A Letter written to a group of people who wanted a detailed description of a Reformed understanding of the Scriptures.
Dear Friends,
I appreciated our discussion concerning my view of the Bible this past Tuesday. I thought that I would write up a brief statement explaining my views. What follows is my understanding of what the Bible is and what it means to me. The question before us, and that which I propose to answer (briefly and inadequately – one could spend a lifetime at this!) is “What does it mean when I say that I believe the Bible to be God’s inspired, infallible and inerrant Word and that it is appropriately read in a literal way?”
First, dealing with my last question point first, I understand that the appropriate way to read any book is literally, i.e., in the manner the author intended (with the caveat that sometimes there is meaning in the text that the author did not recognize - as is true with most if not all great literature) . Sometimes that intention is difficult to discern, but one can usually tell if a work is designed to be a novel, history, satire, poetry, mythic, mystical, diary or whatever. It would be inappropriate to read a novel as a serious work of history, and one would completely miss the point if satire were read as a sober reflection. Would Swift have approved of someone reading his “Modest Proposal” as an actual recommendation and implementing it to solve the “Irish Problem” of his day?
In the same way the Bible needs to be read in the manner its author intended, literally. I cannot imagine that those authors who wrote to real people in real situations expected that their work would be read in any way other than communicating an intentional message. Reading the Bible literally means seeking that authorial meaning. As with any book we obtain clues to that intention within the book itself and, to a lesser extent, in how that book has been used. How does the Bible describe itself and how has it been used?
In many ways both explicit and implicit the Bible proclaims itself as the record of God’s speech and actions in the world. Hundreds of times in the Old Testament phrases such as “Thus says the LORD” and “I (God) say” are used. In the New Testament the voice of God and the voice of Scripture are often equated. Sometimes the New Testament records that God is the source of a quotation taken from the Old Testament – even when it is not evident that God is speaking in the original Old Testament passage. In the same way, sometimes the New Testament recognizes an Old Testament quote with the words, “as Scripture says,” when the original is clearly indicated as having been spoken by God. Of course there is the explicit teaching that all Scripture is from God as taught in 2 Timothy 3:1, 17, “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.” (NRSV)
The phrase “inspired by God” in the quote above might be more literally translated, “God breathed.” That interesting phrase implies that all Scripture comes intimately from the mouth of God, that the words of Scripture are as close to God as God’s breath (speaking anthropomorphically) would be. Jesus use of the OT as “the word of God” (Mt 15:6, Mk 7:13 and Jn 10:35 for example), his use of individual words in the OT record to probe his points (see Mark 12:24-27) and his teachings about the OT prophesies pointing to him (see Luke 24:13-35) all show that Jesus understood the Scriptures should be received in this way. As one of my favorite authors, John Stott, has written, [Our] view of scripture... is [to be] Christ's view of scripture. He endorsed the Old Testament, made provision for the New Testament, and because of Christ we accept the authority of the book.' Do you think that Jesus’ example and teaching should guide his disciples as well?
There are other questions that might be brought up here but which would take up more space than is useful. Many have wondered if the New Testament books fall under that same category of “Scripture”, i.e. the Old Testament, that 2 Timothy 3 speaks about. That is an issue of the “canon” or “rule,” the decision by the church as to which books were accepted as Scripture and which were rejected. Others have wondered as to just what inspiration entails. Did the writers have a part in the writing or did God take over their minds and left no human imprint on the words themselves. It’s obvious that each writer’s personality comes through their writings, but does that rule out inspiration? I think not, but much more has been said on that!
My conclusion and practice is that the whole Bible is God’s Word, and that God can and does communicate God’s intentions and heart through those human words of the Bible. That conclusion is, ultimately, a decision of faith and trust. Many books proclaim themselves to be the word of a god or gods, but proclamation does not the Word of God make. I choose to see the Bible as God’s Word written because it proclaims itself to be; because Jesus, my Lord and Savior, used it as God’s Word; because my personal experience of the Bible leads me to this conclusion, and because of the constant (until recently) conviction on the part of the whole church that the Bible is the Word of God written. I could be wrong. The Bible could be just a collection of fallible human writings talking about fallible human musings about a human-judged God, but I think not. Because of my conviction I was willing to say, “I do” to the following ordination and installation question, “Do you accept the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be, by the Holy Spirit, the unique and authoritative witness to Jesus Christ in the Church Universal, and God’s Word to you.”
Infallibility and Inerrancy are two related judgments about the content of Scripture. The idea of biblical inerrancy must not be construed to mean that we should judge the contents of Scripture based on our modern criteria of historical accuracy or scientific method. My favorite professor of Systematic Theology, Dr. Roger Nicole, writes that the historical and scientific matters recorded in the Bible are “correct” but “not necessarily exact,” because they are written as “popular descriptions.” This is a recognition that the Bible speaks as we do about the things around us. We speak of a “sunrise” when we know that it is not the sun which rises but the earth which turns. An example of this is when Jesus speaks of the mustard seed as “the smallest of all the seeds.” It’s not. Does that mean that Jesus was wrong and the Bible in error? No, it’s evident that Jesus wasn’t attempting to give a scientific description of relative seed size but rather giving an illustration immediately understood using the smallest seed commonly available in the culture of the day.
