3 Authority and Inerrancy of the Bible

Some corners of the church treat the Bible disrespectfully. It is no longer authoritative or inerrant They themselves have become the ultimate authority, not God’s word. But Christians who believe in the inspiration of Scripture see it as authoritative and inerrant.

Let’s begin.

I.. Introduction

A.. Historical view

The history of the church teaches me that the church fathers believed in inerrancy. For a quick overview, please watch this video by the Gospel Coalition, a Reformed organization.

The Doctrine of Inerrancy Is a Hill to Die On – Wes Huff

Jesus himself believed in inerrancy, so says the link. I agree. This is not to say there are no puzzles in the Bible, but the idea is that God’s word is trustworthy because God is trustworthy, and he inspired the Bible.

However, we don’t need to make our view of scripture so rigid that it becomes unrealistic. We need to strike a balance between what inerrancy actually looks like and what it does not. Let’s learn as we go.

B. Different views

All Renewalists have a range of beliefs about the Bible. Some insist on its inerrancy and / or infallibility in some categories, like doctrine and practice. Some insist on total inerrancy even in historical and cultural data and doctrinal areas. Some say the inspiration and infallibility of Scripture is wide open and let’s not impose foreign categories on a library of books (the Bible is a library). Others say all of Scripture is inerrant and infallible in all areas, even down to the very syllables.

To understand the trends, we need an historical perspective on the battle for the Bible, since the 1970s. I write from a Renewal perspective.

C.. The purpose of this post

Let’s explore and come to a consensus, if we can, so we can be confident that the word of God is reliable, accurate, authoritative, and inerrant.

II.. Different Viewpoints about the Bible and inerrancy

A.. Brief intro

From my limited perspective, let’s look at eight Statements of Faith about Scripture and the battle of the Bible.

B.. Ligonier Statement

Seven theologians, none leaders in the Renewal Movements (as far as I know), held a conference on the Bible’s inerrancy in 1973. The outcome was the book God’s Inerrant Word, edited by John Warwick Montgomery. The seven contributors to the book signed a statement called the Ligonier Statement, presumably after the town where they met in Pennsylvania, as follows:

We believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the inspired and inerrant Word of God. We hold the Bible, as originally given through the agents of revelation, to be infallible and see this as a crucial article of faith with implications for the entire life and practice of all Christian people. With the great fathers of Christian history, we declare our confidence in the total trustworthiness of Scriptures, urging that any view that imputes to them a lesser degree of inerrancy than total, is in conflict with the Bible’s self-testimony in general and with the teachings of Jesus Christ in particular. Out of obedience to the Lord of the Church we submit ourselves unreservedly to his authoritative view of Holy Writ.

Signed,

John M. Frame, John H. Gerstner, Peter R. Jones, John Warwick Montgomery, James I. Packer, Clark H. Pinnock, R. C. Sproul (emphasis added)

The key word is total. Using inerrant and infallible, it is a very robust statement and requires us to believe that the Bible is inerrant and infallible in all matters, in every single details about history and science. None of these men were biblical exegetes. If they were, they may have reached more relaxed conclusions.

C.. J. Rodman Williams

Renewal theologian and Presbyterian Minister J. Rodman William, who was the founding president and taught systematic theology at Melodyland School of Theology (MST) from 1972 to 1982, when he moved to Regent School of Divinity in Virginia Beach (he retired in 2001 and died in 2008). He knew John Warwick Montgomery and surely knew about the new book referenced in the previous point. Williams wrote a three-volume systematic theology called Renewal Theology from a charismatic point of view, totaling over 1300 pages. In all of those pages he does not have one chapter or even one section of a chapter, defending or explaining the total inerrancy or infallibility of the Bible, though he does say it is infallible and trustworthy (see particularly vol. 1, pp. 22-25).

True, he deeply respected it throughout those pages and referred to and quoted it often and believed all Scripture is “God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16), but apparently he did not see the need or the social pressure to insist on total inerrancy and infallibility.

D.. Battle for the Bible

This section does not offer a statement of faith, but this step is very important, nonetheless. Harold Lindsell served as editor of Christianity Today and before then taught at Columbia International University, Northern Baptist Seminary, Wheaton College, and Fuller Seminary, where he served as Dean and Vice President.

In 1976 he wrote a seminal book, The Battle for the Bible: Defending the Inerrancy of Scripture. In a parade of horribles, he sketched out various church denominations that left inerrancy behind and then allowed in all sorts of bad doctrines and immoral practices.

In addition, he wrote appendices harmonizing difficult passages in the four Gospels. One of them insisted that Peter denied Jesus six times (instead of three). The book became a laughingstock, even before the worldwide web existed. Far from helping churches to embrace total inerrancy and infallibility, they chuckled and moved forward without the total requirement. In the 2008 reissue of the book, the editors omitted the appendices.

