See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/319136200

Biblical Inerrancy: A Reflection

Article · July 2017

DOI: 10.9790/0837-2207131927

CITATIONS READS

0 3,339

1 author:

Kenneth Oppong
Valley View University
19 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kenneth Oppong on 16 August 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 World Wide Journal of Multidiscip linary Research and Development

WWJMRD 2017; 3(7): 221-226

[Link]
Impact Factor MJIF: 4.25
e-ISSN: 2454-6615 Biblical Inerrancy: A Reflection
Peter Obeng Manu Tutu
Department of Religious Peter Obeng Manu, Kenneth Oppong
Education, Valley View
University, Techiman Campus, Abstract
Techiman, Ghana
For two thousand years in the history of the church, the authority of the Bible was not questioned.
However, for more than two centuries, an assault on the reliability of Scripture has come in relentless
Kenneth Oppong
Department of Religious waves from influential voices on the margins of the evangelical movement. Biblical inerrancy has,
Education, Valley View therefore, become a subject of discussion for the past two centuries among [Link] purpose of
University, Techiman Campus, this paper is to revisit the issue of biblical inerrancy to present the augments for and against the
Techiman, Ghana subject. The paper will make clear whether the Bible is errant or inerrant. It will further help its
readers to approach it as the authoritative source of truth revealing God‘s will and the plan of
redemption He has laid in place for [Link] paper concluded that the Bible is without mistakes
and errors. Its origination is a firm assurance to its inerrancy. A true God who seeks the salvation of
His children will not watch for false accounts containing the plan of salvation to be presented to
them. It was made clear that biblical inerrancy has a link with God and His plan to save mankind.
When it is rejected, it will put God‘s plan to save mankind in danger. Therefore, biblical inerrancy
should be held in high esteem.

Keywords: reflection, history, Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, argument, biblical inerrancy,
salvation

Introduction
The word ‗Bible‘ derives its etymology from the Greek ‗biblios‘and Latin ‗biblia‘ both of
which means ‗the book‘[Link] word Bible has become synonymous withthe sixty-six
canonized books of the Christian Scriptures,the Old and New Testaments, God‘s
writtenwordin human language. Being moved by the Holy Spirit, holy men of God spoke and
wrote the messages God gave them. As an infallible book, the Bible has been accepted as the
standard of character and as the authoritative source of all doctrines. 2The Bible was written
by about forty people in three languages- Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. The writers were of
different literary backgrounds, experiences and geographical locations, yet they did not
contradictthemselves in the presentation of their messages. Though the Bible was written by
men, it has come to be called the word of God. This name signifies the source and the origin
of the messages of the Bible. God was the source of the messages. Trying to reach out and
communicate with mankind, He called these holy men and used them as His penmen.
Documenting these revealed words of God, these holy men used their own style and choice
of words. They chose words and expressions their audience could best understand. Though
the words were not dictated to them, God guided their thoughts and directed their minds as to
what to write and record. God was fully in charge in the production and preservation of the
Bible. The Bible with its divine and human nature has been trusted as an infallible word of
God for ages. The Jews accepted the Old Testament as inspired word of God free from
errors. ―Lord Jesus during His earthly ministry reminded His disciples that heaven and earth
shall passaway, but even a jot or tittle from the Scripture shall not pass away.‖ 3Many have
lost their lives for the trust they had in the Bible. Wars have been waged against the Bible,
yet it has stood as an untainted word of God through the ages.4But in the 1800 and 1900 the
infallibility and the inerrancy of the Bible became a subject of controversy. This controversy
Correspondence:
Peter Obeng Manu Tutu
Department of Religious 1
T.H Jemison, Christian Beliefs (Mountain View, California: Pacific Press,1959),12
Education, Valley View 2
Seventh-day Adventist, An Exposition of the Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church (Silver Spring, MD: Pacific
University, Techiman Campus, Press, 2005), 11.
3
Techiman, Ghana Johnson C. Philip and Saneesh Cherian, The Inerrancy of the Bible (n. p: 2006), 3.
4
Seventh-day Adventist, 11.
~ 221 ~
World Wide Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development

