1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Biblical Inerrancy or Biblical Infallability

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Crabtownboy, Feb 26, 2008.

  1. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    17,383
    Ratings:
    +634
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Biblical inerrancy is the doctrinal position[1] that in its original form, the Bible is totally without error, and free from all contradiction; "referring to the complete accuracy of Scripture, including the historical and scientific parts."

    [2] Inerrancy is distinguished from Biblical infallibility (or limited inerrancy), which holds that the Bible is inerrant on issues of faith and practice but not history or science.

    What is your opinion?
     
  2. Andy T.

    Andy T. New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Ratings:
    +0
    Here is my simpleton response (as some would characterize): If I cannot trust the Bible in the 'small' things (history, science=knowledge), then how can I trust it with the 'big' things (faith, etc.)?

    The Bible, God's Word, is inerrant.
     
  3. Tom Bryant

    Tom Bryant Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,439
    Ratings:
    +2
    I've never tried to discriminate between the 2. Maybe the new definition of infallibility means limited inerrancy, but that wasn't the way it was defined in college or seminary.

    I do believe in both inerrancy and infallibility, but not limited inerrancy which really isn't inerrancy at all.
     
  4. StefanM

    StefanM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,024
    Ratings:
    +408
    My view of inerrancy is that the Scripture is completely true when seen in the linguistic-historical-sociological-theological context of the author.

    If a record says 24,000, it doesn't have to mean 24,000 but can be an approximation.

    Similarly, if a description of a scientific fact doesn't perfectly match up with the highly refined scientific methodology of the 21st century, that doesn't mean that the text is in error. It just means it wasn't given by inspiration to a 21st century American.
     
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,131
    Ratings:
    +2,360
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yea. Good job.
     
  6. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,131
    Ratings:
    +2,360
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I will stay away from opinion and stick to scripture on this one. "All scripture" is inspired even the parts that cover history and science.
     
  7. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Ratings:
    +0
    Scripture is inerrant and Inspired by God in any angle, subject, or method one wants to read it. A contridiction that I may come across shows my lack of understanding and wrong interpretation.
     
  8. TCGreek

    TCGreek New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Bible is not the type of history that we have come to know. The Bible is redemptive history.

    The Bible is not a science book; science books change all the time based on the lastest discoveries.
     
  9. PilgrimPastor

    PilgrimPastor Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    Messages:
    289
    Ratings:
    +1
    That is an interesting question. We are living in an age when everything is open for a reinterpretation which fits into one's world view. It is a matter of writing one's own dictionary when you don't like the definition! :BangHead:

    It is important that we define terms clearly. The Bible speaks of itself as authoritative and perfect. Why would we interpret it otherwise? The Bible is inerrant in all matters to which is speaks - which is matters of faith and practice and on occasion science, history, etc.
     
  10. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,355
    Ratings:
    +35
    The key phrase is:" that in its original form"

    Clearly there are transcription errors contained in our Bibles.
     
  11. PilgrimPastor

    PilgrimPastor Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    Messages:
    289
    Ratings:
    +1
    Exactly. I'm increasingly convinced that these are the major issues which need to be addressed in our teaching, witness, and preaching to reach this increasingly secular generation. We have to be faithful to not only living out our faith (vitally important) but also to providing "every man an answer for the hope that is in us!" :jesus:
     
  12. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    17,383
    Ratings:
    +634
    Faith:
    Baptist


    And no one has an original ... right?
     
  13. bbas 64

    bbas 64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    57
    Ratings:
    +0
    Good Day,

    Both...

    Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy


    Holy Scripture, as the inspired Word of God witnessing Authoritatively to Jesus Christ, may properly be called 'infallible' and 'inerrant'. These negative terms have a special value, for they explicitly safeguard crucial positive truths.

    'Infallible' signifies the quality of neither misleading nor being misled and so safeguards in categorical terms the truth that Holy Scripture is a sure, safe and reliable rule and guide in all matters.

    Similarly, 'inerrant' signifies the quality of being free from all falsehood or mistake and so safeguards the truth that Holy Scripture is entirely true and trustworthy in all its assertions.

    We affirm that canonical Scripture should always be interpreted on the basis that it is infallible and inerrant. However, in determining what the God-taught writer is asserting in each passage, we must pay the most careful attention to its claims and character as a human production. In inspiration, God utilized the culture and conventions of his penman's milieu, a milieu that God controls in His sovereign providence; it is misinterpretation to imagine otherwise.

    So history must be treated as history, poetry as poetry, hyperbole and metaphor as hyperbole and metaphor, generalization and approximation as what they are, and so forth. Differences between literary conventions in Bible times and in ours must also be observed: Since, for instance, nonchronological narration and imprecise citation were conventional and acceptable and violated no expectations in those days, we must not regard these things as faults when we find them in Bible writers. When total precision of a particular kind was not expected nor aimed at, it is no error not to have achieved it. Scripture is inerrant, not in the sense of being absolutely precise by modern standards, but in the sense of making good its claims and achieving that measure of focused truth at which its authors aimed.

    http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Chicago_Statement_on_Biblical_Inerrancy

    In Him,

    Bill
     
  14. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,355
    Ratings:
    +35
    Not to my knowledge.
     
  15. PilgrimPastor

    PilgrimPastor Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    Messages:
    289
    Ratings:
    +1
    Excellent. :thumbs: Let the Bible say what it intends to say. Let us not force it in either direction to say what it does not say or claim it does not say what it says.
     
Loading...