Summary: The Inerrancy Of Scripture
The Inerrancy of Scripture
Over the past 100 years theologians have critically debated the inerrancy of the Bible. Scholars such as J.I. Packer, Calvin, Hannah, and Grudem make a strong case for the historical assertion of Biblical inerrancy. They refute the elements of criticisms with a case for the substantiation of the inerrancy of the Holy Script.
One must begin with the definition of inerrancy. Grudem defines biblical inerrancy as: the inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact (Grudem, 90). To make simple this definition is to define inerrancy as the Bible always tells the truth and it tells the truth concerning everything it talks about (Grudem, …show more content…
91). This does not imply that it tells the comprehensive nature of every truth, but what it says is true.
The word inerrancy has a long history in Roman Catholic theological vocabulary but has taken the forefront in the American Protestant usage for over the past 100 years (Hannah, 144). The previous term for attributing the truthfulness of the Scripture was infallibility, but when Presbyterians began to reduce the accounts of infallibility, those who wanted to uphold the trustworthiness of the Bible began to utilize the language of inerrancy (Hannah, 144).
The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy makes the following distinction: 'Infallible signifies the quality of neither misleading not being mislead and so safeguards in categorical terms the truth that Holy Scripture is a sure, safe, and reliable rule and guide in all matters. Similarly, inerrancy signifies the quality of being free from all falsehood or mistake and so safeguards the truth that Holy Scripture is entirely true and trustworthy in all its assertions '(Packer, 146).
Bannerman argues that the early church fathers understood that the Scriptures were inerrant as he states, “the opinion of the early Christian Church as to the inspired Scripture did not differ from that of its Jewish contemporaries. From the time of Christ downwards and for centuries afterwards, there was hardly any difference of opinion as to the infallibility of the Bible” (Hannah, 23).
The author of Acts response in chapter 24:14 that he (Paul) worships, “believing everything laid down by the law or written in the prophets.” As we look at the work of the New Testament in its entirety, the writers without fail are willing to depend on every detail of the Old Testament as true and appeal to it with certainty and confidence. Clement of Rome claimed that the Scriptures were errorless. Justin Martyr, also an early church father, explains that the Scriptures contain no conflicting or contradictory information. (Hannah, 23)
Continuing the historical case of the inerrancy of the Divine Scriptures Irenaeus states, “…being most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of the God and His Spirit; but we, inasmuch as we are inferior to, and later in existence than, the Word of God and His Spirit, are on that very account destitute of the knowledge of His mysteries” (Hannah, 24). The early churchmen evidenced by in theory and in practice the conviction that the Scriptures were written by and therefore were the inerrant Word of God.
Authority of the Bible
All the words in the Bible are indeed God’s breathed words (2 Timothy 3:16). Jesus ' own view of the Old Testament is that it is the 'word of God ' (Mark 7:6-13). He equated his own human words with the word of God (John 8:28; 17:8), and his disciple’s words were to be his words (Luke 10:16; Matt 10:40). In fact, the disciples had no restraint in claiming their words were the Holy Spirit 's words (Acts 5:32; 15:28).
The Old Testament was seen as divinely inspired and authoritative through its Jewish tradition and was believed to be true not only by the writers of the New Testament but also by Christ himself. Christ demonstrates his complete confidence in the historical accuracy of the Old Testament as he acknowledged that Adam and Eve were indeed created by God and not representative of humankind and that acted in specific ways (Matthew 19:3-5, Mark 10:6-8) (Ryrie, 78). Jesus Christ also verified the events connected to Noah and the flood; specifically that there was an ark and that the Flood destroyed everyone outside of the ark (Matt. 24:38-39; Luke 17:26-27). Our Lord also accepted as a true story of Jonah and the great fish (Matt. 12:40). From Christ authentication of these stories we can affirm them as factual historical events and to be completely trusted. Many of the criticisms of the inerrancy of the Bible specifically in the Old Testament include the creation, the flood, and Jonah and the large fish. (Ryrie, 78)
To disbelieve or to disobey in of the words of the bible are to disbelieve in or disobey God (Grudem, 90). God in his holy, perfect nature cannot lie (2 Sam 7:28, Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18). Numerous times the Bible itself gives claims to being completely true and with error in any part (Num. 23:19, Ps. 12:6, 119:89, Prov. 30:5; Matt. 24:35). John Calvin demonstrates how God 's integrity for speaking the truth entails the truthfulness of the Scriptures: 'And it is not even enough to believe that God is trustworthy (Romans 3:3), who can neither deceive nor lie (Titus 1:2), unless you hold to be beyond doubt that whatever precedes from him is sacred and inviolable truth ' (Calvin, III.ii.6, 549).God’s assertion that he cannot lie transfers into his character being imputed into his Holy Scriptures. God’s Word by its on declaration, the very character of God, and through the affirmation of Incarnate Christ all testify the Bible is validity is certain, therefore inerrant.