was initiated by variety of radical thinkers, ―first in Europe, upon the fact that the Bible is an unfailing guide to
then in USA, and after that in the rest of the world.‖ Thus, whoever may read it, and especially to the Christian and the
the issue of biblical inerrancy has become a worldwide church, for the purpose for which it was given.‖ 11
phenomenon from 1900 down through the centuries. 5The According to Wayne Gruden ―the inerrancy of Scripture
attempt to overthrow the unique position the Bible has in means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not
the Christian communities has led thinkers in non-Christian affirm anything that is contrary to fact.‖12He further added
religions to attack the inerrancy of the Bible.6 that ―in simple terms… the Bible always tells the truth…
What is biblical inerrancy?When did the debate over concerning everything it talks about.‖13Tim
biblical inerrancy start? What are the arguments for and Challiescommenting on this definition mentions that,
against biblical inerrancy? What are the implications for ―So what we affirm in this definition, is that a perfect God
denying biblical inerrancy? These questions need to be moved human authors, by His Spirit, to perfectly transcribe
addressed. what He wanted to communicate. It is important to note
The purpose of this paper is to revisit the issue of biblical that this definition does not apply to the transmission of
inerrancy to present the augments for and against the Scripture through the ages and the translation into other
subject. The paper will investigate whether the Bible is languages. We affirm that only the original autographs are
errant or inerrant. It will further address the confusion held inerrant.‖14
about the trustworthiness of the Bible. Making clear the By summing up what biblical inerrancy is, it is sensible to
inerrancy of the Bible, it will help increase the trust its support the position that the Bible "is without error or fault
readers have for the it,.This will help Bible readers to in all its teaching"15 Basically, the position that the Bible is
approach it as the authoritative source of truth revealing inerrant means that the Bible is free from errors and, thus,
God‘s will and the plan of redemption He has laid in place we can trust it as an authentic word of God communicated
for mankind. to us in human language. The Bible originating from an
The paper is preceded by the definition of biblical inerrant God renders it inerrant. It must also be noted that
inerrancy. A history of biblical inerrancy will be discussed biblical inerrancy is applied only to the original manuscript
next. Then the arguments for and against biblical inerrancy of the Bible known as the autographs: the original scripts of
will be considered.A summary of the Chicago Statement of the Bible by the writers.
Biblical Inerrancy will also be looked [Link], The idea that the Bible is inerrant has become a subject for
problems associated with the denial of biblical inerrancy debate. There was a time the Bible was held as the
will be put in [Link], the paper will be authoritative word of God. Its authenticity and authority
concluded and a position taken on the subject under was never questioned. When, then, did this debate of
consideration. biblical inerrancy start. The subsequent discussion
examines the history of the debate over biblical inerrancy.
Biblical Inerrancy
For two thousand years in the history of the church, the A History of the Debate over Biblical Inerrancy
