Studies of diachronic linguistic change within biblical Hebrew have entered evangelical discussions of the Old Testament’s inspiration, composition, and transmission. Some have levied helpful critiques against the previously assumed dating paradigms in critical scholarship, while others have given some doctrinal accounting of the phenomena of literary updating, which should presuppose linguistic updating. Nevertheless, at large, evangelicals have not yet adequately dealt with the implications of historical linguistics for their doctrine of Scripture. A gap exists in the articulation of doctrine around inspired scribal activity, especially as it concerns linguistic change.
A growing body of evidence from inscriptions and comparative Semitics indicates that the pre-exilic content in the Old Testament mainly reflects the linguistic situation of Judah in Iron Age II (1000–586 BC). The absolute chronology suggested by the evidence for even the texts’ oldest linguistic features, based on current knowledge of the Canaanite dialects and alphabetic script, presents challenges to any adoption of traditional dates of composition that would exclude substantial scribal activity of linguistic and literary updating. This raises the question of the extent of inspiration and what activities it includes. Dismissal of the historical linguistic enterprise to inform this question is contrary to a view of biblical inerrancy that accounts for both divine and human agencies, as explained in articles IV and VIII of the Chicago Statement.
Thus, the present paper seeks to contribute to the discussion by taking stock of current and historical doctrines of Scripture. The paper will, first, briefly demonstrate the challenges of the interrelated issues of inspiration, composition, transmission, and linguistic change. Second, it will survey evangelical and reformed views of Scripture—such as those of Calvin, Bavinck, Warfield, and Frame—by asking how they dealt (or might have dealt) with inspired scribal activity under various terminology. Third, it will briefly evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of those views. Then, finally, it will recommend a preliminary doctrinal articulation of linguistic and literary scribal activity vis-à-vis inspiration and inerrancy, as well as a path forward to future refinement controlled by biblical exegesis.