DEFINING TERMINOLOGY-
Many definitions given for inerrancy use generally the same language with slight nuances depending on the author, perspective, and goals that are being accomplished in the publication. And still others partner the definition with the definitions given for authority and inspiration because of the connection between inerrancy, authority, and inspiration of Scripture.
While there is a definite connection and partnership between those important topics, separate definitions are appropriate for understanding and clarification of terms. Language is a powerful tool that has been captivated and used in inappropriate ways when terms are not clarified. The inerrancy of Scripture can be defined as: Scripture in its original manuscripts being held as fully truthful and fully trustworthy. The authority of Scripture can be defined as: “All the words in Scripture are God’s words in such a way that to disbelieve or disobey any word of Scripture is to disbelieve or disobey God.”[1] And the inspiration of Scripture can be defined as: The words of Scripture being breathed out by God (spoken by God) through the human authors who penned them, giving ultimate authorship to God.
It is imperative to comply with the belief of inerrancy of Scripture. There are several contaminating problems that emerge when denial of inerrancy arises. In a culture that continuously opposes Christianity and biblical teaching, arguments against such a bold statement can be difficult. Especially when so many claim the ravaged errors of Scripture, the contradictory propaganda, and the scientific and historical assertions that supposedly have no real evidential support or justifiable claim to righteousness. While most of these listed issues given have a simple apologetic response, the culture handles them seriously because of the greater focus put on feelings over fact and social acceptance over truth. What do any of these claims have for or against inerrancy of Scripture? It logically follows that the truthfulness and trustworthiness of Scripture leads to the truthfulness and trustworthiness of the authority and inspiration of Scripture.[2] The first problem listed in this account effectively runs through the veins of every other problem that could surface from the denial of inerrancy.
OBJECTIONS TO THE TERMINOLOGY-
As stated above, there are some cultural issues that surface frequently about the Bible in general, but most specifically about its trustworthiness. One of the first major objections would be the number of errors that are found in the Bible. Bart Ehrman has, on many occasions, been known to state (see the ErhmanProject.com) that there are as many as 400,000 errors in the Bible that contribute to the reliability of Scripture.[3] But according to an interview with Daniel Wallace on the same website in the video, NT Manuscript Reliability, He states that using textual criticism, which is what is used with all ancient texts to judge reliability and trustworthiness, no copyist errors change a single foundational Christian doctrine. There are so many copies all the way back to the second century that critics never have to make a guess on what was intended in the text. Additionally, the “scribes who were busy about transcribing the Gospels… were not merely disinterested copyists. To them it was a sacred text they reproduced, but a text, too, that was open and vulnerable to outside criticism. Certainly, they understood their function to be that of copyists, not authors, and certainly not evangelists.”[4] They had an immense responsibility that they undertook with dedication. Because of this exhaustive care, the evidence has given us a prodigious foundation to understand the original manuscripts and keep the foundational doctrines intact with the understanding and confidence that the scribes maintained and reliability of inerrancy.
A second supposedly major issue that is often made by cultural critics is the numerous contradictory statements that are found throughout the pages of Scripture. For example, infidels.org has a large inventory of contradictory biblical statements from the gospels alone on various topics. What is remarkably interesting about these supposed contradictions is that the gospel accounts, when put side-by-side can testify on behalf of the complete narrative. When multiple witnesses are giving their account of any event, it will not contain verbatim testimony if their account is given in truth and may seem to be contradictory until all the accounts are put together to form the entirety of the event. If all accounts are exact, there is suspicion of falsehood in their recount due to rehearsal among the witnesses. The difference in testimony lends to its truth. An investigative and logical reading can see that while some testimonial statements may seem to contradict one another, they do, in fact, simply describe the writer’s perspective during the events that unfolded with no contradiction. This method of research with the Gospels, but also through all of Scripture was perfected by cold case detective and now scholar and apologist J. Warner Wallace.[5] He began researching the Gospels using his research techniques while he was still an atheist and became a Christian after using the cold case detective methods he applied to numerous cases throughout his career and then to the Scriptures and found them to be reliable based on his investigation. He often states that he is a Christian because it is evidentially true.