E.. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978)

The 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy

The Chicago Statement on Inerrancy was issued in 1978, in which Prof. Montgomery was also involved. Most of its signatories were not leaders in the Renewal Movement at the time (as far as I can tell). Article XII serves as an example of the spirit of the long statement:

We deny that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood.

The Bible’s teaching about creation and the flood and science generally needs much more clarification for that article to be sustained.

Further, the Statement is very strict. Three hundred evangelical scholars signed the document. But of the notable signatories (named in the Statement) only one was a biblical exegete. The others were theologians. A large team of biblical exegetes would have probably loosened the strict conclusions because they dig into the biblical text and see it as it is. They use the inductive method (a posteriori). Those theologians clearly used the deductive method based on certain theological premises (a priori). One example: In Article XV (15), they deny accommodation to the biblical authors’ culture.

However, see this link for why accommodationism is necessary to clarify Scripture, with lots of examples.

Interpreting the Bible and Accommodation

F.. Vineyard USA

The Vineyard USA is a consortium of churches that began in the late 1970s. Therefore it belongs to the Neo-Charismatic Renewal Movement. Vineyard USA says this about the Bible in its statement of faith from a kingdom-of-God perspective, as follows:

We believe that the Holy Spirit inspired the human authors of Holy Scripture so that the Bible is without error in the original manuscripts. We receive the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments as our final, absolute authority, the only infallible rule of faith and practice.

The statement includes the words without error and infallible, but not total. Belief in the inerrancy of the no-longer existing, original manuscripts reflect the American context. The Vineyard had run into severe (and unjust) criticism in the early 1990s, leveled by harsh fundamentalists and restrictive theologians, so the Vineyard leaders had to engage more academic members to reply to the charges (I was there, but just a bystander). No doubt that distasteful interaction influenced the wording in their very cautious statement or influenced its approval by Vineyard leaders.

The Forward of Vineyard’s Core Values and Beliefs amplifies the statement, endorsing the creeds of the first four hundred years and highlighting “all matters of faith and practice”:

The Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and practice. However, since the Bible is a diverse collection of narrative stories, poetry, law, and letters, it is helpful to summarize its teaching in a concise form that can be comprehended by both those deeply rooted in the church and those who have little exposure to the Bible. This is the historical function that the ancient universal church creeds played in the first four hundred years of Christ-centered faith.

That above statement seems generous and open-minded, without insisting on total inerrancy and infallibility.

G.. The World Assembly of God Fellowship’s Statement of Faith.

It reads:

We believe that the Scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments, are verbally inspired of God and are the revelation of God to man, the infallible and authoritative rule of faith and conduct. Divine inspiration extends equally and fully to all parts of the original writings, insuring their entire trustworthiness (1 Tim. 3:15-17; 2 Peter 1:21).

That article is awfully close to total inerrancy and infallibility: “fully.”

H.. Regent School of Divinity

It was part of CBN University, founded in 1977. The name was changed to Regent University in 1990. The School of Divinity’s statement of faith about Scripture reads:

That the Holy Bible is the inspired, infallible and authoritative source of Christian doctrine and precept.

That statement is short and omits any discussion or demand for total inerrancy and infallibility in history and science, but Scripture is infallible in matters relating to doctrine and Christian life.

I.. Southern California College / Vanguard University of Southern California

We again go back in time. In the 1980s, Southern California College, now known as Vanguard University of Southern California, and affiliated with the Assemblies of God, a Pentecostal denomination, went through its own debate over inerrancy. The religion faculty rejected the strict and total inerrancy requirement. (I was there also, but as a bystander.) Today, here is the school’s statement about Scripture:

We believe the Bible to be the inspired and only infallible and authoritative Word of God.

So neither does it include total inerrancy and infallibility.

J.. Summary

The unnecessary and disruptive controversy happened mostly here in America (as far as I know).

In those listed examples Renewal churches tend to be much more “relaxed” about total inerrancy and infallibility, while conservative theologians tend to be more restrictive and insistent.

III.. Reasonable Statement about Scripture

A.. Statement

Building on those diverse Statements of Faith about Scripture in the previous section, this one seems reasonable (to me at least):

The Bible is God’s word, inspired by the Spirit, culturally and historically reliable and accurate, and the only inerrant and authoritative rule of faith, doctrine, precept, and practice.

B.. Exposition

That is a fair statement of the Bible’s overarching themes and purposes, after the collation and sifting through the manuscripts that we hold in our hands today, without depending or focusing on the no-longer existing autograph manuscripts. The descriptors “culturally and historically reliable and accurate” come from the evidence outside of the Bible and confirms it (e.g. Jerusalem really is located in the South, and Galilee in the North; and Assyria and Babylon really conquered ancient Israel and Judea, respectively). This phrasing is therefore based on induction, not deduction.

