The Inerrancy Debate
and the Contemporary Church
A survey of Scriptures reveal that the biblical writers
testified to the doctrine of Inerrancy and Inspiration. Time and time again
their use of Scriptures affirm that “the Bible originated from God and is His
message to the human race”[1].
Commonly used Scriptures in support of the doctrine of Inerrancy and Inspiration
include 2 Timothy 3:16, and 2 Peter 1:20-21, John 10:35b). In the process of God’s
superintendcy upon the authors of the Scriptures, He conveyed the humanness of
the authors. Erickson[2]
makes this point very well in describing the acts of Peter and Paul. While God
directed the thoughts of Luke (the result of his careful research) to give and
account of Peter’s ministry to Cornelius in Acts 10, Peter willfully ignored
God’s commands in Acts 10:9-15 and “compromised by withdrawing from eating with
Gentiles and certain Jews” in Galatians 2:11-12. We can learn a thing or two
from reading about the triumphs and failures of those that have gone before us.
The Apostle Paul said it well: “For everything that was written in the past was
written for our instruction…” (Romans 15:4a).
I am of the view that the Bible is a combination of “divine
and human elements in the process of inspiration and the writing of the Bible”[3],
though not every word is inspired in the translated texts as consideration must
be given to human efforts during the translation process. However, we can be
assured of the Holy Spirit was active in actualizing Scripture. Peter stated referred
to the process as “holy men of God moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:17-21).
MacArthur describes it as “human writers of Scripture playing an active rather
than a passive role wherein God superintended them, using their own individual
personalities, thought processes, and vocabulary, composing and recording
without error the exact words God wanted written”[4].
It was “verbal inspiration extending even to the choice of words,” even though the “thoughts at times may have
been more precise than words available”[5].
This presents many points of contention, but we must consider the human element
involved. God “worked within the human limitations of the authors”[6],
although He prepared them over time for the task. We can see these differences
for example in the New Testament accounts of the synoptic Gospels where it
seems Matthew and Luke appear to clarify or smooth out difficult or
grammatically awkward statements in Mark”[7]
(Matthew 12:22-24; Mark 3:21-23; Luke 8:19-21).
That said, the doctrine of the inerrancy of the Scriptures
states that the Word of God is without error, but only to the content of the
originally inspired content. It applies to “all areas of knowledge, faith and
ethics and are based on God’s action in history”[8].
The Bible is its own testimony, authoritatively inherent (John 10:34-35, Matthew
5:17-20), “teaches its own inspiration, which requires inerrancy”, is “absolutely“
according to Jesus (John 10:34-35), and is affirmed by the church fathers (Augustine,
Calvin, Luther) and modern theologians (B.B. Warfield, Charles Hodge)[9].
We cannot and should not fall for the claims that because humans wrote the
texts of the Bible, that it an inerrant document. “A single error (in
translation) should not lead one to conclude that it contains no truth”[10].
It is a “divine-human book” and because the men were moved by God “inspiration
kept them from error”[11].
History is linear, but seemingly moves in a circle; nothing new under the sun. I.S. Rennie recounts the efforts
of Christians to “formulate the theory of inspiration in response to eighteen
century liberal theology”[12].
This move to discredit inspiration and therefore a claim against the inerrancy
of the Bible has not slowed. It is therefore important that Christians continue
to study the Word of God, engage in apologetics in the marketplace, not just in
Christian circle as we cannot properly engage the enemy from the outside, and
keep abreast of history. If we study the strategies of the past
(epistemological and historical), then it is possible to stay ahead of the
conversation and create our own metanarratives on the subject as this is the
world the present postmodern generation understands. The contemporary church is
sometimes seen as irrelevant and out-of-date, but I feel we can turn the tide
when the Scriptures are contextualized to address the needs of the generation
much like Jesus employed an incarnational model in His day and minced no words
in declaring His authority and the authority of the Scriptures.
Bibliography
[2]
Ibid., 180
[3]
Ibid., 175
[4]
John MacArthur Notes, MacArthur Study Bible, (United States, Thomas Nelson,
1997), 1954
[5]
Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 184
[6]
Ibid., 185
[7]
Thomas D. Lea, David Alan Black, The New
Testament: Its Background And Message, (Nashville TN: B&H Publishing (2003),121.
[8] P.D. Feinberg, “Bible, Inerrancy and
Infallibility of,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell,
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing, 2001), 157.
No comments:
Post a Comment