Additionally, there has always been discussion surrounding the historical and scientific accuracy of Scripture. Much of the text can be considered a history book because it outlines what has happened in the past and extra-biblical accounts. Our entire calendar system is derived around the life and death of Jesus. As far as the scientific information provided within Scripture, there is no honest scientist that admits contradiction of biblical text and science apart from normal changes within the science unless he or she denies supernatural involvement of any kind within nature. There are those who hold to drastically different perspectives on scientific identity regarding biblical matters from the age of the earth to the interpretation of heavenly beings. Among top scholars in these fields are Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis taking the position of a young earth and Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe taking the position of an old earth. Both Ham’s[6] organization and Ross’[7] affirm inerrancy of Scripture and express their position thoroughly. Even with differing scientific perspectives on interpretation, both scientists hold to the complete authority, inspiration, and inerrancy of Scripture by the definitions given above and both provide substantial scientific evidence to support their perspectives on their websites that answer interpretive biblical questions as well as how their journey through science has encouraged and grown them in their relationship with God and their knowledge of the Scriptures. This simply shows that even with varying interpretations on non-major doctrines, they can come together on the major ideology of inerrancy and successfully teach about God through their scientific ministries.
THE PROBLEM OF THE MORAL REVOLUTION-
Albert Mohler stated on his podcast The Briefing, that “biblical authority used to be so important in this society. Well, that didn’t hold, because if people don’t believe in God and they don’t believe in the word of God, guess what? Biblical morality goes out the window. After that, could a kind of generalized Christian moral consensus hold the line? History has shown us that, no, that doesn’t happen.”[8] From where does society conceive its moral standard? The answer from a societal standpoint is that the individual may determine his or her own moral standard. This poses an incredible issue in society when those moral standards clash with one another and clash with the laws that are set in place in the land. If there is no set moral standard, then no standard is absolute, and all standards are relative to the individual. This leads to there being no real moral problem when individuals determine for themselves that theft or murder or rape or infanticide or any other crime is morally right by their own standard.
Upon further adherence to this society’s moral revolution against the standard of Scripture and its inerrancy, enters the redefining of terms. The first marriage was portrayed and defined in the book of Genesis (2:21-24). But in a culture that has redefined terms of identity, marriage is redefined as well. Scripture is clear that our identity is found in Christ (John 1:12; 1 Corinthians 6:17; 12:27; Galatians 3:27; Ephesians 1:5; 1 Peter 2:9; etc.), and that we are uniquely created beings of God (Genesis 1:27; Psalm 139:13-14; Isaiah 64:8; Ephesians 2:10; etc.), but society redefines identity into categories that fit within labels that have become normal in every household. Even a child recognizes the labels of “LGBTQIA”, listing the initials of the newly given identity definitions of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, intersex, and asexual and/or ally. The confusion among children and teenagers especially when amid adolescence without a clear understanding of an identity standard has led to emotional and psychological harm to the point that the CDC has a link just for LGBT Suicide Resources on their website to assist with the specific rise in that focal issue.[9]
Finally, without the standard of Scripture being viewed as inerrant, there is a redefinition of sin. Even simply using other words to describe a situation so as not using the terms that were intended harnesses the effect of the outcome: “slept with someone else” instead of “adultery” or “took something that was not mine” instead of “stealing”. Ultimately, these sinful acts have been lessened by language to cheapen the depth of their iniquity. The denial of inerrancy demonstrates the lack of attention and faith in Scripture and allows the growth of the moral revolution in society.
THE PROBLEM OF CONFIDENCE-
When the ideology of inerrancy is not accepted fully, it creates an issue of trust and confidence in the very Word of God. Even if an individual believes that Scripture is inspired, but not inerrant, it becomes increasingly difficult to bear confidence in the teachings of Scripture when there is uncertainty of trustworthiness and truthfulness. How is it determined which areas or passages of Scripture are acceptable to trust and which are not? If one is acceptable and one is not, then how can a reader be certain they have chosen correctly without a fully accepted set of rules for inerrancy? Additionally, if there is no expectancy of trustworthiness or truthfulness, then why should the expectations that individuals give themselves be different than the standards held by the Scriptures? This expectation gives an individual leave to be untrustworthy and untruthful. It also calls into question the position held by the reader of inspiration and authority of Scripture. The breakdown in confidence in the denial of inerrancy leaves far too many questions and the authority and inspiration of the Scripture in jeopardy.
