The Bells started questioning their assumptions about the Bible itself, "discovering the Bible as a human product," as Rob puts it, rather than the product of divine fiat. "The Bible is still the center for us," Rob says, "but it's a different kind of center. We want to embrace mystery, rather than conquer it."

"I grew up thinking that we've figured out the Bible," Kristen says, "that we knew what it means. Now I have no idea what it means. And yet I feel like life if big again - like life used to be black and white, and now it's in color."
Christianity Today, Nov. 2004, p. 38

Tony Campolo was a plenary speaker at the 2006 Spiritual Activism Conference, which was aimed at "taking back religion from the conservative Christians. Tony tried to explain at this conference the necessity of following Scripture. But one participant retorted, "I thought this was a spiritual progressives' conference. I don't want to play the game of 'the Bible says this or that,' or that we get validation from something other than ourselves."

There you have it. Validation from ourselves simply means you make up your own god. We Christians may interpret the Bible differently; we may apply it to life differently; we may have arguments over exegesis. But the Bible has to be the ultimate authority. Otherwise we end up worshiping the goddess of tolerance and believing that tolerance takes precedence over truth.

Dorothy Sayers, the great English writer, said it best: "In the world it is called Tolerance, but in hell it is called Despair, the sin that believes in nothing, cares for nothing, seeks to know nothing, interferes with nothing, enjoys nothing, hates nothing, finds purpose in nothing, lives for nothing, and remains alive because there is nothing for which it will die."
Chuck Colson, Breakpoint

1. The Bible as Special Revelation
   
   1. Views
      
      1. Liberal:
         God - people - tradition - scripture
      2. Catholic:
         God - Church - Magisterium (Tradition+Scripture) - people
      3. Evangelical:
         God - prophet - Scripture - people
   2. The Process in Outline
      
      1. Giving
         
         1. Revealing
         2. Inspiring
         3. Canonizing
         4. Preserving
         5. Authenticating
      2. Receiving
         
         1. Illuminating
         2. Interpreting
         3. Applying
2. The Bible and the Word of God
   
   1. Views
      
      1. Sacra Scriptura est Verbum Dei
      2. Scripture Contains the Word of God
      3. Scripture Becomes the Word of God
      4. Scripture Points to the Word of God
      5. Scripture Was the Word of God
      6. Scripture is a record of the Word of God
3. Inspiration
   
   1. Views
      
      1. Liberal

         The Bible is a response to God's revelation that comes in many forms. Writers of the Bible are people with unique religious insight who wrote their meditations for us. Their writings are inspiring. "We take the Bible too seriously to take it too literally."

         "One of the vital challenges facing thoughtful people today is how to read the Bible faithfully without abandoning a sense of truth and history. "Reading the Bible Again for the First Time" provides a fully authentic yet contemporary understanding of the scriptures. Many mistakenly believe there are no choices other than embracing fundamentalism or simply rejecting the Bible as something that can bring meaning to our lives. Answering this modern dilemma, acclaimed author Marcus Borg reveals how to reconcile the Bible with both a scientific, critical way of thinking and our deepest spiritual needs. This seminal book shows you how to read the Bible through an approach the author calls "historical-metaphorical." Borg explores what the scriptures meant to the ancient communities that produced and lived by them. He then helps readers discover the meaning of these stories, providing knowledge and perspective to make the wisdom of the Bible an essential part of our modern lives. The author argues that the conventional way of seeing and interpreting the Bible has become unpersuasive to millions of people in our time, and that we need a fresh way of encountering the Bible that takes the text seriously but not literally-even as it takes seriously who we have become."

      2. Conceptual

         God inspired concepts, big ideas, in the writers' minds. They put them into words as they wrote their books. The details, the specifics are the human form. The concepts are truth from God.

      3. Verbal-Plenary

         God speaks in these words and all these words to give us His truth. Inspiration goes all the way to the very words. But those words are ordinary human words and expressions coming from divinely guided human thinking.