Paul D. Feinberg writes, “Inerrancy means that when all facts are known, the Scriptures in their original autographs and properly interpreted will be shown to be wholly true in everything that they affirm, whether that has to do with doctrine or morality or with the social, physical, or life sciences.” The Meaning of Inerrancy, in Inerrancy, ed. Norman L. Geisler (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980), 294. For me my view of inerrancy has been derived at first more from my theological and philosophical underpinnings than from any other source. Beginning with the belief that God has spoken through the Scriptures I began to ask “How?” I saw that the Bible claims that God is a God who does not lie (Num 23:19, Titus 1:2 and Heb 6:18). If the Scriptures contain errors then God would either have intentionally introduced them or unintentionally allowed them to be included (either God was ignorant of them, didn’t realize they were errors or was unable to prevent their inclusion. None of these negative possibilities honor God in my mind and thus I am strongly disposed to discount them. As Wayne A. Grudem has written in Scripture and Truth ed. by Carson and Woodbridge, “Untruthful statements would be unprofitable and bring dishonor to God by portraying Him as one who at times speaks untruthfully, and they would serve as an encouragement for people to imitate God and sometimes speak untruthfully as well.”
The view of an inerrant Scripture is not new. Augustine in his Epistle 82 wrote, “Only to those books which are called canonical have I learned to give honor so that I believe most firmly that no author in these books made any error in writing.” John Calvin wrote that Scripture is, “the inerring standard,” the infallible rule of His Holy Truth,” “free from every stain or defect,” “the inerring certainty,” the certain and unerring rule,” and the “infallible Word of God.” (quoted from John H. Gerstner, “The View of the Bible Held by the Church: Calvin and the Westminster Divines,”). While John Calvin is not inerrant, his views do show that our Presbyterian heritage does include the view of an inerrant Bible right from the start.
While the above arguments are not conclusive (I see that some people do have a high view of biblical authority and still hold to errors in the Scriptures), they do move me to always look at the Scripture as true and to seek ways to legitimately reconcile apparent errors with my view. I have seen enough claimed errors in Scripture to be based on a misunderstanding of the passages concerned that I am willing to hold my judgment in abeyance until further confirming evidence arrives or a preponderance of evidence causes me to change my view.
Stephen T. Davis, who argues against inerrancy in his book, The Debate About the Bible writes, “It is true that no Christian who believes that the Bible errs can hold that the Bible alone is his <her> authority for faith and practice. He <she> must hold to some other authority or criterion as well. That authority I am not embarrassed to say, is his <her> own mind, his own ability to reason.” I for one do not hesitate to admit that I do not trust my reasoning ability to the same extent that Dr. Davis does. I know that sin has effected every part of me, including my reasoning ability. If I trusted my reason to reject the truth of any biblical teaching I suspect that the first errors I would find would be those teachings of the Bible that I find difficult to accept. I am very uncomfortable with setting my preferences up as the criteria upon which to judge the authority of the Scripture.
I have also said that I believe that the Bible is infallible. As I see it biblical infallibility is contained within the area of biblical inerrancy. The Bible is infallible if and only if it makes no false or misleading statements in regard to matters of faith and practice. One might reject inerrancy (rejecting the idea that the Bible contains no errors in any of its statements whatsoever) but still accept biblical infallibility (no errors in matters of faith and practice, but with the possibility or certainty of errors in other areas). Rejecting infallibility while holding to inerrancy does not seem possible.
Jack Rogers (former moderator of the PC(USA), author and professor at Fuller Seminary) has a helpful comment on three different models of biblical authority and inspiration that are before the church today. He says all three are useful inasmuch as they are seeking to answer different questions. “The first model asks the question: Is the Bible an authoritative and trustworthy revelation for all of life? We can answer with the inerrantists: 'Yes!' The second model asks: In whom is God most fully revealed? We should answer with the neo-orthodox: 'Jesus Christ, to whom scripture bears unique and authoritative witness.' The third model asks yet another question: How is the Bible most helpfully to be interpreted? Answer: 'It is a divine message given in human words which are best understood in their various historical and cultural contexts.'”
I too can answer “Yes!” to the above three models. I see in Scripture the words and thoughts that provide a unique and authoritative witness to the grace and glory of God through Jesus Christ. As I study the human cultures from which the Bible developed I am amazed at the depth and wisdom of God in producing a document that provides us with a message relevant to every culture and people of our world. As a Christian, I see the Bible as my final authority for faith and practice and one of the major means that God uses to form my heart and mind ever closer to what I am, a human being made in the image of God and redeemed by Jesus Christ, my Lord and Savior. Thanks be to God!
Your Servant in Christ,
Michael R. Burkley
I am indebted to Stephen L. Andrew and his article entitled “Biblical Inerrancy” for many of the historical and current quotes I have used in this letter. I would be pleased to forward his paper to you as well as other information, both for and against the view I present here, if you wish.