THE PROBLEM OF DOCTRINAL BREAKDOWN-
There was already a modest discussion on the foundational doctrines under the section above on the objections to the definition. All was stated with an understanding that all the doctrines of the Christian faith are based on and held together by the ideology of the inerrancy of Scripture. However, if Scripture is not truthful and trustworthy, then the foundational doctrines of our faith are unreliable. This does not just include the doctrine of the Word of God, but also the doctrines of God and His attributes, Christ and His work, the Holy Spirit and His work, salvation and/or regeneration, sin and its consequence, man and his sanctification, the Church, heavenly beings, and future events. Rhyne Putman states that there are several sources or formative factors used to shape and develop doctrine within the church including Scripture, listed as the first source or factor.[10] What becomes of the entire process when the primary source is regarded as errant? The loss of trustworthiness and truthfulness in this source breaks down foundational understanding and alters the culminated result. The denial of inerrancy provides unreliable doctrines for foundational use in the church.
THE PROBLEM OF SUPERIOR THINKING-
Idolatry is the second commandment and partners with the first commandment if you are putting something before the God of the universe. When an individual thinks they know or understand better than God and His understanding, then they make themselves and their thinking take a higher position than the position in which they place God. The work of the Triune God in the lives of His creation has given mankind a remarkable position – higher than the angels because of sonship.[11] But even with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit upon salvation, this act does not give mankind more understanding than God but acts as a revealer of inspiration to the authors of Scripture so that they may not take the ultimate authorship credit for their work. He also acts as re-creator at the moment of salvation, as a witness, and as judge.[12] Christians tend to forget the work of the Holy Spirit in their lives and credit themselves with their spiritual knowledge and understanding. Even though Scripture is clear that “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.”[13] It has already been established that the path of knowledge of God is through the Bible. But if inerrancy is denied, then the reader/thinker establishes their understanding as superior to God and what He has provided for knowledge of Himself. Further, what is read in Scripture cannot be trusted to provide honest knowledge of God.
THE PROBLEM OF CONTRADICTING JESUS-
who was to come. In the New Testament Jesus is the prophesied Messiah who is and is to come. One Testament gives a picture of the Messiah and the other presents Jesus. Together both the Old and New Testaments reveal that Jesus is the Messiah. Even in the New Testament, there is expression of Jesus being found in the Old Testament as He appeared to two traveling men after the resurrection. “And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.”[14] John Blanchard states that in this verse, Jesus gave them “what must have been the greatest Old Testament exposition in history – to a congregation of two!”[15] This is an expression of understanding that Jesus Christ can be seen in the Old Testament Scriptures. And just a few brief verses later, the two men walking with him on the road express their own dismay at not identifying Jesus sooner and even mentioned their burning hearts when Jesus opened the Scriptures.[16] In the book of John, Jesus himself states, “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify to Me.”[17] These verses indicate that Jesus is the essential core of Scripture and that those who read should take heed to this understanding for its eternal value. This thought process is continued later in the same Gospel when Jesus states, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”[18] But here, connecting the account of truth in the acceptance of inerrancy, seeking Jesus is to seek truth. The most regarded and acknowledged path to know more of Jesus is to read Scripture as stated above. Additionally, discovering Jesus’ perspective on what is stated within Scripture lends a guide to the reader as well. In the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5, Jesus clears the barriers to the reader’s perception so that there might be understanding of His intentions on earth and in the lives of His creation and His ideology of Scripture: “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.”[19] This indicates that Jesus holds to inerrancy when he states that nothing will pass away from the Scriptures until all is fulfilled. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones says of this passage,
You can come to one conclusion only, namely, that He believed it all and not only certain parts of it! He quoted almost every part of it. To the Lord Jesus Christ, the Old Testament was the Word of God; it was Scripture; it was something absolutely unique and apart; it had authority which nothing else has ever possessed nor can possess. Here, then, is a vital statement with regard to this whole matter of the authority of the Old Testament.
