Reflection Paper

“Is the Bible God’s Inspired, Infallible, Inerrant Word?”

by David Sisler

for

Dr. Merwyn S. Johnson

ST 11 Contemporary Theology

May 9, 2006
 2

The biggest selling novel of the last three years is about to become a blockbuster movie.

Selling more than 40,000,000 copies in hardcover, and soon to be released as a film staring Tom

Hanks, and directed by Ron Howard, Dan Brown’s mega-hit, The DaVinci Code, is changing the

way people think about the Church, Jesus Christ, and God’s Word – and the changes are not for

the better. In Brown’s conspiracy-laden story Jesus is married to Mary Magdalene, and is the

father of at least one child. In addition, Brown’s protagonists declare that in order to control the

Roman Empire, church leaders doctored the Bible, fabricated Jesus’ divinity for political reasons,

and ruthlessly suppressed the truth.

In a national survey of adults who have read The DaVinci Code, 53% said their “spiritual

growth and understanding” was helped by the novel.1 Add to that depressing statistic, the

revelation that among adults who profess to regularly attend a Christian church, that 40% do not

believe “every word in the Bible is true and can be trusted,” and only 11% believe “the Bible is

the source of absolute moral truth.”2 These statistics are symptomatic of the fact that the Bible is

under attack. The issue of whether or not the Bible is God’s inspired, infallible, inerrant Word is

the most pressing theological issue of our time.

How do we know God today? How does he reveal himself to us today?3 The answer is,

through Scripture, the written Word of God. How we understand God and relate to him, will

depend, in large measure, on the view we take of Scripture. Loraine Boettner writes:

1
George Barna, “Christians and The DaVinci Code,” The Barna Group [Internet],
available from http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=Perspective&PerspectiveID=4,
accessed 28 April 2006.
2
Ibid.
3
The assumption is that he does reveal himself and wants us to know him.
 3

“If we believe that the Bible is the very Word of God and infallible, we will
develop one conception ... If we believe that it is only a collection of human
writings, perhaps considerably above the average in its spiritual and moral
teachings, but nevertheless containing many errors, we will develop a radically
different conception. Hence, we can hardly overestimate the importance of a
correct doctrine of the Scriptures.”4

The question, “Can you take the Bible literally,” means can you take the Bible factually.

If you can prove the facts of the Bible to be accurate, what difference does it make for life? Such

a scientific approach is alien to the Bible because the Bible does not approach or deal with

subjects in that fashion. Such a criteria to prove the truth value of the Bible comes from outside

the Bible. By this means, the biblical idiom has been transformed into something that is not

historically biblical. The idea of inerrancy would correspond to the “ugly ditch” of fact and

factuality, but Karl Barth refuses to work out of any of Lessing’s ditches, representing instead the

“no ditch option.” For Barth the most striking thing of all is God reveals God’s self. Ultimately

only God can speak the Word of God. The only one who can confirm the word of the Bible is

the one whose word it is, God. The only basis for revelation is when God speaks God’s Word.

Barth says we have no natural capacity to understand and know revelation when we see it.

General revelation (something else plus God) emphasizes our natural and human capacities; the

means of revelation is put in the place of God. Special revelation means God and nothing else

comes through.5

The place to begin is with the God himself, but if we are to begin with God he must

reveal himself to us. This he does, and the visitation is gracious (Ps 8:4). The voice of God’s

4
Loraine Boettner. Studies in Theology, pg. 9; quoted in W. Robert Cook, “Biblical
Inerrancy and Intellectual Honesty,” Bibliothica Sacra 125 (April-June 1968): 157.
5
Class notes, ST 11 Contemporary Theology, Dr. Merwyn S. Johnson, 7 February 2006.
 4

glory is seen throughout all creation (Ps 19:1-4). He has always had a witness; plentiful rains and

fruitful harvests have spoken of him (Acts 14:17). There is no excuse for humanity not to follow

him, not to know him, not to serve him, because in his creation, God is known. Because of the

self-revealing majesty of his creation, those who will not serve him are without excuse (Rom

1:20). Mercifully, that was not the end of God’s self-revelation. Through theophanies (Gen

