The Voice of The Spirit

An Imperfect Language

Although Adventists do not believe in verbal inspiration (when understood to mean that God dictates the exact words to the prophet), some are reluctant to accept that the prophet is allowed to use his or her own language. With the exception of a few biblical statements (for example, the Ten Commandments), all the inspired writings are the result of a divine-human combination. The Holy Spirit inspires the prophet with a vision, an impression, or a thought. The messenger then begins to search for the words, expressions, and literary figures that will correctly communicate that message. Although the Spirit also guides in the selection of the words and expressions, as we will see, the prophet nevertheless uses his own form of language. This is the basic reason for the differences in the literary styles of the various biblical writers. It is also the reason why the language of the inspired writers is described as imperfect and human. VOTS 32.2

The Bible is not given us in grand superhuman language. Jesus, in order to reach man where he is, took humanity. The Bible must be given in the language of the men. Everything that is human is imperfect.... VOTS 33.1

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God’s mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented.... VOTS 33.2

It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired. Inspiration acts not on the man’s words or his expressions but on the man himself, who, under the influence of the Holy Ghost, is imbued with thoughts. ⁸ VOTS 33.3

How do you personally react to this statement: “It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired”? It is true that expressions such as “the pen of inspiration” are commonly used to refer to the inspired messages. However, it seems that God wants us to learn that it is not the “pen” that is inspired. Rather, it is the prophet’s mind. In practice, this means at least two things: (1) The prophet uses his own language. It is everyday language, learned from childhood and improved through study, reading, travel, and learning. The language used is not supernatural or divine, but human. (2) The prophet may include spelling or grammatical mistakes, as well as other language defects such as imperfect style or lapses in memory. These imperfections need to be corrected by an editor before the text is ready for publication. The editor is not correcting the inspired “message” but the non-inspired “language.” Consider one prophet’s own testimony: VOTS 33.4

While my husband lived, he acted as a helper and counselor in the sending out of the messages that were given to me.... The instruction I received in vision was faithfully written out by me, as I had time and strength for the work. Afterward we examined the matter together, my husband correcting grammatical errors and eliminating needless repetition. Then it was carefully copied for the persons addressed, or for the printer. ⁹ VOTS 34.1

This morning I take into candid consideration my writings. My husband is too feeble to help me prepare them for the printer, therefore I shall do no more with them at present. I am not a scholar. I cannot prepare my own writings for the press.... VOTS 34.2

I am thinking I must lay aside my writing I have taken so much pleasure in, and see if I cannot become a scholar. I am not a grammarian. I will try, if the Lord will help me, at forty-five years old to become a scholar in the science. God will help me. I believe He will. ¹⁰ VOTS 34.3

For some believers, the idea of an editor or a secretary “correcting” the inspired writings may be new, and even bewildering. The idea that the prophet uses human language and that the language is “imperfect” may raise questions. The idea of looking for “imperfections” in the Bible or in the writings of Ellen White may seem completely out of line. However, it must be done because it is to our advantage to understand that, indeed, just as in the case of the biblical prophets, Ellen White used imperfect language. Are you ready, dear reader, for this challenge? VOTS 35.1

In the biblical record there seems to be a lapsus linguae in the Gospel of Matthew, where the apostle cites Zechariah, but actually quotes Jeremiah, in connection with the thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 27:9, 10; Zechariah 11:12; Jeremiah 32:6-9). For one who believes in verbal inspiration, this situation could give rise to serious doubts. However for those who accept that “the Lord speaks to human beings in imperfect speech,” ¹¹ this is simply an appropriate illustration helping us understand that the divine message arrives through imperfect human language. VOTS 35.2

The following statement of Ellen White also seems to be a lapsus linguae. She quotes Paul, but credits Peter: “ ‘The love of Christ constraineth us,’ the apostle Peter declared. This was the motive that impelled the zealous disciple in his arduous labors in the cause of the gospel.” ¹² Without a doubt, she was thinking of Paul, but wrote Peter. Does this inspired statement with its mistaken name upset or confuse you? Why didn’t the Holy Spirit “correct” this error before it was published? Fortunately, we have enough evidences in the Bible, as well as in the history of Adventism, to demonstrate that the Spirit always corrected His messengers in matters of importance for the knowledge of the truth. Why, then, did not the Spirit correct His servants in the imperfections of language use? Undoubtedly because He allowed the prophets to use their own language, an imperfect and human language that, nonetheless, communicates the perfect and divine message of God. VOTS 35.3