An adequate definition of inerrancy is “the view that when all the facts become known,
theywilldemonstratethattheBibleinitsoriginalautographsandcorrectlyinterpretedisentirely true and
never false in all it affirms, whether that relates to doctrine or ethics or the social, physical, or
life sciences”.1 The view of full inerrancy is supported by the Bible itself stating Scriptures are
“inspired by God” (2 Tim. 3:16).2 Full inerrancy is also supported by the church throughout
history including such theological stalwarts asAugustine, Luther, Calvin, and B. B. Warfield.3
Finally, theepistemological argument, though less convincing, is valid because if full inerrancy is
denied it would significantly increase the risk that Scripture would be unnecessarily questioned.4
LimitedinerrancyviewstheBibleasbothinerrantandinfallibleregardingsoteriological
doctrine; however, “scientific and historical references reflect the understanding current at the
time it was written”.5 Based on Erickson’s definition it appears a sympathetic view toward
limitedinerrancyisnotunreasonableundercertaincircumstances.Forexample,Jesusstatesthat a
mustard seed is the “least of all seeds,” but the mustard seed is not actually the smallest seed
(Matt. 13:32). However, the Talmud suggests that in the Jewish mind the mustard seed was the
“smallest thing the eye could detect”.6 If in Jesus’omniscience he would have referred to the
actual smallest seed it would have detracted from the revelatory intent of the message.7 In this
regard, limited inerrancy can add value while in no way diminishing the truthfulness of
Scripture.
1 WalterA.Elwell,EvangelicalDictionaryofTheology,2nded.(GrandRapids:BakerAcademic,2001),157.
2 Unlessotherwisenoted,allbiblicalpassagesreferencedareinthe NewAmericanStandardBible(La
Habra, CA: Lockman Foundation, 1995).
3 Elwell,EvangelicalDictionaryofTheology,158.
4 Ibid.
5 MillardL.Erickson,ChristianTheology,3rded.(GrandRapids:BakerAcademic,2013),248.
6 DanielFuller,"BenjaminB.Warfield'sViewofFaithandHistory", BulletinoftheEvangelicalTheological
Society 11, no. 2 (1968): 80-81.
7 Ibid.
The Bible itself provides compelling evidence about the nature of its inspiration and
inerrancy. Perhaps of most significance is the fact that neither Jesus nor any Bible writer ever
called into question a single passage of Scripture. Jesus and the writers of Scripture believed in
the truthfulness and historical reliability of even the most disputed parts of the OldTestament.
Notice a few examples. While speaking to the Pharisees in the region of Judea beyond the
Jordan, Jesus confirmed His belief in the real existence of an original couple created during the
Creation week (Matthew 19:4; cf. Genesis 2:24). In writing to the church at Corinth, Paul
affirmed his belief inAdam as the first human (1 Corinthians 15:45). Then, in his first letter to
Timothy, he attested to the fact that Eve was created afterAdam (2:13; cf. Genesis 2:7,21-25).
Paul regarded the serpent’s deception of Eveas a historicalevent (2 Corinthians 11:3;1Timothy
2:13-14; cf. Genesis 3). Both Jesus and the apostle Peter believed that Noah was a real person,
and that the global Flood was a historical event (Matthew 24:37-39; 2 Peter 2:5; 3:6; cf. Genesis
6-8). Jesus and Peter also affirmed their belief in the historicity of Lot, and in the destruction of
Sodom (Luke 17:28-32; 2 Peter 2:6-7; cf. Genesis 19). Paul attested to the Israelites’crossing of
theRedSea,andaffirmedhisbeliefintheirdrinkingwaterfromarock(1Corinthians10:1-4;cf.
Hebrews11:29;cf.Exodus14),whileJesusconfirmedHisbeliefinthemiraculoushealingofthe
Israelites who fixed their eyes on the bronze snake set up by Moses in the desert (John 3:14; cf.
Numbers 21:4-9). Finally, unlike many people today, including some of those who claim to
believetheBibletobetheinspiredWordofGod,JesusregardedtheaccountofJonah’sthree days and
nights in the belly of a great fish as a historical event (Matthew 12:39-40).
In conclusion, I believe that in light of the fact that Jesus and the Bible authors viewed
thewordsofScriptureasbeinginspired(andthustruthful)soshouldallChristians.IfChristians abandon
the doctrine of biblical inerrancy, then having a standard of truth by which all humans
aretolivetheirlives wouldbeimpossible.Likethesonwhoobeyshisfatheronlyifheagrees
withthefather’srules,aChristianwouldhavehisownstandardofauthoritybecausetheBible would
be authoritative only when he judged it to be a reliable guide. Simply put, Scripture cannot be
demonstrated to be divinely authoritative if the Bible contains factual errors.
WordCount(692)