Human authorship and factual criticisms
The content of the Scriptures admittedly uses approximations, loose or free quotes, and language of appearances. This in and of itself does nullify the truthfulness of the statements.
The usage of approximation is often used throughout the Bible. Frequently, the use approximation of numbers becomes a consideration as a reporter may state in a report that 19,000 men where in the army. It would be accurate for a reporter to say 19,000 were in attendance instead of 18,978; the limits of truthfulness would depend on the degree of precision implied by the speaker and expected by the original readers (Grudem, 91).
Measurements would also be another example of approximation. To say that it is about 1 mile to my house or my house is 1.2345 miles to my house. Both are true statements as they both are approximations of distance relative to knowledge and precision. Vague statements do not make a saying errant: there is nothing about a mere summary that is untrue(Grudem, 91).
Addressing the issue of loose or free quotation. The methodology of the current American system is to quote the exact words or a speaker or author. In other cultures this is not the standard, as an indirect quotation tells in summary what a person says and carries the true meaning of what was said, albeit not the exact words. In New Testament Greek there are no quotation marks or equivalent, therefore for a quote to be true it must correctly carry the content of what was said (Grudem, 92).
It is consistent with inerrancy to have unusual or uncommon grammatical construction (Grudem, 92). Some of the language of the bible is extremely eloquent and stylistic while yet other authors use everyday language spoken by common people giving great contrast. There are rules of speech that are ignored by different subsets of culture that are complete understood and preferred in communication. The important part is that it is accurate and truthful in its presentation to its intended original audience (Grudem, 92).
Opposition to Inerrancy
One of the most common objections raised about the inerrancy of the Bible is the premise that Scripture was written to teach us in areas that concern “faith and practice” only (Grudem, 93).
“The bible is infallible, as I define the term, but not inerrant. That is there are historical and scientific errors in the Bible, none of the matters of faith and practice” (Davis, 115). This statement explicitly limits the scope of the bible to the practice of religious faith and ethical conduct (Grudem, 93). The bible answers this objection with passages that state that all of Scripture is profitable for us (2 Tim. 3:16), that it is completely pure (Ps. 12:16), perfect (Ps. 119:96), and true (Prov. 30:5). The bible places no self-restraints on the area of which it truth (Grudem, …show more content…
93).
An example of a problem text in the New Testament that illustrates this point is Matthew 13:32 where Christ said that the mustard seed was the smallest of all seeds. Botanically there are seeds that are smaller than the mustard seed, such as the rue or poppy seed. If we concluded that Christ told a lie then he would not have lived a sinless life. However, it is logical that Christ is using a popular language of the day to make his point. Small as a grain of a mustard seed was a proverbial expression among the Jews from something extremely small (Ryrie, 95). Another bible usage of this phrase if found in Luke 17:6.
The difference between popular and technical language is a source of criticism. “At sunset, Isaac went out to meditate” (Gen. 24:63) does not mean that the Bible teaches the Ptolemaic astronomy. It is not teaching that the sun rotates about the earth so that there is a literal “sunset.” This was and still is a common way of speaking everyday language and does not particularly reflect the thinking of those who use such language. If the Bible were to state this phrase in scientific rhetoric it could read such as: when the rotation of the solar luminary on its axis was such that its rays impinged horizontally on the retina, Isaac went out to meditate (Gerstner, section 7). It is also safe to say that no one in Sunset, TX believes that the sun ever sets.
