Inerrancy may be defined as freedom from error. Biblical inerrancy, therefore, means that the Bible is free from error. The axiom of biblical inerrancy is biblical inspiration, which refers to the Holy Spirit’s superintendence of God’s chosen men in the past to communicate God-given information without error.

What does the Bible’s freedom from error imply? Some theologians have cast biblical inerrancy into four categories: the inerrancy of purpose, limited inerrancy, full inerrancy, and absolute inerrancy.

Absolute inerrancy holds that the Bible’s freedom from error is plenary rather than limited. This is to say, the Bible is inerrant not only with respect to matters of faith but also to every matter that the Bible addresses.

As God’s Special Revelation, the Bible is primarily a theological book that is historically factual and shows special interest in metaphysical, ontological, epistemological, and ethical issues. The Bible is not a scientific book. This means that, while the Old and New Testaments’ human authors of the Bible had nothing close to the biological and astrophysical knowledge that we have in the 21^st century, the omniscient divine author of the Bible—the Holy Spirit who inspired the writing of the Bible made sure that in their limited scientific knowledge, these authors did not write anything that would come to be contradicted by the advanced scientific knowledge of the future generations. Lack of specificity does not constitute errancy.

For example, in contradistinction to the Bible times Jew or Christian who attributed rainfall to the act of God, today, we can present this naturalistic and scientific explanation of the cause of rain: Sunlight warms the water on the surface of the earth at the start of the cycle. The water evaporates or turns into water vapor as a result of the heat. The air is filled with water vapor. The water vapor condenses back into droplets of water when it cools. When these water droplets get too heavy to stay suspended in the cloud, they fall to earth as rain.

The idea that God causes rain to fall is not defeated by our later scientific knowledge of the conditions that must hold for the rain to fall since nothing logically disqualifies God from being the sovereign cause of these rain-causing conditions to hold.

Likewise, the modern science of astronomy teaches that our solar system is heliocentric rather than geocentric and that it is the earth rather than the sun that moves. On the basis of this information, a biblical phrase like “from the rising to the setting of the sun” can be taken as prima facie evidence of biblical errancy. This is wrong because the Bible’s statement about the rising and the setting of the sun is understood as phenomenological (the way it appears to the human eye) rather than astronomical (the actuality of the sun moving from the east to the west, given that it is the earth rather than the sun that revolves around the other). Before you think this is tantamount to subjecting the Bible to an unfairly lower standard, I want you to consider whether it would be out of the character of the astronomers and astrophysicists to say to each other, “I cannot wait to see the beauty of the sunset.” If astrophysicists are free to use these phenomenological expressions without being accused of astrophysical errancy, why should the Bible not be given the same benefit of the doubt?

Limited inerrancy restricts biblical inerrancy to the spiritual and salvific scope. That is to say, the Bible may be errant in some areas. However, when it comes to spiritual and doctrinal matters, the Bible is free from error. The inerrancy of purpose takes such a stance akin to infallibility as to be synonymous with the same. Simply stated, the inerrancy of purpose refers to the infallibility of the Bible’s accomplishment of its purpose. If the first two of these views are epistemological, the last two are soteriological. Do not rush to discard the absolute inerrancy of the autographs. The quasi-biblical errors can be satisfactorily explained.

In his book, God, Revelation and Authority, Carl F. H. Henry gives an excellent summary of what Biblical inerrancy is. Negatively, scriptural inerrancy does not imply the following: (1) modern technological precision in reporting statistics and measurements, and conformity to the modern historiographic method in reporting genealogies and other historical data; (2) conveyance of religious truth only by nonmetaphorical or nonsymbolic language (While all language is symbolic anyone who, on this account, argues that language cannot convey literal truth, disadvantages biblical teaching no more seriously than any and all other communication. If such a theory were consistently applied, it would involve a skeptical view of all statements, and erase the literal truth even of the critic’s assertion.); (3) a requirement of verbal exactitude in New Testament quotation and use of the Old Testament passages; (4) dispensability of personal faith in Christ, on the grounds of the availability of a trustworthy inerrant book; and (5) Evangelical orthodoxy as a necessary consequence of accepting this doctrine. Positively, verbal inerrancy does imply the following: (1) the attachment of truth not only to the theological and ethical teaching of the Bible, but also to historical and scientific matters insofar as they are part of the express message of the inspired writings; (2) the inherence of God’s truth in the very words of Scripture—viz., in the propositions or sentences of the Bible, and not merely in the concepts and thoughts of the writers; and (3) the error-free quality of only the original writings or prophetic-apostolic—specifically, the attachment of the theopneustic quality directly to the autographs, and only indirectly to the copies. (Henry 1983, 4:201-209).

It is worth noting that the presence of evil acts in the biblical narratives like Cain killing Abel, Judas betraying Christ, and Peter denying Christ does not constitute error or errancy in the Bible. On the contrary, it demonstrates the Bible’s absolute truthfulness.