      4. Dictation

         God actually spoke the words of Scripture and the writers wrote them down without becoming personally involved in the composition of Scripture.

         Athenagoras: Holy Spirit breathes the words through the writers as a musician breathes through a pipe.

   2. Central Biblical Support
      
      1. 2 Peter 1:20-21 -- The "how"
         
         1. Contrast myths, etc. (1:16-19)

            The young Winston Churchill said this: One of these days, perhaps, the cold bright light of science and reason will shine through the cathedral windows and we shall go out into the field to seek God for ourselves. The great laws of nature will be understood - our destiny and our past will be clear. We shall then be able to dispense with the religious toys that have agreeably fostered the development of mankind. Until then, anyone who deprives us of our illusions - or pleasant, hopeful illusions - is a wicked man and should (I quote my Plato) 'be refused a chorus.'

         2. Prophecy extends to all Scripture. The part stands for the whole.
         3. Initiative is not human but divine.
         4. Men spoke = verbal inspiration
         5. "moved" fero, menoi pheromenoi
            Taken up and conveyed to bearer's goal.

      
      
      

      2. 2 Timothy 3:15-17 -- The "result"
         
         1. pa/sa pasa = ALL -- in its entirety
                  = EVERY -- each part
         2. grafh. graphe = "Scripture" technical term for O.T. in N.T., Philo, Josephus, etc.
         3. qeo,pneustoj theopneustos: passive: "Writing" receives the action. Thus "all is inspired," not "all inspired Scripture."
         4. Shows God's authorship of all Scripture (plenary inspiration).
         5. Gal. 3:8,22; Rom. 9:17 Scripture personified.
            
            Acts 13:32-35 God is the author of all Scripture records.
            
            Gal. 3:16 To every word.
            
            Acts 1:16; 4:25; Heb. 3:7; 10:15 Scripture is voice of the Spirit.
      3. Pss. 19, 119
      4. 1 Cor. 2:12-13
         The Holy Spirit brings God's truth in words.
      5. John 10:34-35
         
         1. Gives Psalms the authority of Law. All Scripture is authoritative word.
         2. Because the argument hinged on a word, we say inspiration extends to every word. cf. Gal. 3:16.
         3. Scripture cannot be broken, annulled, denied, abolished, done away with.
      6. Matt. 5:17-18
         
         1. The authority, which comes from its divine source, extends to "iota" and "tittle."
         2. "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the Law to become invalid." (Berkeley Trans.)
   3. Writers' Consciousness
      N.T. writer's were aware they were writing God's Word.
      
      1. 1 Cor. 2:12 Truth from Spirit
      2. 1 Cor. 14:37 What I write is the Lord's commandment
      3. Gal. 1:11-12 Received from Christ
      4. 1 Thess. 2:13 Message really is the Word of God
      5. Rev. 1:10-11 Write what you see . . .
   4. Issues in Inspiration
      
      1. Confluence
      2. Levels of Inspiration
      3. Use of Sources
      4. Permanent vs. Particular
   5. A Model of Inspiration
      
      1. Verbal
         The words of Scripture are inspired. Inspiration cannot be limited to concepts or ideas.
      2. Plenary
         All Scripture is God-breathed. There is no basis for partial inspiration or degrees of inspiration.
      3. Confluence
         God spoke through human persons and human words. One must not deny either the human or the divine workings.
   6. Results of Inspiration
      
      1. Immediacy
         Scripture is God speaking, so we can hear Him directly
      2. Durability
         Written documents are far less liable to corruption than oral accounts.
      3. Catholicity
         They can be transported easily everywhere.
   7. Definition: That work of God wherein He providentially prepared and moved the human authors enabling them to receive and communicate according to their individual personalities and styles the truth He would have His people know for His glory and human salvation.
   8. Summarizing Statement: "Holy Scripture . . . is to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms; obeyed, as God's com¬mand, in all that it requires; embraced, as God's promise, in all that it promises." (Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy).
4. A Critical Characteristic: Inerrancy
   
   1. Views
      
      1. Absolute Inerrancy
         
         1. All that the Bible teaches is truth from God. It is wholly true in all its affirmations
         2. Scripture speaks with precision. All accounts are exact. Language is usually technical.
            