Another objection is that the term inerrancy is a poor term. The concept behind this statement is that inerrancy implies itself to be too precise and it connotes scientific precision that should not be claimed by Scripture. To this objection we must take into account the description of non-biblical terms to describe biblical attributes. For instance, trinity is never used in the bible as well as many other terms, including inerrancy. It is difficult to have a discussion about the truthfulness of the bible without the term inerrant. (Grudem, 95)
A third objection to inerrancy is that we do not possess inerrant manuscripts and therefore to talk about Scripture as being inerrant is misleading. This simply means that we do not have the original writings of authors such as Moses or David, but merely copies of copies. Since we do not have the truly original text therefore the must be disqualified from being inerrant since they were copied by human hands. In response to this objection, we perspicuously know what 99 percent of the original text said (Grudem, 97). On the minor textual variants where the ancient manuscripts have different words we can easily derive the clear intended meaning for the vast majority. The study of textual variants is important, however the variants have not left us confused by the meaning of the text. If there are mistakes in words there are attributed to the hands of men upon copying the text. If we say that the originals contained mistakes we are force to admit that the God himself made a mistake and spoke falsely (Grudem, 97).
A fourth objection to the claim of the inerrancy of Scripture is that biblical writer’s accommodated their messages in minor details and false ideas and taught them incidentally (Grudem, 97). This objection is based off the argument that in the times of biblical writers they had to adjust their message to elude historical facts and false scientific information to communication effectively with their audience. This argument is met with the rebuttal that God is well versed in human languages and is perfectly capable of communicating with compromising facts. God is Lord of all and this includes our languages. Secondly, accommodating his message that includes falsehoods is against the very nature of the Divine. God does not lie (Numbers 23:19, Titus 1:2, and Heb. 6:18). God is gracious to speak at our level and with our words; however, he does not need to compromise his messages to distort his truth to us. Paul tells us in Ephesians that we are to imitate God and to “put away falsehood, and to speak the truth to one another.” (Grudem, 97)
Problems with Denying Inerrancy
If we deny the inerrancy of the Bible we must face significant problems that will be briefly outlined. The denial of the inerrancy of the Bible places us in a moral conundrum. If we are to imitate God and if his word is false in the small details we therefore are permitted to speak falsely in small issues. This begins the slippery slope of granting us permission to tell little white lies (Grudem, 100). If God is willing to adjust the truth then we can lie to our wives, children, and employers to get us out of messy situations. A moralistic standard is lost and the functionality of the faith would resemble that of a hedonistic or anarchical culture.
If we deny the inerrancy of the Scriptures we cannot trust God in anything.
If we find that the Bible to hold false statements we like a teenager have learned that our Father is not perfect and capable of not telling us falsehoods. A breach of trust and authenticity is lost leaving us in a position to dismiss the portions of scripture that we so choose, on the deduction that this too could be false (Grudem, 100). A subjective standard would allow us to set up lines in that sand that would continually be erased and redrawn based upon popular thought and whims. The Scriptures demand a standard that is trustworthy and
unchangeable.
Similarly, if we deny the inerrancy of the Scriptures we are able to dismiss not only the small details that we find false but also the doctrines in which are taught from the Word (Grudem, 100). Removing the cornerstone of the dogmas in which we believe to be true would cause the structure of Christianity to fall like a house of cards. God being immutable in His Word and the doctrines derived from it are critical to our faith.
Finally, if we deny the inerrancy we then are able to superseded God’s standard. We become the judge and jury on what is truth. This becomes a very subjective standard in which the lines are blurred and constantly change as we move the variables around to suit our preferences (Grudem, 100). Being creatures with self-acknowledged limits in capacity and knowledge how can one claim to know more than the creator. The created trying to overrule the Creator is the heart of idolatry.
In conclusion, the Bible is in fact inerrant. Throughout the ages, faithful prophets, apostles, early church fathers, modern theologians, and Christ himself have placed complete confidence in the inerrancy of the Holy Script. The debate on the inerrancy of the Holy Script has heightened around scientific findings, modern day standards, lack of original manuscripts, and faulty thinking. There are clear and biblical responses to these objections. Clearly, without biblical inerrancy Christianity substantially looses credibility and therefore viability.
Bibliography
Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion.Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. 2 vols. Library of Christian Classics 20-21. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960 [1559].
Davis, Stephen T., The Debate about the Bible Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977, pg. 155
Gerstner, John H.Biblical Inerrancy: Part III - Some Unsound Bases for Sound Doctrine.http://www.the-highway.com/inerrancy3_Gerstner.html#Part, pg 7.
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology.Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1994, pg. 90-91, 95, 97,100.
Hannah, John D., Inerrancy and The Church. Edited by John D. Hannah. Moody Press, Chicago, 1984, pg. 23, 24, 144.
Packer, J.I. God has Spoken. Hodder Christian Essentials. London: Hodder& Stoughton, 1979, pg 146.
Ryrie, Charles C. What You Should Know About Inerrancy.Moody Press, Chicago, 1981, pg. 78, 95.
