Scripture 2: Inerrancy

[SLIDE 1] Introduction

Purpose of the Vintage Faith Series: Lay the biblical foundation for the EFC faith we not only embrace but will be inviting people into and the way in which we will do that.

[SLIDE 2] Scripture 2

2 Timothy 3:16–17 ESV

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

Challenging My Own Assumptions

Scripture grew out of the life of a community chosen by a God it barely understood and often did not want to follow, yet who would not let them go.

 It reflects God’s word and the community’s response to that word. 

Stories - oral tradition handed down from generation to generation until they became...

Sacred writings that are a record of God revealing himself pulled together in a canon (a measuring rod). Books that are determined to be authoritative for believers as a set of books that are the standard by which other books are measured.

Our 66 books (39 OT, 27 NT) weren’t finalized until the 4th c.

Up to Enlightenment - Widely accepted lens to understand reality - general assumption: It and the interpretations of it was truth.

Science - Wait a minute; some things don’t add up.

Christianity - on the defensive; using scientific approach to argue for keeping its status.

Where we get the word inerrant.

Thank you’s

Buzzword: Inerrancy.

For some, last week was a struggle. Thank you’s.

The word inerrant is a difficult word. As was brought up in one conversation: words mean things.

And their meaning changes over time so that we lose the authenticity of how they were first meant to be used. Going to look at that today.

Challenging My Own Assumptions

What you might be thinking/saying about me...

I’m a lifelong learner. What that means:

I seek to learn what is true.

Challenge my own assumptions = training, learning by reading, studying, listening to the Scripture, the spirit, other areas of learning that touch ministry (culture, human development, etc), and people who hold different views than me because I don’t know everything and only studying those who agree with me only serves to affirm what I think. I need to be challenged by life experiences and other perspectives to grow in my relationship with Jesus and be better equipped to make disciples.

Challenge the assumptions

Training the body...

Stories of family or friends leaving

Faith Formation

Diffusion

Moratorium

Achievement

Foreclosure

Challenging others assumptions

Challenge the assumptions

Diffusion

Moratorium

Achievement

Faith Formation

Foreclosure

Diffusion

Randy Heckert: preach with guts. Everywhere Jesus went, he challenged the status quo in society and the synagogue. Isn’t that what he did with you when you said yes to follow him? It’s not a one time thing. His disciples experienced 3 years of it to help prepare them to take the baton of the kingdom’s gospel. To mature and help prepare us to do something we’ve not done, we have to address our assumptions.

Moratorium

Achievement

Foreclosure

The Struggle

Family/friends who no longer believe or follow Jesus for any number of reasons and wonder if this new perspective might cause someone to doubt.

Diffusion

Moratorium

Achievement

Foreclosure

[SLIDE 3] Review

Scripture grew out of the life of a community chosen by a God it barely understood and often did not want to follow, yet who would not let them go.

 It reflects God’s word and the community’s response to that word. 

Stories - oral tradition handed down from generation to generation until they became...

Sacred writings that are a record of God revealing himself pulled together in a canon (a measuring rod). Books that are determined to be authoritative for believers as a set of books that are the standard by which other books are measured.

Our 66 books (39 OT, 27 NT) weren’t finalized until the 4th c.

Up to Enlightenment - Widely accepted lens to understand reality - general assumption: It and the interpretations of it was truth.

Science - Wait a minute; some things don’t add up.

Christianity - on the defensive; using scientific approach to argue for keeping its status.

Enlightenment challenge and Mid 1900’s Liberalism - critique of the Scripture. Fear of going down the slippery slope of liberalism.

THIS IS Where we get the word inerrant. Bible doesn’t say it about itself.

What about the Trinity? Early church developed that concept.

For some, last week was a struggle. Thank you’s.

The word inerrant is a difficult word. As was brought up in one conversation: words mean things.

And their meaning changes over time so that we lose the authenticity of how they were first meant to be used. Going to start there and move to where we are today.

What it means

Justin Taylor, The Gospel Coalition

[SLIDE 4] A technical word/language. Precision. Math, science.

6+5=10. Error.

Scientist makes a measurement varying by .00004 cm of an actual length, he may say that is an error as in margin of error.

Outside of math and science. Age? How old on your most recent birthday. Is imprecise. Is it an error?

How many pages is the book? 400 but it is actually 385. Error? What about if that book was one to be published? Error?

Identifying an error requires we have to understand the context.

Scripture is primarily ordinary language, not technical language. God intends to speak to everyone.

Through human writers, he used the language we use to communicate: imprecisions, metaphors, parables, etc. While not precise scientifically or mathematically, they convey truth.

The bible is true, not as precise as some want it to be.

Submitting the bible to scientific scrutiny of modern rationalism.

Asking it to be what it’s not intended to be.

Frame: Inerrancy - the bible makes good on its claims.

Acceptable margin of error.

Examples:

Asking it to be what it’s not intended to be.

1978 Chicago statement.

Mid 1900’s Liberalism - 1978 Chicago statement

Many Evangelicals saw it as confusing, creating more issues.