            1. Jesus fed 5000, not 4999
            2. Molten Sea (2 Chron. 4:2) is exactly 30 cubits around and 10 cubits in diameter
         3. Correspondence theory of truth
         4. Theological Method: Deductive
         5. Proponents: Harold Lindsell, John R. Rice
      2. Full Inerrancy
         
         1. All that the Bible teaches is truth from God. It is wholly true in all its affirmations
         2. Scripture speaks accurately in ordinary language.
            
            1. Phenomenal language: The sun rises
            2. Summaries: Sermon on the Mount, Pentecost
            3. Rounded numbers or approximation
               
               1. Feeding of 5000
               2. Molten Sea
            4. Level of precision is indicated by the context
         3. Correspondence theory of truth
         4. Theological Method: Retroductive
         5. Proponents: Millard Erickson, J. I. Packer, Paul Feinberg
      3. Limited Inerrancy
         
         1. All that the Bible teaches about God and salvation is true, but it may err in what it teaches about science or history by representing current thinking.
         2. Scripture speaks accurately in ordinary language.
            
            1. Scientific & historical errors
               
               1. Molten Sea
               2. David wrote Psalm 110
               3. The mustard is the smallest of all seeds Matt. 13:31-32
         3. Correspondence theory of truth
         4. Theological Method: Inductive
         5. Proponents: Daniel Fuller
      4. Infallibility
         
         1. The Scripture will not fail in its purpose to make people wise to salvation (2 Tim. 3:15).
         2. Scripture speaks in ordinary language, witnessing to God's working. The truth in is the content, not the form, of the message
         3. Intentional theory of truth
         4. Theological Method: Inductive
         5. Proponents: Jack Rogers, Stan Grenz, Donald Bloesch
   2. Truth
      
      1. Correspondence (factual)
         
         1. A proposition is true iff it corresponds to reality
         2. Correspondence is
            
            1. to which the author intended it to correspond
            2. to the degree intended.
      2. Coherence
         
         1. A statement is true iff it explains how the world works, iff it helps me make sense of the world, gives me meaning, purpose and hope
         2. It often comes in story form
      3. Intentional
         
         1. A statement is true iff it accomplishes the author's intended purpose
         2. It may or may not be factually true
      4. Existential
         
         1. A statement is true iff it's true for me
         2. Relevance is more basic than factuality
   3. Precision and Truth
      
      1. A statement does not have to be absolutely precise to be true.
      2. The level of precision is indicated by the context
      1. 5000 sounds like a round number
      2. Pentecost sermon (Acts 2) sounds like a summary
      3. The decalogue sounds precise.
      4. Genealogies of Genesis 5 sound precise
5. Inerrancy and Theological Method
   
   1. Deductive
      
      1. Syllogism:
         
         1. The Bible is the inspired Word of God
         2. Therefore it cannot have errors and must be precise
      2. History can never disprove the Bible. All "errors" have an explanation
   2. Retroductive
      
      1. All views share equally the burden of proof
      2. Look to all the data, biblical and historical
      3. Which view explains the most data with the fewest difficulties?
   3. Inductive
      
      1. Look at all the data and infer the principle that describes Bible
      2. One can infer inerrancy only if all problems can be removed.
6. Support for Inerrancy
   
   1. Inspiration

      The Scripture's self witness is that it is truthful. A key point is that self testimony is valid and strong when that testimony is validated by the sufficient evidence. Only a person can testify to the intentions of his or her heart. There is a parallel in the testimony of Scripture.

   2. Character of God

      The character of God as truth implies that what He says would be true. Since the Bible is His word, it must be true. To imply that the Bible shares divine attributes because of its divine origin is fallacious. If that were the case, then creation would also have to be inerrant and the Bible would have to be eternal, neither of which are true.

