Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Contours: The Beliefs That Shape
Our Faith Unit One: Knowing God
Session Five: The Inerrant Word of God
D. Lee Kemp
10.08.2014
Fort Mill Church of God
2
I. Introduction: Brief Review
II. What is Inerrancy?
1. Opening Considerations: The Authority & Inspiration of Scripture.
1. The words of scripture are God’s words and carry divine authority. To disobey or
discount these words is to disobey or discount God Himself.
Psalms 12: 6 (ESV)
The words of the Lord are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.
Proverbs 30: 5 (ESV)
Every word of God proves true; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him.
2. The Bible teaches us that God cannot lie and always speaks truthfully.
2 Samuel 7: 28 (ESV)
And now, O Lord God, you are God, and your words are true, and you have promised this good thing to your
servant.
Titus 1: 2 (ESV)
in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began.
Hebrews 6: 18 (ESV)
18 so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might
have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.
3. The Bible claims that all the words of God are true and without error in any part.
God’s words are, in fact, the ultimate standard of truth.
John 17: 17 (ESV)
17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.
3
4. God’s words remain free from error even when spoken through sinful human beings
(i.e., The Holy Spirit’s role in the Inspiration of Scripture).
e.g., Balaam’s Prophecy in Numbers 23: 19
19 God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not
do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?
5. Because it is inspired and carries the authority of God, we have confidence in the
divine nature of God’s word and trust what is recorded within.
2. Inerrancy Defined:
1. “Inerrancy is the doctrine that the Bible is fully truthful in all of its teachings
(Erickson, 246).”
2. “The inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not
affirm anything that is contrary to fact (Grudem, 91).”
3. A simple definition: “The Bible always tells the truth and that it always tells the truth
concerning everything it talks about (Grudem).”
*Note: this was the universal position of the Church until the Enlightenment (17th
–early
19th
centuries) when some church scholars accepted the secular academies position of
human reason as the standard rather than revelation and reality.
3. Inerrancy Examined:
Inerrancy focuses on the truthfulness of scripture. Does the Bible report truthfully historical facts and teach
truthfully the theological lessons of the faith?
1. The Bible can be inerrant and allow for a variety of styles.
As discussed previously, the Bible was written by authors of various backgrounds
and education levels. John wrote in the simple style of a fisherman while Luke
4
wrote with the sophistication of a doctor. Paul wrote with the logic of a
philosopher. All three recorded truthfully the words of scripture in their books.
Variation of style is entirely compatible with Inerrancy.
2. The Bible can be inerrant and have variety in details explaining the same event.
This can be seen in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) where the three
authors sometimes record the same events in different ways.
Remember, Jesus spoke in Aramaic and the NT was written in Greek. The
authors could have chosen to use slightly different Greek words to translate the
same incident and still meant the same thing (albeit with different words).
Biblical Example: Matthew & Mark record the crowd’s yelling “Hosanna”
during the triumphal entry (see Matt. 21:8; Mk 11:9) while Luke records “Glory
in the highest (Lk 19:38).” The reason for this was the intended audience.
‘Hosanna’ is a Hebrew word that would be familiar to Matthew & Mark’s
audience while Luke, writing to a predominately Gentile audience, chose to use
the phrase “Glory in the highest” to communicate the crowd’s meaning on that
day.
I Don’t have…Atheist Reference: Corroborating evidence verses verbatim
accounts shows greater degree of historicity and truthfulness (See 7. The New
Testament Writers Include Divergent Details, 284).
3. The Bible can be inerrant and use normal, everyday forms of speech.
This is especially true in “scientific” or “historical” descriptions of facts or events
(e.g., the sun “rising”). From the view point of the writer, these everyday
5
expressions are truthful and are not meant to mislead. The writer is reporting how
things appear to the eye.
Modern Example: Meteorologists, with all the scientific equipment at their
fingertips, still talk about “sunrises” and “sunsets.”
Another example of this is with the use of approximation and estimation with
numbers. A reporter reports that 8,000 men were killed in a battle even though he
has not counted everyone. If roughly 8,000 died it would, of course, be wrong to
say that 16,000 died. But if 7,963 died or 8, 212 died we would not think the
report was a lie. **the limits of truthfulness would depend on the degree of
precision implied by the speaker and expected by his original hearers.**
(Grudem, 91).
Biblical Example: Numbers 25:9 states that 24,000 died by the plague and Paul
states in 1 Cor. 10:8 that 23,000 died. Both are approximations, and for the
purpose involved, both are adequate and therefore may be regarded as true
(Erickson, 261).
--these passages warn against the danger of sexual immorality// Baal of Peor.