authority of the Bible was not questioned. However, ―for In the first century or before, there was no debate on the
more than two centuries, an assault on the reliability of inerrancy of the Bible. The Bible was seen as ―perfect, and
Scripture has come in relentless waves from influential exactly as if it had been spoken by God, trumping anything
voices on the margins of the evangelical else.‖16But in the 1800 and 1900 the controversy over the
movement.‖7Biblical inerrancy has, therefore, become a inerrancy of the Bible sparked. This controversy was
subject of discussion for the past two centuries among initiated by variety of radical thinkersin Europe and
scholars.A lot of the problem in the debate has been due to America.17 During this time, some of the biblical events
misunderstanding of the word ‗inerrancy‘ and what people were questioned. For example Noah‘s worldwide flood.18
mean when they use it.‖8 Therefore, to set this in The six literal day creation and the woman being created
perspective biblical inerrancy must be well defined. from the man‘s rib were seen as myths. The authenticity of
other biblical texts were further questioned. Coleman in an
Biblical Inerrancy: What is it? article he wrote in Theology Today said "there have been
―Inerrancy‖ comes from the word ―inerrant‖ and it is long periods in the history of the church when biblical
defined as ―that does not err; free from error; unerring‖9 inerrancy has not been a critical question. It has in fact been
Infallibility is another word that is used to characterize the noted that only in the last two centuries can we legitimately
Bible. Infallibility and inerrancy are sometimes used speak of a formal doctrine of inerrancy. The arguments pro
interchangeably. For John [Link] infallibility is stronger and con have filled many books, and almost anyone can
than inerrant. ―‗Inerrant' means there are no errors; join in the debate"19
'infallible' means there can be no errors"10Paul In the 1970s and 1980s, however, the debate in theological
Helmcommenting on the two terms asserts that:
―‗Inerrancy‘ focuses our attention exclusively on questions 11
Paul Helm, ―B. B. Warfield‘s Path to Inerrancy: An Attempt to Correct Some
Serious Misunderstandings,‖ Westminster Theological Journal (2010), 25.
of truth and falsehood, whereas the older term, 12
Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press,
‗infallibility,‘ when applied to Scripture, lays emphasis 1994; reprint, Grand Rapids: Zondervan 2000), 90.
13
Ibid., 91.
14
Tim Challies, ―the Inerrancy of Scripture,‖ accessed on 23 August 2016,
5
Philip and Cherian, Inerrancy, 3. [Link]
6 15
Ibid., 3-4. Norman [Link], and Roach, B., Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy of
7
John Macarthur, ed. The Scripture Cannot Be Broken (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, Scripture for a New Generation, Baker Books, 2012.
2015), 9.
8
Matthew John Churchouse, ―Defining and Refining Inerrancy: Revisiting the 16
Kris Beckert, ―Scriptural Pursuit,‖ accessed on 23 August 2016,
Doctrine for the 21st Century,‖ (Mphil. Thesis, University of Birmingham, 2009), 70. [Link]
9
―Biblical inerrancy,‖ Wikipedia, accessed 22 August 2016, http:// 17
Philip and Cherian, Inerrancy, 3.
18
[Link]. Wikipedia.
10
John M. Frame, "Is the Bible Inerrant?"IIIM Magazine Online, Volume 4, Number 19
R. J. Coleman, "Biblical Inerrancy: Are We Going Anywhere?,‖ Theology
19, May 13-20, 2002. Today31 (1975), 295.
~ 222 ~
World Wide Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development