NT Wright -

Posture of defending and having a litmus test.

Posture of defending and having a litmus test.

Lack of Agreement Among Evangelicals

Chicago Statement - fear of rising tide of liberalism.

Committed to it…now what?

“Chicago Statement left open the choice of defining inerrancy as you want.”

[SLIDE 5] VARIATIONS  OF  INERRANCY  DEFINED

Professor David S. Dockery, formerly of the fundamentalist Criswell College, then of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, identified nine possible positions held by various theologians with regard to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy.

1.  Mechanical Dictation

God dictated every word of the Bible. Precise. This view ignores style differences between various authors as well as differing historical and cultural contexts. No need to interpret or resolve. It says what it says.

Proponent: John R. Rice

2.  Absolute Inerrancy

The Bible is true and accurate in all matters. that the Bible is the written word of God although not dictated.  It does not take seriously the human aspect, or the historical contexts, in trying to harmonize the apparent differences and difficulties in Scripture.

Proponent: Harold Lindsell

3.  Critical Inerrancy

The Bible is completely true in all that the Scripture affirms, to the degree of precision intended by the original author. This view does not seek to harmonize every detail.  Scientific matters are considered to be treated with phenomenological language rather than technical and scientific thinking.  This view understands the need for interpretation and  takes seriously both the human and divine elements. Redefines inerrancy theologically - truth that makes good on its claims.

Proponents: Roger Nicole, J. Ramsey Michaels, D. A. Carson, John Woodbridge

4.  Limited Inerrancy

The Bible is inerrant in all matters of salvation and ethics, faith and practice, and matters which can be empirically validated. This view is guided by observation alone without using science or theory. 

Proponent: Howard Marshall

5.  Qualified Inerrancy

5.  Qualified Inerrancy

The Bible is taken - upon faith - to be inerrant in all matters of salvation and ethics, faith and practice, and matters which can be empirically validated. This is the same as the previous statement, except for the faith element.  It attempts to take seriously the human and divine elements.  This view is difficult to define.

Proponent: Donald G. Bloesch

6.  Nuanced Inerrancy

The Bible’s inerrancy varies with its types of literature: narrative, poetry, stories, or proverbs. Some passages require dictation in inspiration, while others, as in poetry, stories, or proverbs, may require only dynamic inspiration.  This view takes seriously the human and divine elements.

Proponent: Clark Pinnock

7.  Functional Inerrancy

The Bible is inerrant in its purpose or function of bringing people to salvation and maturity.

8.  Inerrancy is Irrelevant

Inerrancy is neither affirmed nor denied. The doctrine of inerrancy is pointless, irrelevant.

9.  Biblical Authority

The Bible is authoritative only to point one to an encounter with God. This view does not take seriously the divine element in the words of the Bible.  It freely admits human errors and finds them of no consequence.

[SLIDE 6] EFCER

Not All Evangelicals Agree

NAE - doesn’t use the word. We believe the Bible to be the inspired, the only infallible, authoritative Word of God.

NT Wright - it’s a word that comes form a modernist rationalism that has failed to give us a full-blooded reading and living of what the bible actually says. It buys into the rationalist worldview which is the problem all along.

..“inerrancy” has become a shibboleth. So long as you affirm the word you can go on to define it however you want to and you’re still “in.”

Shibboleth: a word or saying used by adherents of a party, sect, or belief and usually regarded by others as empty of real meaning.

John Piper - perfection with respect to purpose. Not what most people think (technical, precise).

Roger Olson - I had a debate with another leading conservative evangelical inerrantist. This one was an officer of the Evangelical Theological Society which requires affirmation of inerrancy for membership. I have never joined because I don’t think inerrancy is the right word for what we evangelicals believe–including those who hold to the term. This person is also an officer of a leading evangelical seminary. After much communication back and forth we realized that we differ hardly at all about the Bible. Given his qualifications of inerrancy and my high view of Scripture (supernatural inspiration and highest authority for life and faith) our accounts of the Bible were nearly identical. So I asked him if I could join the ETS without affirming the word “inerrancy.” He said no.

they want to hold onto the term “inerrancy” because it is such a useful litmus test for excluding “liberals” and other undesirables from the evangelical movement. So, instead of simply discarding the term “inerrancy,” they redefine it to death.

            Professor David S. Dockery, formerly of the fundamentalist Criswell College, then of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, identified nine possible positions held by various theologians with regard to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy.

1.  Mechanical Dictation

God dictated every word of the Bible. This view ignores style differences between various authors as well as differing historical and cultural contexts.

Proponent: John R. Rice

2.  Absolute Inerrancy

The Bible is true and accurate in all matters. This view uses the plenary-verbal concept of inspiration, attempting to separate itself from the dictation view while assuring that the Bible is the written word of God.  It does not take seriously the human aspect, or the historical contexts, in trying to harmonize the apparent differences and difficulties in Scripture.