The Bible’s assertions are fully true when judged in accordance with the
purpose for which they were written (Erickson).--
The same is true for measurements. For example, “We aren’t very far from Rock
Hill,” “It’s a little over a five miles to Rock Hill,” or “We are approximately 5.25
miles from Rock Hill.” All are truthful statements that accurately reflect the
viewpoint of the person speaking.
6
For the Christian, there is no problem affirming the truthfulness of the Bible and
that the Bible uses ordinary language to describe natural phenomena or to give
approximations or round numbers when those are appropriate in the context.
4. The Bible can be inerrant, and depart from standard forms of English grammar.
It is wrong to force English rules of grammar upon the Bible because of the
differences between English and Koine Greek.
These grammatical irregularities often were a reflection of the authors and the
rough-hewn language of ordinary people.
A statement can be ungrammatical but still be entirely true.
For example: John 10:9, Jesus declares “I am the door.” Two verses later he says,
“I am the good shepherd (v.11).” In English this is considered mixing metaphors,
but this is not a problem to Greek grammar or Hebrew language. // Another
Example: John 14:26 Jesus refers to the Spirit (pneuma= neuter) and then refers
to the Spirit as “He” (ekeinos= masculine). This may raise an English
grammarian’s eyebrows, but it is not a problem of Greek grammar (Enns, 170).
5. The Bible can be inerrant, and still include loose or free quotations.
The method used to quote an individual varies from culture to culture. In the
USA and the UK, we quote a person’s exact statement when using quotation
marks. But when we don’t use quotation marks, we merely expect an accurate
report of the main gist or point of the statement.
In Biblical Greek, quotation marks did not exist, and the cultural expectation was
not a verbatim quotation.
7
To accurately cite another person, the author simply needed to include only a
correct representation of the content of what the person said (Grudem, 92).
As a result, inerrancy allows the NT authors to loosely quote the OT or the words
of Jesus, for example, so long as the content is not false to what was originally
stated (Grudem). This would be expected by the original audience and accepted
as true.
Other practical considerations for why verbatim quotes were not expected
include: Translation from Aramaic to Greek made this impractical at times, the
scrolls that contained the OT were large and difficult to unroll and read each time
a quote was needed. Also, these scrolls were not readily available to the NT
writers who were spread out across the ancient world.
4. Current Challenges to Inerrancy
As mentioned above, the Enlightenment brought a new skepticism to the doctrine of
Inerrancy that has continued until today. Below are listed several challenges and how we
might respond to them.
1. The Bible Is Only Authoritative for “Faith & Practice.”
A common objection that states that the bible is only error-free in issues dealing
with religious faith and/or our ethical conduct.
This position allows for there to be errors in the bible on other topics including
scientific facts and historical details (since these areas aren’t really the purpose of
the Bible).
Biblical Response: The Bible clearly teaches that all of scripture is profitable for
us and “God-Breathed (2 Tim 3:16)”.
8
Also, these designations of “Faith & Practice” are artificial categories. The Bible
itself does not restrict what kinds of subjects it speaks truthfully on.
NT examples of the writers believing all of scripture include:
o Paul (Acts 24:14) But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call
a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and
written in the Prophets…
o Paul (Rom. 15:4) For whatever was written in former days was written for our
instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we
might have hope.
o Jesus chides His disciples for not believing everything given to them by
the prophets (Lk 24:25): And he said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to
believe all that the prophets have spoken!”
These are just a few examples of NT writers demonstrating the belief they had in
all details of the OT. Many other examples could be given, but the point is made.
The NT writers were ready and willing to use all of the OT scriptures to teach and
instruct disciples of Jesus.
A Response from Science: Modern day science, especially in the areas of
Astronomy and Archeology, has consistently proved the details of the Bible to be
true.
o Examples: SURGE data corroborates what the Bible says about the
Universe and the Earth.
S- Second Law of Thermodynamics
U- Universe is Expanding
R- Radiation Afterglow (Remnant Heat from Big Bang)
9
G- Great Galaxy Seeds (very precise temperature variations in the
Radiation Afterglow that allowed the galaxies to form in the early
universe).
E- Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity shows that Time, Space, and
Matter came into existence together.
o Archeological discoveries over the past 100 years have proven details
in the Bible to be true.
The unknown “Sargon” mentioned in Isaiah 20:1 has been identified through
archeological discoveries in the twentieth century (Erickson, 263).
Prior to the mid-twentieth century, the best available data suggested that the
region where Jericho was located was uninhabited from about 1600BC until
1200BC. This put the biblical account in doubt which placed the Walls of
Jericho account at roughly 1440BC. But excavations done in the 1950s and 60s
discovered thick layers of ash containing grain samples that, when carbon dated,
showed a burn date of…you guessed it, 1440BC (Driscoll, 63)!