Over the past 100 years theologians have critically debated the inerrancy of the Bible. Scholars such as J.I. Packer, Calvin, Hannah, and Grudem make a strong case for the historical assertion of Biblical inerrancy. They refute the elements of criticisms with a case for the substantiation of the inerrancy of the Holy Script.
One must begin with the definition of inerrancy. Grudem defines biblical inerrancy as: the inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact (Grudem, 90). To make simple this definition is to define inerrancy as the Bible always tells the truth and it tells the truth concerning everything it talks about (Grudem, …show more content…
91). This does not imply that it tells the comprehensive nature of every truth, but what it says is true.
The word inerrancy has a long history in Roman Catholic theological vocabulary but has taken the forefront in the American Protestant usage for over the past 100 years (Hannah, 144). The previous term for attributing the truthfulness of the Scripture was infallibility, but when Presbyterians began to reduce the accounts of infallibility, those who wanted to uphold the trustworthiness of the Bible began to utilize the language of inerrancy (Hannah, 144).
The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy makes the following distinction: 'Infallible signifies the quality of neither misleading not being mislead and so safeguards in categorical terms the truth that Holy Scripture is a sure, safe, and reliable rule and guide in all matters. Similarly, inerrancy signifies the quality of being free from all falsehood or mistake and so safeguards the truth that Holy Scripture is entirely true and trustworthy in all its assertions '(Packer, 146).
Bannerman argues that the early church fathers understood that the Scriptures were inerrant as he states, “the opinion of the early Christian Church as to the inspired Scripture did not differ from that of its Jewish contemporaries. From the time of Christ downwards and for centuries afterwards, there was hardly any difference of opinion as to the infallibility of the Bible” (Hannah, 23).
The author of Acts response in chapter 24:14 that he (Paul) worships, “believing everything laid down by the law or written in the prophets.” As we look at the work of the New Testament in its entirety, the writers without fail are willing to depend on every detail of the Old Testament as true and appeal to it with certainty and confidence. Clement of Rome claimed that the Scriptures were errorless. Justin Martyr, also an early church father, explains that the Scriptures contain no conflicting or contradictory information. (Hannah, 23)
Continuing the historical case of the inerrancy of the Divine Scriptures Irenaeus states, “…being most properly assured that the Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of the God and His Spirit; but we, inasmuch as we are inferior to, and later in existence than, the Word of God and His Spirit, are on that very account destitute of the knowledge of His mysteries” (Hannah, 24). The early churchmen evidenced by in theory and in practice the conviction that the Scriptures were written by and therefore were the inerrant Word of God.
Authority of the Bible
All the words in the Bible are indeed God’s breathed words (2 Timothy 3:16). Jesus ' own view of the Old Testament is that it is the 'word of God ' (Mark 7:6-13). He equated his own human words with the word of God (John 8:28; 17:8), and his disciple’s words were to be his words (Luke 10:16; Matt 10:40). In fact, the disciples had no restraint in claiming their words were the Holy Spirit 's words (Acts 5:32; 15:28).
The Old Testament was seen as divinely inspired and authoritative through its Jewish tradition and was believed to be true not only by the writers of the New Testament but also by Christ himself. Christ demonstrates his complete confidence in the historical accuracy of the Old Testament as he acknowledged that Adam and Eve were indeed created by God and not representative of humankind and that acted in specific ways (Matthew 19:3-5, Mark 10:6-8) (Ryrie, 78). Jesus Christ also verified the events connected to Noah and the flood; specifically that there was an ark and that the Flood destroyed everyone outside of the ark (Matt. 24:38-39; Luke 17:26-27). Our Lord also accepted as a true story of Jonah and the great fish (Matt. 12:40). From Christ authentication of these stories we can affirm them as factual historical events and to be completely trusted. Many of the criticisms of the inerrancy of the Bible specifically in the Old Testament include the creation, the flood, and Jonah and the large fish. (Ryrie, 78)
To disbelieve or to disobey in of the words of the bible are to disbelieve in or disobey God (Grudem, 90). God in his holy, perfect nature cannot lie (2 Sam 7:28, Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18). Numerous times the Bible itself gives claims to being completely true and with error in any part (Num. 23:19, Ps. 12:6, 119:89, Prov. 30:5; Matt. 24:35). John Calvin demonstrates how God 's integrity for speaking the truth entails the truthfulness of the Scriptures: 'And it is not even enough to believe that God is trustworthy (Romans 3:3), who can neither deceive nor lie (Titus 1:2), unless you hold to be beyond doubt that whatever precedes from him is sacred and inviolable truth ' (Calvin, III.ii.6, 549).God’s assertion that he cannot lie transfers into his character being imputed into his Holy Scriptures. God’s Word by its on declaration, the very character of God, and through the affirmation of Incarnate Christ all testify the Bible is validity is certain, therefore inerrant.