My Position and Argument on the Inerrancy of the Bible

After reading Erickson’s sections on “inerrancy” and The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (CSBI), I agree with the article and Erickson’s definition of the term full inerrancy. Erickson states, “The Bible, when correctly interpreted in light of the level to which culture and the means of communication had developed at the time it was written, and in view of the purposes for which it was given, is fully truthful in all that it affirms.” (Erickson 2013, 201)

Importance of Doctrine for the Contemporary Church

There are certain truths that need to be formalized within a church and these doctrines and definitions help focus everyone on them. Another item to include is verbal plenary inspiration as it is one mode of many regarding the inspiration in Scripture when researching the revelation of God to humankind. Verbal plenary inspiration is a combination of the author’s natural human expression and the Holy Spirit’s special initiation and oversight of their writings to guarantee accuracy and completeness of all that was written as being a revelation from God. (Higgins 2007, 97)

International Council on Biblical Inerrancy

The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) was a group of conservative Christian scholars and leaders who were dedicated to promoting the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. It was formed in 1977 and consisted of over 300 members, including theologians, pastors, and other experts in the fields of biblical studies and theology. The council’s primary goal was to affirm and defend the traditional Christian belief that the Bible is without error or contradiction in all its teachings and historical assertions, and that it is the authoritative and trustworthy word of God. The council published several important documents, including the Chicago Statements on Biblical Inerrancy and Hermeneutics, which remain influential in evangelical Christian circles today. Although the council disbanded in 1988, its legacy continues to shape the ongoing discussions and debates surrounding the interpretation and authority of the Bible within the Christian church.

The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy state in the preface of their CSBI, “Recognition of the total truth and trustworthiness of Holy Scripture is essential to a full grasp and adequate confession of its authority.” (Themelios 2023) This provides some clarity on the need to establish the short statement of five clauses and nineteen articles within the CSBI. The CSBI was finalized at a conference by the International Council of Biblical Inerrancy in October of 1978 with over 200 evangelical leaders’ involvement.

The CSBI, the CSBI commentary, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics (SCBH), and the SCBH commentary are important because they were put together by an international group of over 300 scholars and are used as a guide in understanding inerrancy. This view was also adopted by The Southern Baptist Convention which helped save them from drifting into liberalism. (Geisler and Haun 2013, 7) This is important as it clarifies and defends where a church stands in relation to inerrancy. This also prevents theological errors in teaching within a church when the pastor is away and has other leaders teaching the congregation.

The Four Chicago Statements

1. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy – 1978 The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy was drafted and signed by over 200 evangelical Christian leaders at a conference held in Chicago in 1978. It was created in response to growing concerns about the interpretation and authority of the Bible, particularly in relation to modern scholarship and cultural trends. The statement affirms the belief in the inerrancy of the Bible in its original manuscripts, meaning that it is without error or contradiction in all its teachings and historical assertions. (The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy – https://library.dts.edu/Pages/TL/Special/ICBI_1.pdf)
2. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy Commentary – 1980 The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy Commentary, published in 1980, is a detailed explanation and defense of the principles set forth in the original statement. It addresses various criticisms and misunderstandings of the doctrine of inerrancy and offers further clarification on its implications for biblical interpretation and the Christian faith. (The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy Commentary – https://library.dts.edu/Pages/TL/Special/ICBI_2.pdf)
3. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics – 1982 The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics was issued in 1982, also by a group of evangelical Christian scholars and leaders. It builds upon the foundation laid by the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and provides guidelines for how to interpret the Bible in a way that upholds its authority and truthfulness. The statement emphasizes the importance of interpreting the Bible in its historical and literary context and using sound principles of hermeneutics. (The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics – https://library.dts.edu/Pages/TL/Special/ICBI_3.pdf)
4. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics Commentary – 1983 The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics Commentary, published in 1983, is a companion document to the original statement. It offers further explanation and guidance on how to apply the principles of biblical hermeneutics in a way that is consistent with the doctrine of inerrancy and the teachings of the Bible. It addresses various issues and challenges that arise in biblical interpretation and provides practical advice for scholars, pastors, and laypeople alike. (The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics Commentary – https://library.dts.edu/Pages/TL/Special/ICBI_4.pdf)

** Note from Professor – Great Job, Shawn! – Dr. Jonathan Waita

Bibliography

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013.

Geisler, Norman L., and Christopher T. Haun, Explaining Biblical Inerrancy: Official Commentary on the ICBI Statements. Matthews, NC: Bastion Books, 2013.

Henry, Carl F. H. God, Revelation and Authority, God, Revelation and Authority. 6 vols. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1976-83.

Higgins, John R. “God’s Inspired Word.” In Systematic Theology: Revised Edition. Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007.

Sproul, R. C. Can I Trust the Bible?, vol. 2, The Crucial Questions Series. Lake Mary, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2009.

“The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.” Themelios 4 no. 3, Last accessed on April 6, 2023. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/the-chicago-statement-on-biblical-inerrancy/.

---

[1] Top section is commentary from Dr. Jonathan Waita