Proponent: Harold Lindsell

3.  Critical Inerrancy

The Bible is completely true in all that the Scripture affirms, to the degree of precision intended by the original author. This view does not seek to harmonize every detail.  Scientific matters are considered to be treated with phenomenological language rather than technical and scientific thinking.  This view allows the cautious use of critical methodologies in interpretation.  It takes seriously both the human and divine elements.

Proponents: Roger Nicole, J. Ramsey Michaels, D. A. Carson, John Woodbridge

4.  Limited Inerrancy

The Bible is inerrant in all matters of salvation and ethics, faith and practice, and matters which can be empirically validated. It is inerrant only in matters for which the Bible was given.  This view seeks to be empirical, i.e., guided by observation alone without using science or theory.  Some call this view “simple biblicism.”

Proponent: Howard Marshall

5.  Qualified Inerrancy

The Bible is taken - upon faith - to be inerrant in all matters of salvation and ethics, faith and practice, and matters which can be empirically validated. This is the same as the previous statement, except for the faith element.  It attempts to take seriously the human and divine elements.  This view is difficult to define.

Proponent: Donald G. Bloesch

6.  Nuanced Inerrancy

The Bible’s inerrancy varies with its types of literature: narrative, poetry, stories, or proverbs. Some passages require dictation in inspiration, while others, as in poetry, stories, or proverbs, may require only dynamic inspiration.  This view takes seriously the human and divine elements.

Proponent: Clark Pinnock

7.  Functional Inerrancy

The Bible is inerrant in its purpose or function.  It is inerrant in its power to bring people to salvation and growth in Christian life.

Proponents: G. C. Berkouwer, Jack Rogers, Donald McKim

8.  Inerrancy is Irrelevant

Inerrancy is neither affirmed nor denied. The doctrine of inerrancy is pointless, irrelevant, and concerned only with theological minutiæ.

Proponent: David A. Hubbard

9.  Biblical Authority

The Bible is authoritative only to point one to an encounter with God. This view does not take seriously the divine element in the words of the Bible.  It freely admits human errors and finds them of no consequence.

Proponent: William Countryman

OBSERVATION:

The fact that inerrancy can be viewed in so many ways is an argument against its plausibility.  It seems pointless to argue over belief in something that is too nebulous to define.

Fuller Theological Seminary - Inspiration and authority of the Scriptures. At times, some Christians have become unduly attached to the precise wordings of doctrine—whether of events in the last days, the meaning of baptism, or the use of a catch phrase like “the inerrancy of Scripture.” But it is well to remember that all our formulations of Christian truth must ultimately conform not to some preset statement but to the Scriptures, all parts of which are divinely inspired. Thus, sloganeering can never be a substitute for the careful, patient analysis of what God’s Word teaches, including what it teaches about itself.

What I Believe

A conviction.

The inerrant lowers the view of Scripture

While science and Scripture can work together, the Scripture should not be subject to scientific scrutiny. Not it’s purpose.

Because words have meaning, and the meaning of inerrancy is so subjective, I wonder if it’s necessary.

However, we’re committed to it and a definition of it. It is one I

What is being sought and the implications of claiming precision

Certainty. Proof. Defense against deniers.

Bunker and weapon

Litmus test

We spend our time resolving issues more than seeking how to live the truth.

What I Believe

A conviction.

While science and Scripture can work together, the Scripture should not be subject to scientific scrutiny. Not it’s purpose.

Because words have meaning, the original definition of precision limits its authority and power. It leads to a lower view of scripture.

New definitions and the meanings of inerrancy is so subjective, I wonder if it’s necessary.

However, we’re committed to it and a theological definition. I am in agreement with The EFCER definition.

This is what I said last week: INERRANCY in all it affirms (truth of God revealed and recorded in the scriptures).

Imprecise by God’s sovereign design.

So we continue to seek, grow in trust, maturity.

We spend our time resolving issues more than seeking how to live the truth

[SLIDE 7] What Now?

The resolution of issues and the work we do to interpret themselves say

If you aren’t yet ready to let go of your conviction: Hold it with grace and humility.

Won’t this open the door for doubt?

Hold it with grace and humility

Allow for difference of conviction.

Justin Taylor, The Gospel Coalition

A technical word. Precision. Math, science.

6+5=10. Error.

Scientist makes a measurement varying by .00004 cm of an actual length, he may say that is an error as in margin of error.

Outside of math and science. Age? How old on your most recent birthday. Is imprecise. Is it an error?

How many pages is the book? 400 but it is actually 385. Error? What about if that book was one to be published? Error?

How many pages is the book? 400 but it is actually 385. Error? What about if that book was one to be published? Error?

Identifying an error requires we have to understand the context.

Scripture is primarily ordinary language, not technical language. God intends to speak to everyone. Through human writers, he used the language we use to communicate: imprecisions, metaphors, parables, etc. While not precise scientifically or mathematically, they convey truth.

The bible is true, not as precise as some want it to be.

Frame: Inerrancy - the bible makes good on its claims.