15:17; 16:10; Job 38:1; Ex 23:20-23) and direct communication (Gen 2:16; Ex 19:9; Num 27:21;

1 Samuel 3:4; Joel 2:28) he revealed himself. First to Adam, then to Noah, then to Abraham,

then Moses, God revealed himself. Through the nation of Israel, called to be his people, called to

carry the message of salvation, he revealed himself. Through the Holy Spirit, he revealed

himself (Num 11:25; 24:2; 2 Sam 23:2; 1 Chron 12:18; 2 Chron 24:20; Ezek 2:2). “God,” the

writer of Hebrews said, “who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the

fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by his Son” (Heb 1:1-2). The voice of

“these last days,” the Son of God, is the living Word of God (John 1:1).6

Before continuing, we need to consider several definitions. A quick search of several

dictionaries for “inerrant” and “infallible” reveals virtually interchangeable definitions: “Inerrant

– incapable of erring; infallible,” and “Infallible – incapable of erring; not liable to deceive.”

Charles C. Ryrie says that as it concerns Scripture, “inerrant” has been used more recently, and

“if there is any difference in the shade of meaning it is simple this: infallible includes the

resultant idea of trustworthiness while inerrant emphasizes principally the truthfulness of the

6
Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from the New King James Version.
 5

Scriptures.”7 Edward J. Young says that “infallible” means that Scriptures “possess the quality

of freedom from error. They are exempt from the liability of mistake, incapable of error. In all

their teachings they are in perfect accord with the truth.”8 W. Robert Cook says, “It is [an]

artificial division which would attempt a discussion of the doctrine of inerrancy apart from the

doctrine of inspiration ... The doctrine of inerrancy is a part and parcel of a Biblical doctrine of

inspiration.”9 Carl. F. H. Henry states his beliefs on inerrancy with a series of denials and

affirmations:

Negatively, inerrancy does not require modern technological precision in

reporting or discussing statistics, measurements, genealogies, or cosmology; it
does not require only nonmetaphorical or nonsymbolic language to convey truth;
it does not require verbal exactitude in New Testament use of Old Testament
passages; it does not render personal faith in Jesus Christ dispensable or a
guarantee that evangelical orthodoxy will necessarily follow from adopting this
doctrine. Positively, it refers not only to theological and ethical teachings, but
also to historical and scientific teachings, insofar as they are part of the express
message of Scripture; it inheres in the very words, propositions, or sentences of
the Bible, not merely the thoughts or concepts of the writers.10

The Bible describes itself as “perfect,” “sure,” and “right” (Ps 19:7), “pure”(Ps 19:9),

“truth” (Ps 119:160; John 17:17), and “enduring forever” (Ps 19:9), and “forever settled in the

heavens” (Ps 119:89; cf. Matt 24:34). The Bible demonstrates its inspiration as it speaks to its

7
Charles C. Ryrie, “Importance of Inerrancy,” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (April-June 1963):
137.
8
Edward J. Young, “Thy Word Is Truth: Some Thoughts on the Biblical Doctrine of
Inspiration. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 113.
9
W. Robert Cook, “Biblical Inerrancy and Intellectual Honesty,” Bibliotheca Sacra 125
(April-June 1968): 158, 167.
10
Millard J. Erickson, Carl F. H. Henry, in A New Handbook of Christian Theologians,
Donald W. Musser and Joseph L. Price, eds., 217, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996.
 6

formation. Moses was told to “write these words,” and “he wrote on tablets the words of the

covenant” (Ex 34:27). God twice told Isaiah to write (Isa 8:1; 30:8). God told Jeremiah, “Take a

scroll of a book and write on it all the words that I have spoken to you” (Jer 36:2). Ezekiel was

told to write the details of the future temple (Ezek 43:11). God told Habakkuk to “write the

vision, and make it plain” (Hab 2:2). The Gibralter verse of inspiration11 is 2 Timothy 3:16: “All

Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction,

for instruction in righteousness.” Edward W. Goodrick deals with a key element of the text, the

word “inspiration” (or “inspired”) by first identifying the Greek word theopneustos – “God-

breathed . . . “God,” he says, “is the active agent.” Discussing the grammatical construction,

Goodrick says “you produce the sentence ‘God breathes the Scripture,’ or ‘God breathes out the