These are just a few examples to illustrate that the Bible is truthful in all areas,
not just Faith and Practice, and can be trusted.
2. We have no inerrant manuscripts; therefore, talk about an inerrant bible is
misleading.
Those who use this argument make the point that the Originals were inerrant, but
we no longer have these (Autographs). Since that is the case, how can we say that
the Bible is inerrant?
Response: Through the science and study of textual criticism of ancient biblical
manuscripts, Bible scholars know exactly 99.5 percent of what the original copies
10
said. Thus, we have been able to reconstruct the original manuscripts and can
authoritatively use them as the Word of God.
Note: the .5% in question does not affect a single doctrine of the Christian Faith.
An Example of the textual reconstruction process (Geisler, 228). Suppose we
have four different manuscripts that have four different variations in the same
verse, such as Philippians 4:13 (“I can do all things through Christ who gives me
strength.”).
Example A: I can do all t#ings through Christ who gives me strength.
Example B: I can do all th#ngs through Christ who gives me strength.
Example C: I can do all thi#gs through Christ who gives me strength.
Example D: I can do all thin#s through Christ who gives me strength.
Is there any doubt what the original said? Through the process of comparing and
cross-checking, the original manuscripts can be reconstructed with great accuracy.
The early dating and large number of manuscripts confirm the accuracy and
truthfulness of scripture.
o The Dead Sea Scrolls contain much of the OT and are dated to nearly 150BC.
The contents of the scrolls confirmed what the previously oldest manuscripts
(roughly 900 years old) with miniscule variation (mostly spelling differences
& grammatical variations). The Church’s confidence in the OT text was
confirmed (Driscoll, 64).
o Today we have 14,000 fragments and over 5,000 complete manuscript copies
of the NT. Some of these date back to as early as 25 years after the originals
were written (Geisler, 226-27).
11
o This compares VERY favorably to other ancient writings where all have less
than 1000 manuscript copies surviving (many less than 25) with a gap of 500
yrs. (Homer) to 1400 yrs. (Demosthenes) between the original and the copies.
Therefore, the current published scholarly texts of the Hebrew Old Testament
and Greek New Testament are the same as the original manuscripts. Thus,
when we say that the original manuscripts were inerrant, we are also implying
that over 99 percent of the words in our present manuscripts are also inerrant,
for they are exact copies of the originals (Grudem, 96).
Well if the New Testament really is the Word of God, then why didn’t God
preserve the original? We can only speculate here, but one possibility is
because his word might be better protected through copies than through
original documents. How so? Because if the original were in someone’s
possession, that person could change it. But if there are copies spread all
over the ancient world, there’s no way one scribe or priest could alter the
Word of God. As we have seen, the process of reconstruction allows variants
and changes from copies to be indentified and corrected rather easily. So,
ironically, not having the originals may preserve God’s word better than
having them (Geisler, 229).
Side Note: Why So Many Translations? Are They Reliable?
Yes they are. If you have a modern translation of the Bible, then you have
almost exactly what the ancient authors wrote.
Bible translations allow more people to read God’s word (for centuries, only
12
the clergy could read the Bible because the general populace didn’t
understand Greek [Eastern Orthodox] or Latin [Western Church].
One of the great results of the Reformation was returning the Bible to the
People.
At least part of the Bible has been translated into at least 2,454 languages, and
the full Bible is available in at least 453 languages (Driscoll, 70).
In the English language, there are three types of translations that you will find:
Word for Word Translations (i.e., formal equivalence translations):
these translations emphasize the patterns of the words and seek “as far
as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the
personal style of each Bible writer…thus it seeks to be transparent to
the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the
structure and meaning of the original (Driscoll). These translations
strive to translate exactly, word for word, what the Bible says.
Examples include, The King James Version (KJV), The English
Standard Version (ESV), the New King James Version (NKJV), and
The New American Standard Version (NASB).
Thought for Thought Translations (i.e., dynamic equivalence):
These translations attempt to convey the full nuance of each passage
by interpreting the Scripture’s entire meaning an dnot just the
individual words. Such versions seek to find the best modern cultural
equivalent that will have the same effect the original message had in
its ancient cultures. Popular examples include the New International
13
From the 1978 Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy…
No translation is or can be perfect, and all translations are an additional step away
from the autograph. Yet the verdict of linguistic science is that English-speaking
Christians, at least, are exceedingly well served in these days with a host of excellent
translations and have no cause for hesitating to conclude that the true Word of God
is within their reach. Indeed, in view of the frequent repetition in Scripture of the
main matters with which it deals and also of the Holy Spirit's constant witness to and
through the Word, no serious translation of Holy Scripture will so destroy its
meaning as to render it unable to make its reader "wise for salvation through faith in
Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:15).