You will find so many people today who seem to think they can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ fully and yet more or less reject the Old Testament. It must be said, however, that the question of our attitude to the Old Testament inevitably raises the question of our attitude towards the Lord Jesus Christ.[20]
Even Christ’s knowledge of the authors many and grievous sins does not keep him from acknowledging the authority and inerrancy and inspiration that the Scriptures hold. To Jesus, these men were inspired by the Spirit with a message.[21] When the inerrancy of Scripture is denied, it leads to a contradiction of our Lord Jesus Christ himself and His understanding and belief in the inerrancy of Scripture and ultimately can change our perspective and relationship toward Him.
CONCLUSION-
Each problem presented seems to bear an elementary remedy: simply accept inerrancy and proceed. But as stated near the introduction, the first problem permeates the others. The moral revolution within society has affected the thought and actions of believers and non-believers alike. Redefined terms and normality of individual moral standards have progressed to all time highs according to Barna Research Group.[22] The acceptance of inerrancy would be a great start. There are other important actions that are necessary to fight against the moral revolution and other problems of society. Perhaps beginning with literacy of the Bible and Theology in general and making Scripture exciting again for the believer. The Bible is the greatest book ever written and contains the most exciting true story anyone could ever know. What makes an individual disenfranchised with what is contained in its pages? Any individual involved in ministering to others should ask themselves this question adjoining the questions of teaching others of the truthfulness and trustworthiness of the Scriptures.
Subscribe by email to receive a notification when a new article is posted!
[1] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 73. [2] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013), 193-94. [3] “Welcome to the Ehrman Project,” Ehrman Project, January 15, 2011, www.ehrmanproject.com. [4] Wayne C. Kannaday, Apologetic Discourse and the Scribal Tradition: Evidence of the Influence of Apologetic Interests On the Text of the Canonical Gospels (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 5:249. [5] J. Warner Wallace, “Cold Case Christianity,” Cold Case Christianity,
https://coldcasechristianity.com/.
[6] Mark Bird Dr., “Inerrancy and the Test of Truth,” Answers in Genesis, March 26, 2018, https://answersingenesis.org/is-the-bible-true/inerrancy-and-test-truth/. [7] Kenneth R. Samples, “What Is Biblical Inerrancy? (Part1),” Reasons to Believe, April 13, 2015, https://reasons.org/explore/blogs/reflections/read/reflections/2015/04/13/what-is-biblical-inerrancy-(part-1). [8] Albert Mohler, “Part 1: Trans-Inclusive Abortion Services? The Horrifying Collision of the Culture of Death and the Sexual Revolution Wrapped Up in One Manual,” The Briefing, December 10, 2020, https://albertmohler.com/2020/12/10/briefing-12-10-20. [9] “Suicide and Violence Prevention,” CDC, accessed December 12, 2020, https://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/suicide-violence-prevention.htm. [10] Rhyne R. Putman, In Defense of Doctrine: Evangelicalism, Theology, and Scripture (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2015), 210. [11] Heb. 1:4-5 [12] Daniel L. Akin, ed., A Theology for the Church (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2007), 670-78. [13] Prov. 9:10 [14] Luke 24:27 All Scripture references will be from the NKJV unless otherwise noted. [15] John Blanchard, Look through Luke (Mesquite: Lamb, 1973), 122. [16] Luke 24:32 [17] John 5:39 [18] John 14:6 [19] Matt. 5:17-18 [20] D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Studies in the Sermon on the Mount, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1960), 163. [21] John Wenham, Christ and the Bible (Guildford, Surrey: Eagle, 1993), 29-30. [22] “The End of Absolutes,” Barna Group, Inc., May 25, 2016, https://www.barna.com/research/the-end-of-absolutes-americas-new-moral-code/.
