Let’s talk about Biblical inerrancy. It’s a relatively recent belief that started in the 1800’s in America. It was a response to advances in science, as well as academics wanting to look at the Bible from historical critical perspectives. In 1978, a bunch of ministers got together and wrote a document they call the Chicago Statement. Here it is:
In my opinion, the foundation of Biblical inerrancy is built on shifting sand. The Chicago Statement says this: “The signatories to the “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy” admit that, “Inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture.”. What they mean is that inspiration can only strictly be applied to the original, first ever written down scriptures. That’s what autographic text means. The very first time scriptures were ever written on anything.
Which no one has. No one at all. The first copy of “the Bible” doesn’t exist. And while we’re at it, which Bible? The 66 books that cover the Protestant canon? The first ever Catholic Bible? Eastern Orthodox or Jewish Scriptures? There are issues with this belief without digging very deep.
Even the Catholic church has enlarged what they teach about Biblical inerrancy. They spent ages teaching that the Bible was 100% without error. Now they have shifted to a stance where inerrancy is only applicable to the things in Scripture necessary to salvation. From the article: “The first view refuses to admit any error at all into the inspired word. The second admits the possibility of historical or scientific error, since these matters are not relevant to salvation.”
It’s also worth knowing that the Jewish faith (which Christianity grew out of) does not consider the Scriptures inerrant. From the wikipedia:
“Judaism: According to H. Chaim Schimmel, Judaism had never promulgated a belief in the literal word of the Hebrew Bible, hence the co-existence of the Oral Torah. The significance of most phrases, their parts, grammar, and occasionally individual words, letters and even pronunciation in the Hebrew Bible are the subject of many rabbinic discussions in the Talmud.”
According to Dr. Doug Potter, there’s a logical way to prove Biblical inerrancy:
“the argument for biblical inerrancy is quite simple:
- God cannot err.
- The Bible is the word of God.
- Therefore, the Bible cannot err.”
That logical equation seems a bit incomplete to me though. Maybe more like this:
1) God doesn’t make mistakes.
2) Humans are fallen and make tons of mistakes.
3) God’s Holy Spirit inspired the writing of the Bible.
4) Most people believe that the writers still maintained their humanity and were not turned into word for word recording devices.
5) Therefore, taking all that into account, the Bible probably has errors in it.
The oddest part of Biblical inerrancy is this: the idea that if the Bible has even one error in it, then there’s no point in using it for faith. If there’s even one error, you can’t trust it at all. Why? Why would you limit yourself like that? Our faith is in a God who defeated sin and death by rising from the grave. But you want to put the Bible (and yourself by extension) in this tiny little box? For what? That serves no purpose at all. We serve a God who loves and delights in us despite all of our errors and mistakes. Surely we can delight in a Scripture with errors also.
Biblical inerrancy is a form of idolatry. People worship the Bible instead of God. Yes, I know the Chicago Statement disavowed that idea in 1978. But in 2013, fundamentalism in America is gaining more power in government than ever. The belief in inerrancy in Scripture is spreading out to them thinking they’re inerrant in thought, belief, and behavior. The fruit that stems from Biblical inerrancy is rotten. God is not at the center of it.
Views: 1