Human authorship and factual criticisms
The content of the Scriptures admittedly uses approximations, loose or free quotes, and language of appearances. This in and of itself does nullify the truthfulness of the statements.
The usage of approximation is often used throughout the Bible. Frequently, the use approximation of numbers becomes a consideration as a reporter may state in a report that 19,000 men where in the army. It would be accurate for a reporter to say 19,000 were in attendance instead of 18,978; the limits of truthfulness would depend on the degree of precision implied by the speaker and expected by the original readers (Grudem, 91).
Measurements would also be another example of approximation. To say that it is about 1 mile to my house or my house is 1.2345 miles to my house. Both are true statements as they both are approximations of distance relative to knowledge and precision. Vague statements do not make a saying errant: there is nothing about a mere summary that is untrue(Grudem, 91).
Addressing the issue of loose or free quotation. The methodology of the current American system is to quote the exact words or a speaker or author. In other cultures this is not the standard, as an indirect quotation tells in summary what a person says and carries the true meaning of what was said, albeit not the exact words. In New Testament Greek there are no quotation marks or equivalent, therefore for a quote to be true it must correctly carry the content of what was said (Grudem, 92).
It is consistent with inerrancy to have unusual or uncommon grammatical construction (Grudem, 92). Some of the language of the bible is extremely eloquent and stylistic while yet other authors use everyday language spoken by common people giving great contrast. There are rules of speech that are ignored by different subsets of culture that are complete understood and preferred in communication. The important part is that it is accurate and truthful in its presentation to its intended original audience (Grudem, 92).
Opposition to Inerrancy
One of the most common objections raised about the inerrancy of the Bible is the premise that Scripture was written to teach us in areas that concern “faith and practice” only (Grudem, 93).
“The bible is infallible, as I define the term, but not inerrant. That is there are historical and scientific errors in the Bible, none of the matters of faith and practice” (Davis, 115). This statement explicitly limits the scope of the bible to the practice of religious faith and ethical conduct (Grudem, 93). The bible answers this objection with passages that state that all of Scripture is profitable for us (2 Tim. 3:16), that it is completely pure (Ps. 12:16), perfect (Ps. 119:96), and true (Prov. 30:5). The bible places no self-restraints on the area of which it truth (Grudem, …show more content…
93).
An example of a problem text in the New Testament that illustrates this point is Matthew 13:32 where Christ said that the mustard seed was the smallest of all seeds. Botanically there are seeds that are smaller than the mustard seed, such as the rue or poppy seed. If we concluded that Christ told a lie then he would not have lived a sinless life. However, it is logical that Christ is using a popular language of the day to make his point. Small as a grain of a mustard seed was a proverbial expression among the Jews from something extremely small (Ryrie, 95). Another bible usage of this phrase if found in Luke 17:6.
The difference between popular and technical language is a source of criticism. “At sunset, Isaac went out to meditate” (Gen. 24:63) does not mean that the Bible teaches the Ptolemaic astronomy. It is not teaching that the sun rotates about the earth so that there is a literal “sunset.” This was and still is a common way of speaking everyday language and does not particularly reflect the thinking of those who use such language. If the Bible were to state this phrase in scientific rhetoric it could read such as: when the rotation of the solar luminary on its axis was such that its rays impinged horizontally on the retina, Isaac went out to meditate (Gerstner, section 7). It is also safe to say that no one in Sunset, TX believes that the sun ever sets.
Another objection is that the term inerrancy is a poor term. The concept behind this statement is that inerrancy implies itself to be too precise and it connotes scientific precision that should not be claimed by Scripture. To this objection we must take into account the description of non-biblical terms to describe biblical attributes. For instance, trinity is never used in the bible as well as many other terms, including inerrancy. It is difficult to have a discussion about the truthfulness of the bible without the term inerrant. (Grudem, 95)
A third objection to inerrancy is that we do not possess inerrant manuscripts and therefore to talk about Scripture as being inerrant is misleading. This simply means that we do not have the original writings of authors such as Moses or David, but merely copies of copies. Since we do not have the truly original text therefore the must be disqualified from being inerrant since they were copied by human hands. In response to this objection, we perspicuously know what 99 percent of the original text said (Grudem, 97). On the minor textual variants where the ancient manuscripts have different words we can easily derive the clear intended meaning for the vast majority. The study of textual variants is important, however the variants have not left us confused by the meaning of the text. If there are mistakes in words there are attributed to the hands of men upon copying the text. If we say that the originals contained mistakes we are force to admit that the God himself made a mistake and spoke falsely (Grudem, 97).
