human logic, which according to Dr. Clark, is logical because it is first God’s logic. Logic is the way God thinks, and this is easy to prove. John 1:1 can also be translated as, “In the beginning was the Logic, and the Logic was with God and the Logic was God.” Examples of logic abound in Scripture. Jesus and the apostles used it often. Just a few of the many instances in which Jesus used logic can be found in John 8:47, John 18:36, John 9:49, and Matthew 12:11-12. Acts 2:14 and 3:18 demonstrate Peter’s use of logic, and his comparing different Old Testament Scriptures in order to draw conclusions. Acts 17 and 18 speak several times of Paul’s reasoning with his hearers. Benjamin B. Warfield, Professor of Theology at Princeton Theological Seminary, in his book, The Westminster Assembly and its Work said,

This is the strenuous and universal contention of the Reformed theology against Socinians and Arminians, who desired to confine the authority of Scripture to its literal asseverations; and it involves a characteristic honoring of reason as the instrument for the ascertainment of truth. We must depend upon our human faculties to ascertain what Scripture says, we cannot suddenly abnegate them and refuse their guidance in determining what Scripture means. This is not, of course, to make reason the ground of the authority of inferred doctrines and duties. Reason is the instrument of discovery of all doctrines and duties, whether “expressly set down in Scripture” or “by good and necessary consequence deduced from Scripture”: but their authority, when once discovered, is derived from God, who reveals and prescribes them in Scripture, either by literal assertion or by necessary implication.... It is the Reformed contention, reflected here by the Confession, that the sense of Scripture is Scripture, and that men are bound by its whole sense in all its implications. The re-emergence in recent controversies of the plea that the authority of Scripture is to be confined to its expressed declarations, and that human logic is not to be trusted in divine things, is, therefore, a direct denial of a fundamental position of Reformed theology, explicitly affirmed in the Confession, as well as an abnegation of fundamental reason, which would not only render thinking in a system impossible, but would discredit at a stroke many of the fundamentals of the faith, such e.g. as the doctrine of the Trinity, and would logically involve the denial of the authority of all doctrine whatsoever, since no single doctrine of whatever simplicity can be ascertained from Scripture except by the use of the processes of the understanding.... The recent plea against the use of human logic in determining doctrine... destroys at once our confidence in all doctrines, no one of which is ascertained or formulated without the aid of human logic.

Cornelius Van Til and his followers assert that the use of logic is to be avoided in theology and apologetics. They maintain that, “mere human logic” is not to be trusted. On the contrary, it has been clearly demonstrated above that logic originated with God. Jesus and and Paul used logic, and no doctrine can be extracted from Scripture without the use of logic. The use of logic is a characteristic of reformed theology. Dr. John W. Robbins, in his lecture “Evangelism and Defense of the Faith” said, “Logic is and must be the basic tool for Christian apologetics. It was so for Christ and the apostles, anyone who belittles the lawful use of logic is simply showing his unbelief or ignorance of Scripture.”          

          Dr. Clark makes careful consideration regarding the rationality of the Scriptures, and he does this with a decisive motive. If the rules of logic are ignored and denigrated, truth and error can no longer be distinguished. Let us follow the examples set forth by Jesus and the apostles, and recognize the importance of reason.  

          In his writings, Dr. Clark does an excellent job clearly demonstrating in great detail that the axiom, or first principle of Christianity is the belief that the Bible alone is the Word of God. This conviction is caused by the Holy Spirit in the mind of the Christian. Dr. Clark determines that our only weapon in the defense of the Bible is the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. Ephesians 6:17 clearly states this. Dr. Clark also explains that God’s revelation to us is both verbal and rational. Sadly, the seminaries have largely ignored Dr. Clark’s magnificent work, and as a result, many churches have been exchanging the Biblical, theocentric view of knowledge for an anthropocentric view. May God grant us grace to not trust in ourselves, but to realize that His revelation to us, the Sword of the Spirit, is all sufficient, all-powerful, and our only source of truth.

Works Cited

Clark, Gordon H., God’s Hammer: the Bible and its Critics. (Hobbs, New Mexico: The Trinity Foundation, 1995).

Robbins, John W., Lecture, “Evangelism and the Defense of the Faith.”

Warfield, Benjamin B., The Works of Benjamin Warfield: The Westminster Assembly and Its Work, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1981).

Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Confession of Faith, 1646.