circles, which centered on the issue of whether or not the on to other biblical [Link] of Andrew‘s position,
Bible was infallible or both infallible and inerrant, came this argument is sound because if we cannot trust the Bible
into the spotlight. Some notable Christian seminaries, such how can its teachings and doctrines be adhered to. It is
as Princeton Theological Seminary and Fuller Theological when the Bible is trustworthy that it readers will see its
Seminary, were formally adopting the doctrine of teachings as authoritative in their lives.
infallibility while rejecting the doctrine of inerrancy. 20
For many historians the biblical inerrancy debate began The Epistemological Argument:This argument says that
among the evangelicals in the late 19th century. B. B. ―if the Bible is not inerrant, then any claim it makes maybe
Warfield an American conservative theologian of his time, be false. This argument holds that every statement made in
debated extensively in favour of biblical inerrancy. But he Scripture must be true for the entire text to be
was opposed by James Orr who insisted on limited inerrant.‖29Lindsell explains it this way, ―if even one of its
inerrancy.21Supporting Orr, G. C. Berkouwer argued (i.e., the Bible‘s) statements could be in error, the truth of
against Warfield‘s view of biblical inerrancy. His argument any of its statements becomes questionable.‖30In other
remains as perhaps the strongest arguments yet for limited words, all statements of the Bible must be without error for
inerrancy.22 ―The debate began to heat up in the 1960s, it to be inerrant. Andrew further explained ―once inerrancy
when Dewey M. Beegle published a scathing attack on is surrendered, all of Scripture becomes suspect in regards
inerrancy.‖23 Thus, from the eighteenth and nineteenth to trustworthiness.‖31 Giving more insight on this argument
centuries downwards biblical inerrancy has been a subject wrote Pinnock:
of debate among theologians and scholars. The result of denying inerrancy, as skeptics well know, is
the loss of a trustworthy Bible. Limited inerrancy is a slope,
Argument for Biblical Inerrancy not a platform. Although we are repeatedly assured that
Various theories and arguments have been presented in minor errors in unimportant matters would not greatly
defense of biblical inerrancy. They are; slippery-slope affect the substance of the Christian faith nor the authority
argument, epistemological argument, historical argument of Scripture, this admission has the effect of leaving us
and biblical argument. with a Bible which is a compound of truth and error, with
no one to tell us which is which. 32
The Slippery-Slope Argument: Proponents of this Andrew was on point who in evaluating this argument of
argument simply posit that ―if one gives up the inerrancy of biblical inerrancy wrote:
scripture they also surrender other Christian doctrines as I agree with this logic. That is, the presence of one error in
well.‖24 Lindsell, a most noted inerrantist, explainedit this Scripture would not necessarily mean that there are others.
way: What it would mean is that we could not be sure, in any
History affords us notable examples of institutions and given passage, whether the information is true or not. The
denominations that have gone astray. At times it is not easy introduction of uncertainty does undermine the plenary
to perceive howthis happened. The trend away from trustworthiness of the Word of God.33
orthodoxy maybe slow in movement, gradual in its scope,
and almost invisible to the naked eye. When people awaken The Historical Argument: This argument assumes that
to what has happened, it is too late. . . . Theological ―the Bible is inerrant because from the Apostles all the way
aberration, like cancer, begins as a small and seemingly throughoutChurch history, the truths in the Bible were
insignificant blemish, but when it is left to itself it grows assumed, not defended.‖34This argument simply maintains
and spreads.25 that since the church fathers and the reformers did not
Pinnock shares a similar view. He says ―Inerrancy is . . . question the inerrancy of the Bible, it renders the Bible
urgent for Protestants because the sola scriptura principle inerrant. Thus the church has historically believed in the
cannot be maintained without it. An erring authoritycannot inerrancy of Scripture, and thus it is a doctrine with long-
serve as the only source and judge of Christian theology.‖ 26 standing support in tradition. For Andrew, ―this fact alone
This argument for biblical inerrancy is weak. Andrew does not prove anything. After all, many Church Fathers
evaluating this argument in his article on biblical inerrancy held to baptismal regeneration, and we think that is hardly
said ―it is not self-evidently true that once an orthodox correct. Ultimately, the historical argument becomes a
individual or institution denies inerrancy he or it is fallacious appeal to authority.‖35This argument may not be
ultimately bound to abandon orthodoxy.‖ 27Citing an strong enough, but it is still an important point to take into
example, he stated ―inerrancy does not even guarantee account when discussing biblical inerrancy.
orthodoxy for its adherents: Jehovah‘s Witnesses, hardly an
orthodox group, hold strenuously to biblical The Biblical Argument:This argument simply states that
inerrancy.‖28This means that it is possible for any we should believe in inerrancy because the Bible teaches its
institution or individual to deny biblical inerrancy and hold own inerrancy. We should accept the Bible's claim about
[Link] argument advocates that the Bible originated
from God and, since, God is truth it renders the Bible as an
20
―Biblical Inerrancy,‖ Wikipedia accessed 23 August 2016,
[Link] absolute truth. If God does not lie, His words cannot too.
21
Stephen L. Andrew, ―Biblical Inerrancy,‖Chafer Theological SeminaryJournal 8 Speaking to this wrote Andrew, ―all arguments for
(January–March 2002), 4.
22
Ibid.
23 29
Ibid. Feinberg, P.D. "Bible, Inerrancy and Infallibility of." in Evangelical Dictionary of
24
Feinberg, P.D. "Bible, Inerrancy and Infallibility of." in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Elwell, A. Walter. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book house Company,
Theology, ed. Elwell, A. Walter. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book house Company, 2001), 157.
30
2001), 158. Lindsell, 220.
25 31
Harold Lindsell, the Battle for the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976), 185. Andrew, 10.
26 32
Clark H. Pinnock, Biblical Revelation—the Foundation of Christian Theology Pinnock, 80.
33
(Chicago: Moody, 1971), 74. Andrew, 10.
27 34
Andrew, 9. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 157.
28 35
Ibid., 14. Andrew, 11.
~ 223 ~
World Wide Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development