A fourth objection to the claim of the inerrancy of Scripture is that biblical writer’s accommodated their messages in minor details and false ideas and taught them incidentally (Grudem, 97). This objection is based off the argument that in the times of biblical writers they had to adjust their message to elude historical facts and false scientific information to communication effectively with their audience. This argument is met with the rebuttal that God is well versed in human languages and is perfectly capable of communicating with compromising facts. God is Lord of all and this includes our languages. Secondly, accommodating his message that includes falsehoods is against the very nature of the Divine. God does not lie (Numbers 23:19, Titus 1:2, and Heb. 6:18). God is gracious to speak at our level and with our words; however, he does not need to compromise his messages to distort his truth to us. Paul tells us in Ephesians that we are to imitate God and to “put away falsehood, and to speak the truth to one another.” (Grudem, 97)
Problems with Denying Inerrancy
If we deny the inerrancy of the Bible we must face significant problems that will be briefly outlined. The denial of the inerrancy of the Bible places us in a moral conundrum. If we are to imitate God and if his word is false in the small details we therefore are permitted to speak falsely in small issues. This begins the slippery slope of granting us permission to tell little white lies (Grudem, 100). If God is willing to adjust the truth then we can lie to our wives, children, and employers to get us out of messy situations. A moralistic standard is lost and the functionality of the faith would resemble that of a hedonistic or anarchical culture.
If we deny the inerrancy of the Scriptures we cannot trust God in anything.
If we find that the Bible to hold false statements we like a teenager have learned that our Father is not perfect and capable of not telling us falsehoods. A breach of trust and authenticity is lost leaving us in a position to dismiss the portions of scripture that we so choose, on the deduction that this too could be false (Grudem, 100). A subjective standard would allow us to set up lines in that sand that would continually be erased and redrawn based upon popular thought and whims. The Scriptures demand a standard that is trustworthy and
unchangeable.
Similarly, if we deny the inerrancy of the Scriptures we are able to dismiss not only the small details that we find false but also the doctrines in which are taught from the Word (Grudem, 100). Removing the cornerstone of the dogmas in which we believe to be true would cause the structure of Christianity to fall like a house of cards. God being immutable in His Word and the doctrines derived from it are critical to our faith.
Finally, if we deny the inerrancy we then are able to superseded God’s standard. We become the judge and jury on what is truth. This becomes a very subjective standard in which the lines are blurred and constantly change as we move the variables around to suit our preferences (Grudem, 100). Being creatures with self-acknowledged limits in capacity and knowledge how can one claim to know more than the creator. The created trying to overrule the Creator is the heart of idolatry.
In conclusion, the Bible is in fact inerrant. Throughout the ages, faithful prophets, apostles, early church fathers, modern theologians, and Christ himself have placed complete confidence in the inerrancy of the Holy Script. The debate on the inerrancy of the Holy Script has heightened around scientific findings, modern day standards, lack of original manuscripts, and faulty thinking. There are clear and biblical responses to these objections. Clearly, without biblical inerrancy Christianity substantially looses credibility and therefore viability.
Bibliography
Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion.Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. 2 vols. Library of Christian Classics 20-21. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960 [1559].
Davis, Stephen T., The Debate about the Bible Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977, pg. 155
Gerstner, John H.Biblical Inerrancy: Part III - Some Unsound Bases for Sound Doctrine.http://www.the-highway.com/inerrancy3_Gerstner.html#Part, pg 7.
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology.Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1994, pg. 90-91, 95, 97,100.
Hannah, John D., Inerrancy and The Church. Edited by John D. Hannah. Moody Press, Chicago, 1984, pg. 23, 24, 144.
Packer, J.I. God has Spoken. Hodder Christian Essentials. London: Hodder& Stoughton, 1979, pg 146.
Ryrie, Charles C. What You Should Know About Inerrancy.Moody Press, Chicago, 1981, pg. 78, 95.