Version (NIV), New Living Translation (NLT), and the Contemporary
English Version (CEV).
Paraphrased translation: these translations put the emphasis on
readability in English. Therefore, they pay even less attention to
specific word patterns in an attempt to capture the poetic or narrative
essence of a passage. Examples include The Message (MSG) and the
Living Bible (TLB) (Driscoll, 71).
Final Thoughts on Translations:
All faithful translations strive to find a balance between four
elements: 1) Accuracy to the original text, 2) Beauty of language, 3)
Clarity of Meaning, 4) Dignity of Style.
All translations have various strengths and weaknesses and students of
scripture benefit from reading various translations.
Finally, instead of fighting over the different translations, we should
instead thank God for every good translation and trust the Holy Spirit
to use them to transform our lives.
14
3. There are clear errors in the Bible.
Inevitably, those who deny the inerrancy of scripture will make this claim.
The first response should be to ask the person making the claim to identify an
error in scripture.
Many who claim the Bible is filled with errors cannot locate even one.
Since we believe the Bible to be inerrant we should not fear such claims, but
should welcome the opportunity to examine the scriptures when these claims are
made.
Note: Difficult passages in scripture (e.g., the .5 percent mentioned above) does
not mean that the Bible is not inspired or inerrant.
In these instances we wait for all the remaining data to be made available,
confident that if we had all the data, the problems could be resolved.
As mentioned above, modern science has helped fill in many of the gaps
in the data and reassured the modern reader that what the Bible says is the
inspired Word of God.
Some problem passages may never be resolved this side of eternity (the
needed data is lost to history), but this does not shake our confidence in
scripture knowing the overwhelming pattern points to God’s word being
reliable and truthful.
Finally, A historical perspective on inerrancy is helpful. There are no
“new” problems with God’s Word. The Complete Bible is over 1900
15
years old and the “problem texts,” have been there all along (Grudem, 99).
For centuries scholars have examined the text and walked away with the
same conclusion: The Bible is the inspired and inerrant Word of God that
we can build our lives upon.
5. Why Inerrancy Matters
1. Theologically: If we deny inerrancy, we are saying that God is not truthful, or
He can lie about the minor things when needed. If God is who the Bible says He,
this cannot be.
i. If we deny inerrancy, we place human reason above divine revelation
and make our judgments a higher standard of truth than God’s word.
2. Historically: Since its birth, the historic Christian church has held the Bible to be
inerrant and the inspired word of God. Denying inerrancy moves a person onto
dangerous ground where all beliefs are questioned.
i. History has shown that when a person, movement, or denomination
moves away from this belief, their belief in other core doctrines of the
faith slowly erode away (e.g., the doctrine of the incarnation & virgin
birth, the Deity of Christ).
ii. If the bible proves to be in error in those areas that we can check
(history, science, etc.), then why should the reader believe in those
areas that cannot be checked?
III. Conclusion: Final Thoughts on how we know God through Revelation and
Scripture:
16
1. God can be known & wants you to know Him. You can trust Him to faithfully reveal
Himself to you.
2. If you are Christian, the importance of the Bible cannot be overstated. The author
lives inside of you and will make the truth of scripture come alive (illumination). “In
a world with many different voices, the Bible is a trustworthy guide. For when
correctly interpreted, it can be fully relied on in all that it teaches. It is a sure,
dependable, and trustworthy guide (Erickson, 265).”
3. We must remember that those who have not accepted Christ still have a darkened
view of God. With grace and patience we must look for opportunities to obediently
tell them the good news of Christ.
Bibliography
Arrington, French L. Christian Doctrine: A Pentecostal Perspective. Vol. 1. Cleveland, TN.
Pathway Press, 1992.
Driscoll, Mark and Gerry Breshears. Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe. Wheaton, IL.
Crossway, 2010.
Enns, Paul. The Moody Handbook of Theology. Revised and exp. ed. Chicago: Moody
Publishers, 2008.
Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1998.
Freedman, David Noel. Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing, 2000.
Geiser, Norman L. and Frank Turek. I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist. Wheaton, IL:
Crossway Publishing, 2004.
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1994.
Seamands, Stephen. Ministry in the Image of God: The Trinitarian Shape of Christian Service.
Downers Grove, IL. InterVarsity Press, 2005.
17
Williams, J. Rodman. Renewal Theology: Systematic Theology from a Charismatic Perspective.
Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.