   3. Character of Prophets

      The standard for true prophecy was complete truthfulness. Can the standard for the Bible be less if it is truly prophetic?

   4. Bible's Use of the Bible

      The NT uses the OT as if it were inerrant. In particular, Jesus treated the OT as completely truthful, especially in areas that would be questionable. John 10:35, Adam & Eve, Jonah, etc.

   5. History

      The witness of the church over the ages to the truthfulness of Scripture is powerful testimony for us today. It is interesting that even foes of inerrancy admit that the church held the doctrine historically. While this is not definitive, it is significant testimony to us. Gerstner has an excellent short summary in The Foundations of Biblical Authority. Woodbridge's Biblical Authority is the best response to the thesis that the church did not believe inerrancy until the mid 1700's. Note that Pinnock agrees that all the church fathers held inerrancy and goes on to say, "what we have to do is admit honestly that the old view of the Bible that we treasure is not biblical and serviceable in every detail today and, like every other theological topic can use some improvement and development by the thinkers and scholars of our generation" (Scripture Principle, p. xii).

   6. Accuracy

      The remarkable accuracy of the Bible in areas where we can check it gives confidence that it is true in all areas. It is remarkable that many who take the Bible on a fairly neutral basis agree at this point. Kirsopp Lake, Nelson Glueck, W. F. Albright are some non-evangelical archaeologists who agree fully with the accuracy of the Bible. I am intrigued that TIME (Dec. 30, 1974) concluded, "After more than two centuries of facing the heaviest scientific guns that could be brought to bear, the Bible has survived -- and is perhaps the better for the siege. Even on the critics' own terms -- historical fact -- the Scriptures seem more acceptable now than they did when the rationalists began the attack."

7. Objections to Inerrancy
   
   1. Phenomena
   2. Ancient World View
   3. No Inerrant Bibles Today
   4. Uncertainty in Interpretation
   5. Soteriological Purpose
8. Speech-Act and Inerrancy (G. Allison, "Speech Act Theory and Its Implications for the Doctrine of the Inerrancy/Infallibility of Scripture," Philosophia Christi 18 (Spring, 1995) 1-23; K. Van Hoozer, Is There a Meaning in This Text? Zondervan, 2001)
   
   1. Three Aspects of a Speech-Act
      
      1. Locutionary = propositional content
      2. Illocutionary = What we do in saying something. The motivation and total context of the speech act (Encourage, warn, assert, reprove, instruct, command, etc.)
         
         1. Fact (Assertive): Jesus has come again
         2. Command: Jesus, come again! (God speaking)
         3. Promise (Comissive): I, Jesus will come again
         4. Exhortation: Praise God! Jesus, has come again!
         5. Declarative (by which something becomes true): Jesus come! (God speaking and it happens)
      3. Perlocutionary = What we achieve by saying something. The response it intends to produce
         
         1. Factual statement intends instruction
         2. Command intends obedience
         3. Promise intends trust
         4. Exhortation intends one to join in an action
         5. Declarative intends a new situation
      4. "Meaning, according to speech-act theory, is the complex interaction of all three aspects. Thus, if two people both yelled "Fire!" one of which was on a firing range and the other in a crowded theatre, the two statement would be the same locution ("Fire!") but given their different illocutionary status (firing range vs. theatre) would result in different perlocutions (shoot your gun vs. get out of the theatre)." Marc Cortez, ThM Thesis, 2004
      5. As normally defined, inerrancy usually relates to the locutionary aspect and only the factual assertions. An adequate doctrine addresses the truth value of commands, promises, exhortations and declarations.
10. Inerrancy vs. Truthfulness
    
    1. Double Negative vs. Positive
    2. Encourages one to seek errors vs. seek truth
    3. Factual Oriented vs. Full Truth Oriented
       
       1. Facts
       2. Commands
       3. Promises

* Note: These are outlines that I use in my classes. You are welcome to use them in any way that honors the Lord Jesus Christ. If you have comments at any point, I'd welcome them.