inerrancy of bible vs inspired word of god

biblical inerrancy

• doctrine that the bible is without error or fault in all its teaching

• infallible bc god’s word

• many evangelicals believe bible is exact word of god → teachings contained are universal, timeless + unquestionable

• others believe that the bible is the inspired word of god → god provided a divine influence on the prophets so they were able to communicate truth w/o error

theopneustos

• idea that ‘all scripture is god-breathed’ (2 timothy)

• underscores divine origin + authority of bible, suggesting that the scriptures are not merely human writings but instead given through divine inspiration

dictation theory

• This view holds that every word of Scripture is directly dictated by God, making the Bible God’s exact word, word-for-word, without human error or cultural influence.

• traditional view is conservative and objective: that the Holy Spirit directly moved biblical writers to write the words of the Bible. T

• here are clear examples of this in the Bible, such as God speaking either directly through or to a prophet like Moses, or inspiring people via the Holy Spirit.

• Irenaeus claimed that the scriptures are “perfect” because they were “spoken by the Word of God [Christ] and his Spirit”.

• Augustine claimed there are no contradictions or falsehoods affirmed in the Bible, and that believing otherwise would have “disastrous consequences” because that would cast doubt on the entire thing.

pheromenoi

• phrase originates from greek ‘carried along’

• implies prophets were guided by divine influence

• prophecy originates in god, not the prophets

• aligns w theopneustos

diff views of inspiration

• conservative/ objective →attempted to hold on to the traditional view that that Bible was the perfect word of God. These theories are objective, meaning mind-independent. An objective view of inspiration claims that the inspiration for what was written in scripture was independent of the minds of the authors; it came from God.

• literal/ subjective →views of inspiration accept that the writing of the Bible was a human process and thus did not produce the exact word of God, leaving its meaning up for interpretation.

• neo-orthodox → views of inspiration claim that although the Bible is not the exact word of God, it is a miraculous document through which the word of God can be heard

literalism

• Most notably in America, Literalism takes the view that the Bible is literally true.

• Ken Ham is a literalist and he makes the argument that the Bible is all or nothing; you can’t say some parts are true and others are not, you either think it’s all true or it’s all false.

• Their approach to the evidence of human influence which began being discovered during the enlightenment era is to deny that evidence.

• For example, creationists will deny the scientific evidence for evolution because they think it contradicts the Genesis creation story and thus must be false.

plenary verb inspiration

• Plenary verb inspiration means ‘every word inspired’. It is another objective and conservative view of inspiration.

• It is arguably more realistic than literalism because it accepts and acknowledges the evidence of human influence on the Bible.

• It still holds that all the words of the Bible are equally inspired and come directly from God, but somehow the gospel writers at the same time did have some influence.

• William Lane Craig is a proponent of this view.

• He explains that biblical inerrancy is the view that “everything that the Bible affirms to be true is true.”

• There are many examples of metaphor and symbolic language in the Bible, which the Bible is therefore not presenting as literally true.

• This allows Christians who hold to this view to believe that the genesis story of creation is symbolic and thus not affirmed as literally true by the Bible, so they can agree with what science says about creation.

catholicism + dei verbum

• bible is written by humans but inspired by god via HS such that it is ‘without error’ and contains ‘that truth which god wanted to put into sacred writings’

• “In composing the sacred books, God chose men and while employed by Him they made use of their powers and abilities, so that with Him acting in them and through them, they, as true authors, consigned to writing everything and only those things which He wanted.”

• cardinal newman argued that whilst divinely inspired, there are characteristics of dialect and style within each text

liberal subjective views

• This began during the enlightenment period and accepted the scientific evidence of human influence on the Bible, which is concluded to be a product of the human mind, not the perfect word of God.

• scriptures were written by witnesses of God’s divine events in history like the incarnation, or times when God communicated or revealed himself. What came to be written down as a result however was merely what those people took away from such events, or from hearing about such events from the testimony of those who witnessed them.

• The words of the Bible are therefore just human interpretations of what the authors felt and understood of God’s revelation.

• The bible thus reflects the cultural and historical context of its human authors and requires continual re-interpretation to ensure its relevance.

hick

• John Hick thought that we should view the Bible as a record of how ancient humans interpreted events like the life of Jesus.

• They wrote it down not as a set of historical facts but as stories which had a symbolic meaning.

• For example, the resurrection symbolises God’s gift of renewal and the possibility of life after death.

• Hick does not believe the resurrection actually happened.

• He views Jesus as a ‘guru’.

neo-orthodox view

• karl barth

• Neo-Orthodoxy accepts that the scientific, historical and textual criticism of the Bible show that it could not be the word of God.

• He concluded instead that while the Bible was not the word of God, by meditating on it with proper faith it is possible to experience the word of God through it.

• He viewed the Bible as miraculous, capable of creating a kind of religious experience which connects the mind of a faithful believer to God’s word.

• This has the strength of taking seriously the issue of the evidence of human influence on the Bible.

calvin’s theory of accomodation

• Accommodation is the idea that the seeming incompatibility between God’s authorship of the Bible and historical, scientific, or textual criticism can actually be reconciled. The idea is that God is beyond our understanding, so in order to effectively communicate with us God had to use flawed and inadequate language and concepts because it was all humanity was capable of understanding.

• The seemingly false claims about history and science in the Bible are therefore just God attempting to get a point across in language we could understand. Thus, the presence of these errors in the Bible does not show that God wasn’t the author

• The transcendent God chooses to lower himself to become intelligible in our experience
  In the Bible, God has chosen to accommodate his language to us
  Calvin also speaks about the human authors of the Bible choosing to speak in a language that would be easily intelligible to most of their readers