Scripture.’”12 The inseparable relationship between the verbal message of God and the words of

the prophets is summed up in Peter’s statement: “For prophecy never came by the will of man,

but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21). “Moved” or

“carried along” is the same word Luke uses in Acts 27:15-17 to describe their ship as “driven” by

the wind. “The prophets were continuously being ‘borne along’ or ‘carried’ by the Holy Spirit as

they ... wrote Scripture, thus insuring the divine inerrancy of the message they communicated.”13

New Testament writings verify the inerrancy of the Old Testament when the writer of

Hebrews recounted the simple story of Abraham giving tithe to Melchizedek (Heb 7:4-10), when

11
John A. Witmer, “Biblical Evidence for the Verbal-Plenary Inspiration of the Bible,”
Bibliothica Sacra 121 (July-September 1964): 244.
12
Edward W. Goodrick, “Let’s put 2 Timothy 3:16 Back in the Bible,” Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 25 (December 1982): 479.
13
Witmer, 249.
 7

James quoted Amos to verify the preaching of Simon Peter (Acts 15:13-17), and when Paul

demanded the use of a singular noun, not a plural one, referring to the “seed” not “seeds” of

Abraham (Gal 3:16). The New Testament writers declare for themselves what they verified for

the Old Testament – they, too, were writing the Word of God. The believers at Thessalonica

received the word of Paul “not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God” (1

Thess 2:13). Peter told his readers he was passing Jesus’ commandment to them (2 Pet 3:2), and

he declared that Paul’s writings were as “the rest of the Scriptures” (2 Peter 3:15-16). Paul

pronounces a curse on any one who preaches a gospel differing from the one he preached (Gal

1:8). John deals in similar fashion with anyone who adds to or takes away from “the things

which are written in this book” (Rev 22:19). “Every Scripture God-breathed” demands that the

Bible, in its original autographs, is completely accurate, infallible, and inerrant.

Jack B. Rogers and Donald K. McKim, in The Authority and Inerrancy of the Bible,

define biblical error as involving “deliberate and deceitful telling of that which the author knew

to be untrue”14 a definition they attribute to Augustine, but at the same time, they conveniently

dismiss Augustine’s declaration, “I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free

from error.”15 So there will be no doubt as to what he means, Augustine continues, “And if in

these writings I am perplexed by anything which appears to me opposed to the truth, I do not

hesitate to suppose that either the manuscript is faulty, or the translator has not caught the

14
Jack B. Rogers, and Donald K. McKim, The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible:
An Historical Approach, (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1979), 31.
15
“Letter 82 to Jerome.” New Advent [Internet]; available from
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102082.htm; accessed 22 April 2006.
 8

meaning of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it.”16 Faced with the clear

evidence of their own research, Rogers and McKim continue, “The early church theologians like

Augustine had understood error in the biblical sense of willful intent to deceive, and they were

quick to affirm that the Bible never erred in that sense.”17 Gerald T. Sheppard declares, “Not a

single church father or Reformer states directly that an author can err in any intended historical

reference as long as the same author did not intend to do so.”18 Donald G. Bloesch “emphasizes

the primacy of the Word of God over cultural and philosophical influences.” This “progressive

evangelicalism stands in continuity with the historical church – especially the early church

fathers and the Reformers of the sixteenth century.”19

The Patristics assumed the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures and treated it as a

fundamental fact, so basic that they rarely mention it. A study, however brief, of the early church

fathers, reveals “something most essential ... about the text of Scripture – something that is

currently fashionable to ignore or explain away – namely that it is, as a whole, authentic,

authoritative and inspired.”20 Clement of Rome exhorts his readers to, “Look carefully into the

16
Ibid. The emphasis is mine, but note, Augustine gives an unequivocal statement in
favor of inerrancy in the original autographs of Scripture!
17
Rogers and McKim, 46.
18
Gerald T. Sheppard, “Recovering the Natural Sense.” Theology Today 38 (October
1981), 334.
19
Roger E. Olson, Donald G. Bloesch, in A New Handbook of Christian Theologians,
Donald W. Musser and Joseph L. Price, eds., 67, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996. Bloesch,
however, “denies that every single statement of the Bible conforms to the facts of history and
world science.” Ibid., 72.
20
Peter A. Chamberas, “Transfiguration of Christ: A Study in the Patristic Exegesis of
Scripture,” St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 14, no. 1-2 (1970), 61.
 9

