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!

Featured Inspiration/Infallibility/Inerrancy: To Be or Not To Be?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by AndyMartin, May 19, 2017.

  1. AndyMartin

    AndyMartin Active Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2017
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    30
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In light of another thread that I started, on Andy Stanley's misuse of the Holy Bible, and certain comments that he has made, that are clearly heretical. I am asking here as very simple question:

    Is it absolutely necessary that all truly born-again Christians, believe in the total Inspiration, Infallibility and Inerrancy of the Holy Bible, Or, can they hold the one without the other(s), or, even partial?
     
  2. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    21,903
    Likes Received:
    252
    Faith:
    Baptist
    is it needed in order to get and be saved, no , but the Christian Should hold o the scriptures being all that once been saved!
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. blessedwife318

    blessedwife318 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2014
    Messages:
    2,233
    Likes Received:
    397
    Faith:
    Baptist
    My husband and I have been talking about this issue of what doctrines are absolutely essential, what are secondary, and what are tertiary since a sermon our pastor preached a few weeks ago. I said I was tempted to get a board and lay out all the doctrines in order of importance but I think that some of them would be different by microscopic degrees.
    As I was sitting here thinking about this topic while waiting for the internet to start working again I was struck by the idea that there are a lot of Doctrines that are absolutly insisted on, that don't make it into Gospel presentations. An example would be the hypostatic Union. No one is going to touch that issue while talking to an unsaved person and yet we see in the Bible the denying either the deity or the humanity of Christ is a damnable heresy.
    1 John 2:22 Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.
    1 John 4:1-2
    Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.

    I think that correct doctrines are like good works. We do good works BECAUSE we are saved not to get saved. We believe correct doctrine (beyond the Gospel essentials of sin, righteousness and Judgement John 16:8) BECAUSE we are saved not to get saved

    So a person that denies either the deity or humanity of Christ to continue that example after being taught is giving evidence of not being saved, just as a person that continues a willful lifestyle of sin is giving evidence of not being saved.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. AndyMartin

    AndyMartin Active Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2017
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    30
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, very good points indeed. There is an interesting variant reading, which I believe to be the original, based on the textual evidence in 1 John 4:3. Instead of "ὃ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ" (that does not confess), it read, "ὃ λύει" (that separated) Jesus. Which is one of the main purposes of this Epistle of John, against the Gnostic's like Cerinthus, who taught that Jesus was born a mere man, upon Whom the "divine nature" descended at His baptism, and left at the crucifixion. Jesus IS the Christ, two "natures", one "Person". A mystery that no human mind can ever fathom!
     
  5. TCassidy

    TCassidy Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    13,937
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Such "textual evidence" is virtually non-existent.

    NU reads μὴ ὁμολογεῖ.

    TR reads μὴ ὁμολογεῖ

    WH reads μὴ ὁμολογεῖ

    Byz reads μὴ ὁμολογεῖ
     
  6. evangelist6589

    evangelist6589 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    9,598
    Likes Received:
    136
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes!!!!! Lots of false converts do not believe in a fully inerrant bible. Lots of progressives that claim to be Christian but really are children of Satan do not believe in a fully inerrant bible.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. AndyMartin

    AndyMartin Active Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2017
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    30
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Textual evidence is more than Greek versions. I see that "ὃ λύει", was know to, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement, Origen, Greek manuscripts according to Church historian Socrates. These Church fathers are very early, though some also knew of "ὃ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ", which shows a very early corruption. Like both Tertullian and Cyprian knowing of 1 John 5:7, as part of their First Epistle of John. Like 1 Timothy 3:16, important texts for the Trinity and Deity of Jesus have been tampered with. Interesting that the earliest Greek Mss for the Woman in adultery in John's Gospel, is from the 6th century. Yet Jerome, writing over 100 years earlier says, that the words are "found in many Greek and Latin manuscripts" of his time! These did not make it when the library was burnt were many manuscripts were kept.
     
  8. AndyMartin

    AndyMartin Active Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2017
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    30
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, and the great tragedy is, that they have a huge following who hang on to their every word! May the Lord grant mercy!
     
  9. HawgWyld

    HawgWyld Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    14
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Wow. I think Christians have been debating these issues since the early days of the church.