inerrancy of which I am aware admit that Scripture does authenticated through research and every fact verified
not explicitly claim inerrancy for itself. Nevertheless, historical study, they assume that the Bible is in error.‖ 44
arguments have been put forward for its
implicitclaims.‖36To make more clearly biblical argument The Bible is outdated: Those who do not believe in
of inerrancy, He continued: biblical inerrancy claim that the Bible was written many
Perhaps the most common passage used to support years ago, therefore, it has no relevance for our day.
inerrancy is 2 Timothy 3:16, which teaches that all Simply, the Bible cannot be our guide because its principles
Scripture is inspired by God. 2 Peter 1:20-21 teaches that are outdated.45
Scripture originates not with human will, but with God‘s
will. When we combine these two passages with Numbers The Bible is the work of man: The Bible is held by those
23:19, 1 Samuel 15:29, Titus 1:2, and Hebrews 6:18 (these who reject biblical inerrancy as the product of man‘s
latter four passages all teach that God does not lie), we can imagination and created stories. They see the Bible as
legitimately deduce that there are no errors in Scripture.37 man‘s word rather than God‘s word. To them, the Bible is
He further added: just any other religious book like those of Mohammedand
In Matthew 5:18, Jesus states that not one letter, not one Confucius.46 In other words, what they mean is that if the
stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is Bible is just another religious book then it cannot guide us
[Link] John 10:35, Jesus bases his argument from into the way of salvation.
Psalm 82:6 on thefact that the scripture cannot be annulled. Their arguments may sound logical, but then the unique
Both of these passagesteach that Scripture (in these cases, nature of the Bible and the God it reveals is notwell
the Old Testament) isauthoritative—even its jots, tittles, understood by these scholars. These argumentsare not
and the least of [the] commandments (Matthew 5:19). 38 tenable because they operate within different
For Pinnock ―if one believes the Scripture to be God‘s presuppositions. They evaluate spiritual truths in terms of
Word, he cannot fail to believe it inerrant‖39Wayne A. human reasoning and the natural environment, this is
Grudem shared a similar view. He wrote: natural [Link], the Bible standing as untainted
For it to be eternally useful for edification, God‘s word word of God through the ages, in spite of the wars waged
must be an abiding testimony to the veracity of God‘s against it, is evidence of its uniqueness.
speech: Untruthful statements would be unprofitable and
bring dishonor to God by portraying Him as one who at The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy
times speaks untruthfully, and they would serve as an In 1978, International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI)
encouragement to people to imitate God and sometimes was formed to defend the inerrancy of the Bible. The
speak untruthfully as well.40 Council released its famous Chicago Statement on Biblical
Bible argument is, thus, the best and more convincing Inerrancy. The Statement consists of three parts: a
argument for biblical inerrancy. The Bible is its best summary Statement, articles of affirmation and denial, and
advocate, and it implicitly and explicitly claim its an accompanying [Link] the statement the
inerrancy. ―Repeatedly, the Scriptures teach that God Council gave on biblical inerrancy. It states:
cannot lie...If, then, the Bible is from God and his character 1. God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has
is behind it, it must be inerrant and infallible.‖ 41 inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself
to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord,
The Arguments against Biblical Inerrancy Redeemer and Judge. Holy Scripture is God‘s witness to
Some think that the Bible is full of errors and Himself.
inconsistencies and, thus, see it as an errant book. What 2. Holy Scripture, being God‘s own Word, written by men
informs such a position? The following are the arguments prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible
advanced in favour of such a position. divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to
be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms:
The Bible is not scientifically reliable: Those who argue obeyed, as God's command, in all that it requires;
against biblical inerrancy posit that ―the Bible is full of embraced, as God's pledge, in all that it promises.
scientific errors and therefore cannot be trusted in spiritual 3. The Holy Spirit, Scripture‘s divine Author, both
matters either.‖42 They question the truth of the sun authenticates it to us by His inward witness and opens our
standing still, the Israelites being fed with manna on the minds to understand its meaning.
wilderness and how Jonah survived that three days in the 4. Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is
belly of the fish.43 without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it
states about God‘s acts in creation, about the events of
The Bible is historically inaccurate: Anytime archeology world history, and about its own literary origins under God,
or ancient history seems to contradict with biblical records, than in its witness to God‘s saving grace in individual lives.
those who do not believe in biblical inerrancy conclude that 5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this
the Bible is wrong. ―Unless every biblical name is total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded,
or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the Bible‘s
36
own; and such lapses bring serious loss to both the
Ibid., 12.
37
Andrew, 12. individual and the Church.47
38
Ibid., 13.
39
Pinnock, 74.
40
Wayne A. Grudem, ―Scripture‘s Self-Attestation and the Problem of Formulating a 44
Doctrine of Scripture,‖ in Scripture and Truth, ed. D. A. Carson and John D. Ibid., 3.
45
Woodbridge (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), 44. Ibid.
46
41
Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 158. Sper, 3.
42 47
David Sper, ed., Can I Really Trust the Bible? (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Thomas Macarthur.
Nelson, 2003), 2.
43
Ibid.
~ 224 ~
World Wide Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development