Scriptures, which are the true utterances of the Holy Spirit. Observe that nothing false is written

in them.”21 Irenaeus says, “They are beyond falsehood.”22 In another place, he says, “The

Scriptures are indeed perfect, since as they were uttered by the Word of God and His Spirit.”23 In

his Commentary on Matthew, Origen says, “There is in the holy discourses [theiois logiois]

nothing crooked or perverse ...”24 Augustine wrote, “I have learned to yield in this respect and

honor only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I firmly believe that the authors

were completely free from error.”25

Luther said, “The Scriptures have never erred ... The Scriptures cannot err ... It is

impossible that Scripture should contradict itself.”26 Quenstadt said, “The holy canonical

Scriptures in their original text are the infallible truth and free from error ... there is no lie, no

deceit, no error, even the slightest.”27 Concerning Calvin, E. A. Dowey, Jr. says, “There is no

hint anywhere in Calvin’s writings that the original text contained any flaws at all ... Calvin,

21
Quoted in James M. Sawyer, “The History of the Doctrine of Inspiration from the
Ancient Church through the Reformation.” Bible.org [Internet]; available from
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=688; Accessed 23 March 2006.
22
Ibid.
23
Quoted in John J. O’Keefe and R. R. Reno, Sanctified Vision: An Introduction to Early
Christian Interpretation of the Bible, (Baltimore: The Johnson Hopkins University Press, 2005),
11.
24
Quoted in Michael W. Holmes, “Origen and the Inerrancy of Scripture,” Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 24 (September 1981): 224.
25
Ibid., Letter 82.
26
Quoted in Harold Lindsell, “Biblical Infallibility: The Reformation and Beyond,”
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 19 (Winter 1976): 26.
27
Ibid., 27.
 10

where he does find a difficulty, lays it to a copyist’s error, and this can only mean that Calvin

regarded the autographs as infallible.”28 “The Belgic Confession,” which was prepared by the

National Synod at Dort (1619), and which remained the “official doctrinal standard for the

Reformed Churches” into the twentieth century, said of Scripture, “We reject with all our hearts

whatsoever doeth not agree with this infallible rule.”29 In 1644, seven Baptist churches in

London published “The Confessions of Faith,” declaring, “The Rule of the Knowledge, Faith,

and Obedience, concerning the worship and service of God, and all other Christian duties, is not

mans inventions, opinions, devices, lawes, constitutions, or traditions unwritten whatsoever, but

onely the word of God contained in the Canonicall Scriptures.”30 In 1647, the Westminister

Assembly of Divines produced “The Westminister Confession of Faith.” Harold Lindsell says,

“Among the confessions of faith in the Reformed tradition, none ever written is superior to the

Westminister Confession in its scope, clarity, and precision. Chapter 1 sets forth the doctrine of

Scripture. It is called ‘the only infallible rule of faith and practice.’”31 In 1677, the “Second

London Confession,” specifically used the term “infallible” for the first time in direct relation to

28
Ibid., 28.
29
William E. Nix, “The Doctrine of Inspiration Since the Reformation,” Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 25 (December 1982): 449.
30
Ibid., 445 (Spelling is uncorrected from the original).
31
Lindsell, “Biblical Infallibility, (Winter 1976): 31. Lindsell continues, “From this some
have argued that the Westminster Confession in effect limited inerrancy to matters of faith and
practice, excluding matters having to do with history, science, and cosmology. The error of this
may be seen [by] two phrases that destroy the limited inerrancy notion. The confession speaks of
‘the entire perfection’ of Scripture and acknowledges the ‘consent of all of the parts.’”
 11

the Scriptures.”32 This “Second London Confession” was adopted by the Baptist Association

meeting in Philadelphia, on September 25, 1742. Under the heading “Of the Holy Scriptures,”

this “Philadelphia Confession” says, “The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain and

infallible rule of all-saving knowledge, faith, and obedience.”33 John Wesley asserted, “‘All