    I would argue that we, as Christians, must accept the existence of Christ and the fact he is the Son of God as absolute truths. If we can't at least recite the Nicene Creed and mean it, then we simply don't believe in the underpinnings of our faith.

    As for the Old Testament, I believe a lot of the debates over the historical accuracy of events described herein are largely distracting. Take Job, for example. Should we get bogged down over whether Job was an actual person whom God let the devil torment to prove a point? Or, should we focus on what Job actually means (i.e., the repeal of the Deuteronomic formula)? I'd argue the lesson conveyed is the important thing and the historic accuracy of it is secondary.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    39,470
    Likes Received:
    956
    Faith:
    Baptist

    Yes, although some would not see it as being bogged down but simply holding to scripture as reliable.
     
  11. AndyMartin

    AndyMartin Active Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2017
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    30
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thanks for your input. I have reservations about the Nicene Creed, and its subordinationism of Jesus Christ to God the Father. As for Job, there is no valid Scriptural reason not to believe that he was a literal person. I don't think that we should detract from what the Bible plainly teaches.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. AndyMartin

    AndyMartin Active Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2017
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    30
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones in his book, What is an Evangelical, discussed "Essentials" and "Secondary" Truths: After the Great Doctrine of God.

    "Essential Truths

    So what are the essential doctrines for evangelicals that distinguish them from other Christians or professors of faith?

    1. “The first is the doctrine of Scripture” (340). The Bible is our supreme and sole authority, God’s completely trustworthy self-revelation. The evangelical believes in propositional truth, the miracles of the Bible, the history as well as the didactic teaching. The Bible is not just true in its “religious” parts. It is without error in all that it affirms. This means that the evangelical believes in the historicity of Adam and Eve. Further, “we reject any notion of a pre-Adamic man because it is contrary to the teaching of Scripture” (343). The first chapters of Genesis must be accepted as history and cannot be undermined based on evolutionary theories.

    2. We believe in the existence of the devil and evil spirits.

    3. Man is spiritually dead and totally incapable, on his own, of any spiritual good.

    4. The evangelical believes in the atonement, with a special emphasis on its penal, subsitutionary nature.

    5. “We must also assert in a very special way justification by faith alone, faith only. We have to go on to assert that justification is not the result of regeneration, nor does it depend upon regeneration” (349).

    6. No evangelical “can possibly believe in a state or territorial church” (349).

    7. We believe in the importance of doctrine and church discipline.

    8. We reject every notion of apostolic succession.

    9. We believe in the sacraments, but reject every suggestion of sacerdotalism (the notion that there is inherent efficacy in the sacramental act itself).

    Secondary Truths

    Non-essential doctrines “are very important, and they must be discussed by evangelical people, but we must discuss them as brethren…we call them non-essential because they are not essential to salvation” (351). These doctrines are not as clearly taught as essential doctrines. Thus, sincere Christians sometimes come to different convictions in these areas. We must note that “difference between a defective understanding and a positive denial of truth by able people” (352).

    So what are some of the doctrines Lloyd-Jones marks as non-essential?

    1. “One is the belief in election and predestination” (352). Pelagianism is to be condemned, but not evangelical Arminianism. Though Lloyd-Jones was a convinced Calvinist, he put the issue in the category of a non-essential because Calvinists and Arminians disagree on the mechanism of salvation, not the way of salvation.

    2. The age and mode of baptism. You cannot prove one or the other from the Scriptures.

    3. “In the same way, we must not divide on the question of assurance of salvation” (353).

    4. “We must not divide on the issue of church polity” (353).

    5. “In the same way, clearly, we must not divide on the question of prophetic interpretation: pre-, post-, a-millennialist, and so on” (353).

    6. Our differing views of sanctification are not essential.

    7. Ditto for “the whole question of the baptism of the Spirit and the charismata, the spiritual gifts” (354).

    Our object in all this is to safeguard the gospel, to keep the evangel clear. This is our motive for defining “evangelical.” By the same token, we should realize that none of us will be perfect in our understanding. We are all saved in spite of ourselves.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. JonC

    JonC Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    8,481
    Likes Received:
    542
    Faith:
    Baptist
    IMHO there is a difference between not holding or misunderstanding a doctrine and rejecting that doctrine. We are saved by God through the power of the gospel. I believe it unreasonable to require a lost person to learn (much less adopt) the doctrine of Infallibility, Biblical Inerrancy, the Doctrine of the Trinity, Providence....all VERY important doctrines....in order to be saved (evangelism).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. JonC

    JonC Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    8,481
    Likes Received:
    542
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Do you consider a belief in "a full inerrant bible" to be a fundamental necessity for salvation? In other words, without this belief can a person really be saved?
     