Tracing the source of the Bible as being from a Holy and

unerring God, the Council asserted that the Bible cannot Summary and Conclusion
err. The Bible writers, being inspired by the Spirit of God, So far the issue of Biblical inerrancy has been revisited and
wrote nothing but the truth. The Bible, therefore, should be in terms of definition put in perspective. A history of the
seen and held as an infallible word of God. This the debate over the biblical inerrancy has been addressed and
Council defended. various arguments in defense of and against biblical
inerrancy examined. Also, a summary of the Chicago
Implications for Denying the Inerrancy of the Bible Statement on Biblical Inerrancy was provided to support
What does it implies to deny the Bible‘s claim of biblical inerrancy. Again, the implication of rejecting the
inerrancy? Consider the ramifications when biblical Bible‘s claim of inerrancy has been addressed in this paper.
inerrancy is rejected. Finally, the paper was summed up and a personal view on
biblical inerrancy was clearly stated with a reason.
It will render God as a Liar: If the Bible contains error It is therefore the cherished opinion of this paper that the
then God is s liar because He is the source of the Bible Bible is without mistakes and errors. Its origination is a
messages. Speaking to this issue, Challies said: firm assurance to its inerrancy. A true God who seeks the
If there are errors in the original manuscripts that were salvation of His children will not watch for false accounts
breathed out by God one of two things must be true: either of the plan of salvation to be presented to them. The Bible
God purposely lied or he mistakenly lied. This indicates itself gives enough evidence to its inerrancy. We, therefore,
that God is capable of making errors or of producing errors. say that it is easier to accept the Bible‘s claim of inerrancy
We might conclude from this that we are likewise able to than to believe in the philosophical arguments presented
intentionally lie, even if only in small matters. 48 against it. We are of the strong viewpoint that the Bible is
inerrant. The rejection of biblical inerrancy will lead to the
Men will lose their trust in God: The claim of biblical rejection of the authority of the Bible which will in the long
errancy simply means that we cannot trust God and what run lead to the rejection of all biblical doctrines because the
He says. Challies explains meticulously: Bible will be seen as a falsified book which cannot be
If there are errors in Scripture, even if in the smallest detail, trusted. If the Bible contains errors then it cannot be
and these were placed there intentionally by God, how are mankind‘s sufficient guide to salvation, thus jeopardizing
we to maintain trust that He did not lie in other matters? the plan of redemption. Also, the rejection of biblical
When we lose trust in the Scriptures, we lose trust in God inerrancy means that God is a liar, and thus, cannot be
Himself and we may consequently lose our desire to be trusted. If this is the case then God and His plan of
obedient to Him.49 redemption cannot be reliable. We see that biblical
inerrancy has a link with God and His plan to save
Human mind will become the source of authority: If the mankind. When it is rejected, it will put God‘s plan to save
agenda to refute biblical inerrancy is succeeded, it implies mankind in danger. Therefore, biblical inerrancy should be
