Is The Bible Inerrant?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by zeek

I think Bible inerrancy may implicitly be one of the "items of the faith" noted in the mission statement. What you're doing is like getting drunk in a Baptist Church.

I am a card-carrying evangelical, and that means that I believe in inerrancy of the Bible.

The problem is with the meaning of inerrancy. As long as there is unambiguous text that says simply one very straightforward thing in clear, unambiguous words, then the proof of inerrancy would be easy. We would see that everything it says is simply true.

But it is not so easy. While there are unambiguous statements, it is not all so clear. That means we have to analyze and interpret. And if we get competing interpretations (which has happened over and over) then who is right.

I believe that scripture is inerrant in terms of its revelation of God. But to arrive at that revelation, there is a lot that could be said with different words or in different ways that would arrive at the same revelation.

What is fully errant is our insistence on over-analysis of the flavors of words used to say otherwise straightforward things. People come and add their overlays and read through their foggy glasses and do stupid things like read "God is spirit" and conclude that it means that God is the Holy Spirit. Or read "became a quickening (life-giving) spirit" and insist that it must mean the Holy Spirit because there is only one spirit.

I know that those are poor examples. But they are germaine to discussions about the LRC. I can go into the counter-argument that "spirit" in both verses is about nature, not a name, therefore those verses do not mean what Lee and Nee say that they mean.

And so many of the outward divisions of Christianity, and even the debates going on within many groups, are much more complex and less obvious than those two.

How does going through this help with the "inerrancy" issue? Maybe it doesn't. But I think that maybe it does. I believe that the things that matter are not mired in those problems. And while there may be a correct answer for many of the disagreements, they mostly do not matter.

But the revelation of God is accurate. The primary directions to the church and to the Christian are accurate. The only problem is the mess that we have made it into.

While not on topic, there is a song on worship that says something like "I'm sorry, Lord, for the thing I've made it, when it's all about you."

Similarly, scripture is inerrant. What is full or error is our interpretation. Is our majoring on the minors. Is the insistence on the optionals. Is emphasizing and deemphasizing based on our preferences.

The end result is that while scripture is inerrant, the fact is almost irrelevant as long as we keep insisting on our erroneous interpretations. It is almost better to insist upon just reading it and letting it speak for itself. Sure. Get some background on the culture, the times, the events that lead to the writing (such as with the Psalms). But ultimately, they should mean what they say, not something else.

(Do not take that last statement as an insistence upon turning metaphors and pictures into literal things.)