Does Inspiration lead to Inerrancy?

[Piper]

There are some who would claim that the 66 books of the Bible are Inspired, but not inerrant.

I believe that the bible itself teaches that It is inspired, i.e. God-breathed, and therefore Inerrant, in the Original Autographs.

Are there people here who differ over that as well?

And yes, I am stirring the pot. I am encountering people here who hold strange views, and I am trying to see just how broad it is here. I am on other forums where people post cryptic posts and then it comes out that they don't believe in Original sin, or inerrancy, or the Hypostatic Union, or The bodily resurrection, or the Bodily Return of Christ.

 

[Marooncat79]

Yes, by default

otherwise it’s
“How can God inspire Error”?

make sense?

 

[Deacon]

Define inerrant.

The term “inerrant” has been defined to such an extent (see the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy) that disagreement is almost the norm.

Rob

 

[Jerome]

Just look at what, in 1990, future seminary presidents, Al Mohler (now SBTS) and David Dockery (now SWBTS), were advocating!

http://media.sbhla.org.s3.amazonaws.com/7009,17-Aug-1990.PDF

“Scholars discuss ways to move ‘beyond the impasse'” pp. 12-14

"LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP)–Speakers at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’s Pastor’s School discussed ways to move Southern Baptists 'beyond the impasse' in the denomination’s
current theological debate. During sessions on 'Four Views of the Bible among Southern Baptists,' seven scholars spoke at the Louisville, Ky., school about the nature of biblical authority and interpretation. They also proposed ways for Southern Baptists to find common ground in the present theological controversy."

"Dockery said Southern Baptists will have to decide if 'we can hold together tensions on various views about the Bible as well as various views of interpreting the Bible.' Southern Baptists must understand the Bible is truthful, authoritative and is both a divine and human book, said Dockery. 'A lot of us get quite hung up on terms like inerrant and infallible,' he said. 'I think it is very possible to move the discussion forward and still talk about the nature of Scripture without using those particular red flag terms.' Within the Southern Baptist Convention, the terms communicate more about political parties than the nature of Scripture, he said. 'I would prefer that we talk about the Scripture as truthful, reliable and authoritative and see it having to be the normative guide for the church, for our lives and for the Christian community'."

"Another speaker, R. Albert Mohler Jr., editor of the Christian Index, newsjournal for Georgia Baptists,....described inerrancy as 'an important issue' but it 'isn't the most important word about Scripture'."

There you have it:

Dockery, then: "Inerrant and infallible" are "red flag terms", why can't we just talk about the Bible being "truthful' , "reliable", "both a human and divine book", "authoritative", or "normative"?

Mohler, then: Inerrancy "isn't the most important word about Scripture".

 

[37818]

Inerrancy is with God and His word.

 

[Deacon]

Inerrancy is with God and His word.

Well that certainly clears things up.

Is that a quote from our Vice President?

Rob

 

[37818]

Well that certainly clears things up.

Is that a quote from our Vice President?

Rob

No.
But Rob, glad I could help.

 

[Deacon]

Persistent problems when discussing biblical inerrancy:

1) A failure to distinguish between the text and the interpretation of the text
- our interpretations of Scripture are NOT inerrant.

There is a great tendency to force our interpretation of nature and history based upon Scripture, rather than viewing Scripture in light of history or nature - it goes both ways.

• modern historical writings do not tell the "whole picture" of a historical event. A frequently heard expressions is, "history is written by the winners".
• Scripture was written to a particular people at a particular time. Scripture was not written to us, (it was written for us).
• When we read Scripture we need to perceive what God's purpose in communicating the passage to the people that received it.
• When a person talks about taking Scripture "literally" it often involves taking Scripture out of its historical context and twisting it to fit into our current worldview - this modern reinterpretation of Scripture does not carry biblical authority.

2) A failure to understand that a discussion about inerrancy at its most basic level, concerns the authority of Scripture. What is the message that God is communicating.

Rob

 

[Alan Gross]

I believe that the bible itself teaches that It is inspired, i.e. God-breathed, and therefore Inerrant, in the Original Autographs.

I believe the Bible is not just any ordinary book.

I am not a darn Ruckmanite and see their teachings as very unfortunate, as is my need to put so many on 'ignore' that won't stop calling me a Ruckmanite, because I prefer the KJV and don't care a wit about the new versions, for the very reason that they were intended to be translated as any ordinary book. That's a clincher to me.

Now, what do you call it, when the result of a sufficient translation from valid texts is produced if we don't see it as any ordinary book?

For centuries men of God never hesitated to say the Bible was inspired.

All they mean is that it is God's word that He has preserved for us to have as He has promised and is a copy, which can't be perfect-perfect, like the original autographs, but it can be a copy that is as exact a copy/translation that is more than humanly possible in its exactness and integrity and, therefore, its authority.

Ask Alan Gross and he'll tell you God's word is inspired.

That inspiration is by nature of the originals and their Auther, Who promised we'd have His Word.

That inspiration is deferred to the extent that it is a copy, which can't be perfect.

I said deferred inspiration, but as an imperfect copy/translation, but accurate.

Not deferred or a copy as if there was double inspiration.

Our confessions and Statement of faith mention plenty about inspired, infallible, and inerrant, etc., and do not imply our copy/translation of the Bible is a bunch of undependable errors.