  15. TCassidy

    TCassidy Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    13,937
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Faith:
    Baptist
    4:3 καὶ πᾶν πνεῦμα ὃ μὴ ὁμολογεῖ [74] τὸν -τὸν Ἰησοῦν [75] +χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα [76] ἐκ [77] τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν· καὶ τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου, ὃ ἀκηκόατε ὅτι ἔρχεται, καὶ νῦν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἐστὶν ἤδη.

    74 4:3a txt μὴ ὁμολογεῖ rell. TR HF RP NA28 {A} ‖ λύει itar,z vg; Ir1739mg Cl1739mg Or ‖ lac ⁹ ⁷⁴ P 048 0296.
     
  16. JonC

    JonC Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    8,481
    Likes Received:
    542
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Good question (although not really related to Stanley’s comments as he was speaking of evangelism and not what truly born-again Christians must believe).

    My answer is no. While it would be an error to reject biblical inerrancy and infallibility, there are many Christians who have held this error to one degree or another at least in how they interpret Scripture itself (depending on your position). C.S. Lewis, for example, views the sufferings of Hell as self-imposed rather than an exercise of divine wrath. Martin Luther held to a substitution view of Atonement (rather than Penal Substitution Theory). John Calvin, John Knox, John Wesley, George Whitefield, and Jonathan Edwards all practiced infant baptism. And Andy Stanley believes that evangelism should be reduced strictly to the gospel message (literally).

    Christians may be saved by Jesus Christ as a supernatural act of God and through the power of the gospel. Nowhere in Scripture is there additional requirements needed to be saved. On the other thread you mentioned that we are not told everything that was said when the Disciples witnessed to the lost, implying they may have taught other doctrines alongside the gospel. My answer to this suggestion is that Scripture, which is inerrant, tells us what was proclaimed was the gospel only. There is no need to disciple those who are not saved.

    Salvation depends on the gospel message. I think John 1-3 is sufficient for salvation. Once saved there are doctrines that are essential, perhaps not to salvation but to the faith. And then there are important doctrines that are debatable.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. HawgWyld

    HawgWyld Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2017
    Messages:
    58
    Likes Received:
    14
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I agree with that. We can get bogged down in whether Job was a real person or we could focus on the lesson to be learned from Job. If we can't get past the "was Job an historical figure" argument, then we never get to the real point of that particular book.
     
  18. Reynolds

    Reynolds Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2014
    Messages:
    488
    Likes Received:
    50
    Faith:
    Baptist
    A well discipled, fully matured Chrristian will believe total infallibility. It is not absolutely essential that a new convert believe it.

    When I was saved knew very little. I knew God was God. I knew Jesus was His son. I knew Jesus loved me so much that He died so I could live with Him forever. I knew I did bad things and could never get to Heaven without Jesus.

    I did not know what a virgin was. I do not really think I knew Jesus was God, I just knew He was The Son of God. I did not have a clue about The Holy Spirit. Despite all that, I still got saved. I did believe The Bible was true, but I was a kid and I still thought all books were true.
     
    #18 Reynolds, May 19, 2017
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 3
  19. JonC

    JonC Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    8,481
    Likes Received:
    542
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In terms of essential doctrine that comprise the gospel message, here are the idea’s I’m toying with (from the gospel as presented in the first chapters of John):

    1. The divinity and creatorship of Christ
    2. The Incarnation
    3. A general revelation (there was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man).
    4. A universal rejection of the Word, depravity, sin (the world did not know Him).
    5. The necessity of a supernatural rebirth/re-creation accomplished through the Cross
    6. The death, burial and resurrection of Christ.
    7. The Lordship of the Son (the Father has given all things into his hand).
     
  20. evangelist6589

    evangelist6589 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    9,598
    Likes Received:
    136
    Faith:
    Baptist
    NO the gospel is what saves.
     
Loading...