The problem with the Bible is not with the Bible itself.

The problem is with how we read the Bible.

When people expect to get history, science, doctrine, and ethics out of the Bible, but end up with nothing of the sort, or what they do get does not agree with science, history, or the doctrine of others, they either reject the whole thing as fiction, or they blindly believe and obey what they read, because they don’t know what else to do with the text.

Most people, both Christian and non-Christian alike, come to the Bible with completely wrong expectations about how the functions, why the Bible was written, and how the Bible presents truth. We will look at each of these three in the following posts, beginning here with How the Bible Functions.

How the Bible Functions

It has been said in numerous comments on previous posts, and I agree with them completely, that the Bible is not a road map to life. It is not a guide for living. It is not “Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth.”

Nor is it a book of science, history, doctrine, or ethics.

So what is the Bible? How does it function?

[Read more…]

I believe the Bible is true. I believe the Bible is inerrant.

I found the following statement in my seminary class notes, and I agree with it 100%

The Bible is a record of things as they actually were, and a true account of those things about which it speaks.

Yet while I agree with this statement, I probably do not agree with how many pastors and theologians understand that statement.

What do I mean?

Well, I believe that even if all the stories of the Bible were false, the Bible itself could still be true. In other words, even if all the facts were wrong, the Bible could be a true and accurate account of those things about which it speaks.

How can I say this?

[Read more…]

Yesterday, I asked why we need the doctrine of inerrancy. I also asked that even if we had a text today which was  100% accurate to what was originally written, would this be of any help to us at all?

I say no. It wouldn’t.

Why not?

Because the primary issue when it comes to the Bible is not so much what was written, but rather, what it means. And even if we knew for certain what was written, this still would not help us understand what it means.

The Bible is 99.9% Accurate. So what?

Look at it this way: Scholars like to say that although errors crept in to the manuscripts through the copying process, most of the manuscripts we have today are in 99.9% agreement with each other, and therefore, are mostly in 99.9% agreement with what was originally written. Furthermore, these same scholars go on to tell us that the 0.1% of discrepancies do not effect any major teaching or doctrine of the church.

Fine. So this means that all Christians, and all churches, and all theologians are in 99.9% agreement with each other on the major teachings and doctrines of the church?

[Read more…]

Now that I have summarized what I was taught in Bible College and Seminary about the inerrancy of Scripture (Inerrancy 1, Inerrancy 2, Inerrancy 3, Inerrancy 4), let me turn to asking the questions about inerrancy that I had neither the time nor the courage to ask while I was in seminary.

Let’s with this statement:

The Bible is not inerrant. It does contain errors.

Before you call me a heretic, let me say that I pulled that statement right out of my Bible College class notes. And I didn’t go to some liberal college either. Moody Bible Institute is about as conservative as you can get. The year I started there, they finally decided to let females wear pants to class.

Is the Bible Inerrant?

So what did my Professor mean when he said that? He meant, as is universally known and accepted, that the Greek and Hebrew texts of the Bible are copies of ancient manuscripts, and these copies have textual errors which have crept in over the course of time. Not all the copies are in full agreement with each other. Therefore, the Bible has errors.

[Read more…]

My seminary class notes present refutations for several of the common arguments against inerrancy. I remember not being too impressed by these refutations at the time, but now, some of them seem quite absurd.

Do not misunderstand. I believe in inerrancy. But I believe a slightly different version of it than what I learned in seminary. We will discuss my view later this week. (If you are new here, make sure you subscribe to the posts so you don’t miss out).

So here are some of the typical arguments against inerrancy, and how to refute them. I include my own comments in parentheses.

Cults Teach the Inerrancy of Scripture

The argument here is that inerrancy cannot be right because some of the biggest proponents of inerrancy are found in the teachings of cult leaders. They use the doctrine of inerrancy to support their outlandish teachings from the Bible. Therefore, inerrancy must be wrong.

Refutation: So what if they teach it? They teach all sorts of things that agree with sound Christian doctrine. So do other religions. Similarity in teachings does not mean that the teaching is wrong.

[Read more…]