Radical Christians & the Word of God (part 2 of 3): Inerrancy
This is part two of the series started here. It's a longer post with a lot of quotation-worthy material, so instead of starting this with a wall of quotes from the piece, I'm just going to pick a few to give a general idea of what the author is saying, although I urge reading the entire piece before commenting. Especially the 3 examples he uses to highlight the different approaches of Protestant and Anabaptist.
This is part two of the series started here. It's a longer post with a lot of quotation-worthy material, so instead of starting this with a wall of quotes from the piece, I'm just going to pick a few to give a general idea of what the author is saying, although I urge reading the entire piece before commenting. Especially the 3 examples he uses to highlight the different approaches of Protestant and Anabaptist.
Quote:
THE LIMITATIONS OF INERRANCY
Many (though not all) Evangelicals do hold to a doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture, and by that they mean that the original copies of the Old Testament and New Testament texts were so inspired by the Holy Spirit that they are without error in everything they affirm. (Note: we don't have the originals any more, but we do have enough early copies that we can get very close to what the original manuscripts said.) These Christians believe that the Holy Spirit did not allow any human error to creep into the process of recording the original handwritten biblical texts (what are called "the original autographs"). So technically, the idea of inerrancy does not apply directly to any existing Bibles today.
Quote:
WHY INERRANCY BECAME IMPORTANT FOR SOME CHRISTIANS
So, if the idea of inerrancy only applies to the original manuscripts which we no longer have, and if Church history gives us ample evidence of error (minor, but present) in the transmission process throughout the past two thousand years, and if the process of translation is imperfect, not to mention our imperfect understanding as receivers of the message, and if Jesus and his disciples do not seem to prioritize the precise words of Scripture over the message and meaning of Scripture, then why are many Evangelicals so very much concerned that all committed Christians use the word "inerrant" to describe our contemporary Bibles? Why has "inerrancy" become the litmus test of orthodoxy for many contemporary Christians?
In the early twentieth century, conservative Christians became increasingly concerned about the slow creep of liberal Christianity, which they believed didn't take the truth of the Bible seriously enough. Increasing numbers of liberal leaning Christians were tending to dismiss the parts they didn't like in favour of the bits they did like, rather than see every bit of the Bible as "inspired and useful".
Quote:
THE ANABAPTIST APPROACH
The entire Bible is breathed out by God, or "inspired", and because of this it is also "useful" to equip God's people "thoroughly" for living like Jesus. These are the three points Anabaptists rally around regarding the Bible:
- The Bible comes from God.
- Therefore we should use it
- The result will be that we are thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Our emphasis is less on the details of doctrines about the Bible and more on using the Bible as a gift from God for our guidance especially as a guide to see Jesus most clearly. Our emphasis is more on transformation than information. Anabaptists are exceedingly practical, and our approach to Scripture is a perfect example of this.
Quote:
The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy states that the Bible is "to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms" and adds that "Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching." Radical Christians can say "amen" to this. What the Bible affirms, what it means to teach, it does so perfectly. As the Statement of Faith for Tyndale Seminary, a local Evangelical seminary where I sometimes teach, says, the Bible is "the authoritative written Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, inerrant in all that it teaches" a statement I have been happy to align with.
Quote:
WRAPPING UP
As an Anabaptist, I care less about converting a fellow Christian away from the doctrine of inerrancy than I care about all Christians holding up Christ as the centre of Scripture and Lord of our lives. If that's where you're at Catholic or Protestant or Orthodox or Anabaptist then Jesus makes us family.