On the other hand, the descriptors “inspired by the Spirit” and “inerrant and authoritative rule” are deductive or comes from the Scriptures’ self-testimony. The Scriptures are “God breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16). Jesus taught that the Holy Spirit inspired the Psalms and Psalmist (Matt. 22:43; Mark 12:36). The apostolic community also affirmed the Spirit spoke through the Psalmist (Acts 1:16; 4:25-26). Paul believed the Holy Spirit spoke through the prophet Isaiah (Acts 28:25-27). Jesus said the Scriptures cannot be broken or set aside (John 10:35). He gave a long Bible lesson to his disciples, after his resurrection because he believed the Old Testament was authoritative and inspired (Luke 24:27; 44-47).

Then a transition was taking shape. The earliest church listened and devoted themselves to apostolic teaching as if it were Scripture (Acts 2:42). The Greek word for devoted implies that they considered their teaching to be authoritative, particularly since the twelve spent time with Jesus from the beginning (Acts 1:22). Luke believed—and he was reflecting the belief of the earliest Christians—that Jesus instructed the apostles through the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:2). Thus for the earliest church, Jesus’s words, as eventually recorded in the four Gospels, were inspired by the Spirit, just like the Old Testament writers were. Paul affirmed that his words, which were not based on human wisdom, but were taught through the Spirit, and Spirit-taught words, were authoritative (1 Cor. 1:13). The other teachers, like Apollos or Priscilla and Aquila, did not have the same testimony as Paul did. All in all, the teachings of Jesus and the apostolic community were also Scripture, equivalent to the Old Testament.

If, however, some cultural and historical and scientific details and some verses in Scripture do not match up, then there is no need to reject the Bible. That would be over-reactive and simplistic and brittle. The Bible is not brittle, and neither should our respect for it be brittle.

To explain the second half of the statement, the Spirit inspired the authors of the Bible, so it is an inerrant guide to teach the Church what she needs for faith and practice, for guidance, for moral and personal growth in Christ, and for its basic doctrines: “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16-17). There is nothing in those verses about total inerrancy and infallibility in history and science.

See, for example, this post at my website drjimsebt.com:

13.. Are There Contradictions in the Gospels?

C.. The universality and applicability of the Bible

The Bible, though ancient and emerging out of the ancient Near East, then the Roman empire, and Israel, which was part of the Roman empire, is universal and applicable to the world today.

Second Timothy 3:16-17 is broad enough to include the world. The Bible is a universal and relevant communication to people outside the Church

¹⁶All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, ¹⁷so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16-17)

Since the Bible is God-breathed, the world can also enjoy a salvific and relational knowledge with the Father, in the name of his Son Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit. The Bible speaks with divine clarity and God-backed authority for everyone.

In Acts 2:43, the people “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching.” It was inspired teaching because it was rooted in the Old Testament and Jesus commissioned them. If people devote themselves to it, then we can conclude that it was becoming the church’s Scripture as well. They did not read the Old Testament without the apostolic teaching to guide them, as Peter’s numerous references to it in his sermons in Acts 2, 3, and 4, and then in other teachings by other men of God throughout the book of Acts. Today we have the Scriptures in the four Gospels, Acts, the epistles and even the Revelation, if it is interpreted properly.

IV. Application

A.. Practicing the Bible

Doing what the Scriptures say is more important than certain words in a Statement of Faith. We should actually live Scripture in the power of the Spirit. “Therefore, everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock” (Matt. 7:24). Let me reemphasize: this looks more and more like Jesus’s words are inspired and authoritative and becoming unerring Scripture, even surpassing the Old Testament for the very earliest church. In our day, they are indeed inspired and authoritative and unerring Scripture. Let’s not read the Old Testament without The New Testament.

Putting his words, including the charismata or gifts of the Spirit, into practice explains why the Renewal Movement are the fastest growing sectors in the global church. (And I pray for this to happen for the next great and global revival.)

Christianity Is Fastest Growing Religion in World

Therefore, there is no urgency to insert “total inerrancy” or “total infallibility” in the statement. However, it is no fault if a church decides to insert those words, either.

B.. Scripture alone

Therefore no Christian should regard the Bible lightly, but to see it as still inspired, authoritative, and inerrant for theology doctrine and Christian life and morals. It is highly reliable and accurate on cultural and historical matters. Though an ancient text, it is relevant and applicable to the needs of the world today. And the New Testament should not be unhitched from the Old Testament. Both are authoritative and inerrant, though the Old is incomplete without the New.

We see Scripture as so authoritative and sufficient in itself that for us it is sola scripture (Scripture alone in our churches).

1. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels: Introduction to Series

2. Archaeology and the Synoptic Gospels

3. Archaeology and John’s Gospel

4. Did Jesus Even Exist?

5. The Gospel Traditions

6. Reliable Gospel Transmissions

7. What Is the Q ‘Gospel’?

8. Did Some Disciples Take Notes During Jesus’ Ministry?

9. Authoritative Testimony in Matthew’s Gospel

10. Eyewitness Testimony in Mark’s Gospel

11. Eyewitness Testimony in Luke’s Gospel