I say the Bible is inspired just like any old men of God and don't care what egghead says I mean something other than when I hold the Bible in my hand, I am holding God's Word, because it came from Him, by preservation, and the original was perfectly inspired and I have a completely sufficient and authoritative copy that came from Him.

The Bible is not any ordinary book. It is alive.

New International Version
so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.

New Living Translation
It is the same with my word. I send it out, and it always produces fruit. It will accomplish all I want it to, and it will prosper everywhere I send it.

English Standard Version
so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.

Berean Standard Bible
so My word that proceeds from My mouth will not return to Me empty, but it will accomplish what I please, and it will prosper where I send it.

King James Bible
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

New King James Version
So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

New American Standard Bible
So will My word be which goes out of My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the purpose for which I sent it.

NASB 1995
So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

NASB 1977
So shall My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

Legacy Standard Bible
So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what pleases Me, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

Amplified Bible
So will My word be which goes out of My mouth; It will not return to Me void (useless, without result), Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

Christian Standard Bible
so my word that comes from my mouth will not return to me empty, but it will accomplish what I please and will prosper in what I send it to do.”

Holman Christian Standard Bible
so My word that comes from My mouth will not return to Me empty, but it will accomplish what I please and will prosper in what I send it to do.”

American Standard Version
so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Thus my word shall be that proceeds from my mouth, and it shall not return to me empty handed, but surely it does the thing that I please and accomplishes that for which I have sent it

con't

 

[Alan Gross]

Brenton Septuagint Translation
so shall my word be, whatever shall proceed out of my mouth, it shall by no means turn back, until all the things which I willed shall have been accomplished; and I will make thy ways prosperous, and will effect my commands.

Contemporary English Version
That's how it is with my words. They don't return to me without doing everything I send them to do."

Douay-Rheims Bible
So shall my word be, which shall go forth from my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall do whatsoever I please, and shall prosper in the things for which I sent it.

English Revised Version
so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
My word, which comes from my mouth, is like the rain and snow. It will not come back to me without results. It will accomplish whatever I want and achieve whatever I send it to do."

Good News Translation
So also will be the word that I speak--it will not fail to do what I plan for it; it will do everything I send it to do.

International Standard Version
so will my message be that goes out of my mouth— it won't return to me empty. Instead, it will accomplish what I desire, and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.

JPS Tanakh 1917
So shall My word be that goeth forth out of My mouth: It shall not return unto Me void, Except it accomplish that which I please, And make the thing whereto I sent it prosper.

Literal Standard Version
So is My word that goes out of My mouth, | It does not return to Me empty, | But has done that which I desired, | And prosperously effected that [for] which I sent it.

Majority Standard Bible
so My word that proceeds from My mouth will not return to Me empty, but it will accomplish what I please, and it will prosper where I send it.

New American Bible
So shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; It shall not return to me empty, but shall do what pleases me, achieving the end for which I sent it.

NET Bible
In the same way, the promise that I make does not return to me, having accomplished nothing. No, it is realized as I desire and is fulfilled as I intend."

New Revised Standard Version
so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and succeed in the thing for which I sent it.

New Heart English Bible
so shall my word be that goes forth out of my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing I sent it to do.

Webster's Bible Translation
So shall my word be that proceedeth from my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

World English Bible
so is my word that goes out of my mouth: it will not return to me void, but it will accomplish that which I please, and it will prosper in the thing I sent it to do.

Young's Literal Translation
So is My word that goeth out of My mouth, It turneth not back unto Me empty, But hath done that which I desired, And prosperously effected that for which I sent it.

they don't believe in Original sin, or inerrancy, or the Hypostatic Union, or The bodily resurrection, or the Bodily Return of Christ.

wow. They are supposed to define who they are and not be on certain forums unless they are a Baptist. (Tell me these aren't Baptists.)

 

[Deacon]

It is important to define what one means when they use the term "inerrancy".

(1) The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy [link] is a good starting place for understanding inerrancy.
This statement is sometimes used as a 'confession of faith' for professors in Evangelical colleges and universities.
There have been revisions, refinements and debates by some over the decades, dealing with particularly difficult portions of Scripture.

Here are two declarations from the CSBI that are often debated on the BaptistBoard.

Article X

WE AFFIRM that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy. We further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original.

WE DENY that any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of the autographs. We further deny that this absence renders the assertion of Biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant.​

​

Article XIX

WE AFFIRM that a confession of the full authority, infallibility, and inerrancy of Scripture is vital to a sound understanding of the whole of the Christian faith. We further affirm that such confession should lead to increasing conformity to the image of Christ.

WE DENY that such confession is necessary for salvation. However, we further deny that inerrancy can be rejected without grave consequences, both to the individual and to the Church.​

[G. K. Beale, The Erosion of Inerrancy in Evangelicalism: Responding to New Challenges to Biblical Authority (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008), 272–274.]​

(2) A big problem that occurs when we discuss inerrancy is that it is not a stand-alone doctrine.
Inerrancy is fully integrated into our evangelical hermeneutic; our understanding of God and the faith we have in him.

Inerrancy communicates far more than simply an attribute of Scripture. It communicates a way of understanding God and a way of understanding ourselves before Scripture. It is therefore bound up with the whole of Christian teaching and cannot be properly understood apart from some discussion of its doctrinal setting.
Zondervan. Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy (Counterpoints: Bible and Theology). Zondervan. Kindle Edition. ​

To change someones view about inerrancy often means they have to confront how and what one believes about God and how he communicates and works in our world.

Rob