Biblical inerrancy: Difference between revisions

The word ''inerrancy'' comes from the [[English language | English]] word ''inerrant'', from the Latin ''inerrantem'', (parsable as ''in-'' + ''errantem'' - the accusative singular present participle of ''errāre'' - "to err" or "wander"). The [[Oxford English Dictionary]] defines ''inerrant'' as "That does not err; free from error; unerring."<ref>{{oed | inerrant}}</ref> Another word often used{{by whom?|date=June 2021}} to characterize the Bible is "infallible". From dictionary definitions, Frame (2002) insists that this is a stronger term than "inerrant". "'Inerrant' means there are no errors; 'infallible' means there ''can be'' no errors".<ref>Frame, John M. "Is the Bible Inerrant?" IIIM Magazine Online, Volume 4, Number 19, May 13 to May 20, 2002 [http://reformedperspectives.org/files/reformedperspectives/theology/TH.Frame.inerrancy.html]</ref> Yet he agrees that "modern theologians insist on redefining that word also, so that it actually says less than 'inerrancy.{{'"}} [[Harold Lindsell|Lindsell]] (1978) states that, "The very nature of inspiration renders the Bible infallible, which means that it cannot deceive us. It is inerrant in that it is not false, mistaken, or defective".<ref>[[Harold Lindsell| Lindsell, Harold]]. ''The Battle for the Bible.'' Zondervan, 1978, p. 31. {{ISBN|978-0-310-27681-4}}</ref>

According to H. Chaim Schimmel, [[Judaism]] had never promulgated a belief in the literal word of the [[Hebrew Bible]], hence the co-existence of the [[Oral Torah]].<ref>Schimmel, H. Chaim, ''The Oral Law: The rabbinic contribution to Torah Shebe'al Peh'', 2nd, revised ed., Feldheim Publishers, Jerusalem, 1996, pp. 19–21</ref> Within [[Christianity]], some mainstream [[Evangelical]] and [[Protestant]] groups adhere to the inerrancy of the [[Biblical canon | canon]] of [[scripture]] as it reads today. However, the ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' says that "Evangelical scholars&nbsp;... doubt that accepting the doctrine of biblical inerrancy is the best way to assert their belief in biblical authority".<ref>''Encyclopædia Britannica'', "Evangelicalism".</ref>

{{quoteblockquote|Most changes are careless errors that are easily recognized and corrected. Christian scribes often made mistakes simply because they were tired or inattentive or, sometimes, inept. Indeed, the single most common mistake in our manuscripts involves "[[orthography]]", significant for little more than showing that scribes in antiquity could spell no better than most of us can today. In addition, we have numerous manuscripts in which scribes have left out entire words, verses, or even pages of a book, presumably by accident. Sometimes scribes rearranged the words on the page, for example, by leaving out a word and then reinserting it later in the sentence.<ref>See Ehrman, ''Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew'', p. 220</ref>}}

{{quoteblockquote|Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds", as (referring) to many, but (rather) to one, "And to your seed", that is, Christ.{{Bibleref2c|Gal|3:16}}}}

{{quoteblockquote|For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.|{{Bibleref2c|Matthew|5:18|KJV|Mt. 5:18 (KJV)}}}}

{{quoteblockquote|That the Bible is inspired is, indeed, a primary Christian conviction; it is from this that certain consequences have been drawn, such as infallibility and inerrancy, which retain their place in Christian thought because they are held to be bound up with the affirmation of inspiration. But the deductions can be rejected without any ambiguity as to the fact of inspiration. Neither 'fundamentalists' nor sceptics are to be followed at this point... the Bible is inspired because it is the adequate and indispensable vehicle of revelation; but inspiration does not amount to dictation by God.<ref>Mozley, J.K., "The Bible: Its Unity, Inspiration, and Authority", in W.R. Matthews, ed., ''The Christian Faith: Essays in Explanation and Defense'', Harper and Bros., 1936. pp. 58-59.</ref>}}

{{quoteblockquote|The doctrine of biblical inerrancy seems inherently improbable, for two reasons. Firstly, the Scriptures contain what seem to be evident errors and contradictions (although great ingenuity has been applied to explain these away). Secondly, the books of the Old and New Testaments did not gain their place within the "canon", or list of approved books, as soon as they were written. The Old Testament canon was not closed until late in the Apostolic age, and the New Testament canon was not finally closed until the fourth century. If all the Bible's contents were inerrant, one would have thought that this would have become apparent within a much shorter period.<ref>Montefiore, Hugh. ''Credible Christianity: The Gospel in Contemporary Society'', London: Mowbray, 1993; Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1994. p. 5. {{ISBN|0-8028-3768-9}}</ref>}}

* [[Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible]]

* [[R. C. Sproul|Sproul, R. C.]]. ''Hath God Said?'' ([https://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/hath_god_said/ video series]).