that God cannot be the source authority in any matter of held in high esteem. Consequenttly, we recommend to
human endeavor and the human mind will become those who read the Bible to see it as a trustworthy account
autonomous and the sole dictator of issues of human life. about their salvation from a trusthworthy God.
―If we deny the clear testimony of Scripture that it is
inerrant, we make our minds a higher standard of Truth Bibliography
than the Bible.‖50 1. Andrew, Stephen L. ―Biblical Inerrancy.‖ Chafer
Theological SeminaryJournal 8. January–
Lastly, it will lead to the rejection of other biblical 2. March 2002.
doctrines. Challies points out that ―if we deny inerrancy, 3. Beckert, Kris. ―Scriptural Pursuit.‖ Accessed on 23
and indicate that small details are incorrect, we cannot August 2016.
consistently argue that all the doctrine the Bible contains is 4. [Link]
correct. Admitting error in even the smallest historical 5. ―Biblical inerrancy.‖ Wikipedia. Accessed 22 August
detail is the thin edge of the wedge, for we then allow the 2016. http:// [Link].
possibility that there may be error in doctrine as well.‖ 51 6. Carson, D. A., and John Woodbridge, [Link]
Commenting on the problems associated with denying and Truth. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1992.
biblical inerrancy, Valley Bible Church has this to say: 7. Churchouse, Matthew John. ―Defining and Refining
When people deny the inerrancy of the Bible they Inerrancy: Revisiting the Doctrine for the 21 st
attack:The character of the Father who originated the Century.‖ Mphil. Thesis, University of Birmingham,
Word; the reliability of the Son who affirmed the Word; the 2009.
ministry of the Holy Spirit who inspired the Word; the 8. Coleman, R. J. "Biblical Inerrancy: Are We Going
stability of the Church which is built on the Word.52 Anywhere?‖ Theology Today 31. 1975.
There can be no doubt that when the inerrancy of the Bible 9. Frame, John M. "Is the Bible Inerrant?"IIIM Magazine
is rejected, it will really cause a great harm. It will, Online. Volume 4. Number 19. May 13-20, 2002.
consequently, put the doctrine of the Godhead in jeopardy. 10. Grudem, Wayne A. ―Scripture‘s Self-Attestation and
When the doctrine of the Godhead becomes tampered, the the Problem of Formulating a Doctrine of
salvation of mankind is what will be at stake. 11. Scripture.‖ in Scripture and Truth. Ed. D. A. Carson
and John D. Woodbridge. Grand
48
Challies. 12. Rapids: Zondervan, 1983.
49
Ibid. 13. Jemison, T.H. Christian Beliefs. Mountain View,
50
Challies.
51
Ibid. California: Pacific Press, 1959.
52
Valley Bible Church, the Inerrancy of the Bible, 3, accessed 23 August, 2016, 14. Macarthur, John, ed. The Scripture Cannot Be Broken.
[Link]
~ 225 ~
World Wide Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development

Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2015.

15. P.D. Feinberg. "Bible, Inerrancy and Infallibility of."
in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Ed.
16. Elwell, A. Walter. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
house Company, 2001.
17. Philip, Johnson C. and Saneesh Cherian. The Inerrancy
of the Bible. n. p: 2006.
18. Sper, David,ed. Can I Really Trust the Bible? Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Thomas Nelson, 2003.
19. Valley Bible [Link] Inerrancy of the Bible.
Accessed 23 August, 2016.
20. [Link]
df.
21. Warfield, B.B. The Inspiration and Authority of the
Bible. Philadelphia: Presbyterianand Reformed, 1948.

~ 226 ~

View publication stats