Scripture is given by inspiration of God,’ and consequently, all Scripture is infallibly true.”34

More weight could be added, but I will close with a quotation from Charles H. Spurgeon:

“This volume is the writing of the living God: each fetter was penned with an
Almighty finger; each word in it dropped from the everlasting lips, each sentence
was dictated by the Holy Spirit ... It is God’s voice, not man’s, the words are
God’s words, the words of the Eternal, the Invisible, the Almighty ... This is the
book untainted by any error; but is pure, unalloyed, perfect truth. Why? Because
God wrote it.”35

Believers through all eras of the Church’s history, and the testimony of Scripture itself declare

that God’s Word is inspired, infallible, and inerrant. To proclaim this truth is the greatest

theological need of our day.

32
Frank Louis Maudlin, “A Notion of Truth Among Seventeenth-Century English
Baptists,” Perspectives in Religious Studies, 18 (Spring 1991): 49.
33
Nix, 446.
34
Ibid., 452.
35
Charles H. Spurgeon, “The Bible,” The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Book for the
Ages, Version 1.0, CD-ROM, AGES Software, 1997.
 12

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barna, George. “Christians and The DaVinci Code.” The Barna Group [Internet]. Available from
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=Perspective&PerspectiveID=4. Accessed 28
April 2006.

Boettner, Loraine. Studies in Theology, pg. 9. Quoted in W. Robert Cook. “Biblical Inerrancy and
Intellectual Honesty.” Bibliothica Sacra 125 (April-June 1968): 157.

Chamberas, Peter A. “Transfiguration of Christ: A Study in the Patristic Exegesis of Scripture.”

St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 14, no. 1-2 (1970): 48-65.

Cook, W. Robert. “Biblical Inerrancy and Intellectual Honesty.” Bibliothica Sacra 125 (April-
June 1968): 157-175.

Goodrick, Edward W. “Let’s Put 2 Timothy 3:16 Back in the Bible.” Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 25 (December 1982): 479-487.

Erickson, Millard J. Carl F. H. Henry. In A New Handbook of Christian Theologians. Musser

Donald W., and Joseph L. Price, eds. 214-220. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996.

Holmes, Michael W. “Origen and the Inerrancy of Scripture.” Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 24 (September 1981): 221-231.

Johnson, Merwyn S. Lecture notes. ST 11 Systematic Theology. Taught at Erskine Theological

Seminary. 7 February 2006.

Lindsell, Harold. “Biblical Infallibility: The Reformation and Beyond.” Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society. 19 (Winter 1976): 25-37.

Maudlin, Frank L. “A Notion of Truth Among Seventeenth-Century English Baptists.”

Perspectives in Religious Studies 18 (Spring 1991): 39-57.

New Advent. “Letter 82 to Jerome.” Available from

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102082.htm. Accessed 22 April 2006.

Nix, William E. “The Doctrine of Inspiration Since the Reformation.” Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 25 (December 1982): 443-454.

O’Keefe, John J. and R. R. Reno. Sanctified Vision: An Introduction to Early Christian

Interpretation of the Bible. Baltimore: The Johnson Hopkins University Press, 2005.
 13

Olson, Roger E. Donald G. Bloesch. In A New Handbook of Christian Theologians. Musser,

Donald W. and Joseph L. Price, eds. 67-73. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996.

Rogers, Jack B. and Donald K. McKim. The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible: An
Historical Approach. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1979.

Ryrie, Charles C. “Importance of Inerrancy.” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (April-June 1963): 137-144.

Sawyer, James M. “The History of the Doctrine of Inspiration from the Ancient Church through
the Reformation.” Bible.org [Internet]. Available from
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=688. Accessed 23 March 2006.

Sheppard, Gerald T. “Recovering the Natural Sense.” Theology Today 38 (October 1981): 330-
337.

Spurgeon, Charles H. “The Bible.” The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit. Book for the Ages.
Version 1.0. CD-ROM. AGES Software. 1997.

Witmer, John A. “Biblical Evidence for the Verbal-Plenary Inspiration of the Bible.” Bibliothica
Sacra 121 (July-September 1964): 243-252.

Young, Edward J. Thy Word Is Truth: Some Thoughts on the Biblical Doctrine of Inspiration.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.