A Running Thought on Biblical Inerrancy

I am still a doctrinal (fundamentalist) evangelical in many ways. On a doctrine of biblical inerrancy: I am so committed to the intent that “inerrancy” intends to communicate that I’m beyond an inerrantist. My view of Scripture is “contexted” Christologically and thus soteriologically such that any type of abstract philosophical frame for a doctrine of inerrancy simply will not do. My view is confessional and even via antiqua, as I see an ontology of Holy Scripture funded protologically by God’s free election to be for the world in Jesus Christ. In a theological taxis then, my doctrine of Scripture has its antecedent reality in the gracious fact that God has chosen to speak for the world in His Son (Deus incarnandus). Scripture is an ordained and primary aspect of His speech for us, and continues to be by the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit—as the Spirit speaks the Words of Christ to us afresh anew. Scripture in this frame, as it becomes soteriological, is a dialogical experience wherein I am mortified and vivified as I encounter the voice of the living God in Jesus Christ, thus being deconstructed and reconstructed over and again into the image of God’s image pro me in Jesus Christ. It is as I engage in this fellowship with the Word that its clarity becomes brighter and brighter as I stand closer and closer to its brightest Light in the face of Jesus Christ. So my doctrine of Scripture, as can be seen, is greater than not lesser than the intention that an evangelical doctrine of inerrancy intends to communicate (against the higher critics etc).

6 thoughts on “A Running Thought on Biblical Inerrancy

  1. A line of tension exists between reading the Bible before or after prayer.
    The Bible is God’s objective communication, and prayer is humanity’s subjective expression and communication with God. People often preface personal Bible reading with prayer. Sounds like a good idea. People base prefacing Bible reading with prayer on the opinion that the Word of God does not ‘speak’ to a person unless the reader invokes God first. I beg to differ. God is the originator of all things, including communicating with His chosen people. Our position is to respond to God appropriately and to whatever message He gives us and in any situation. I have developed the practice of letting God have the first Word, and then I respond by praying. God’s Word speaks to us, and we are responsible for fitting into the Bible’s message. The Bible gives me something to pray about and teaches me how to approach the throne of grace.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Indeed, Bobby, your particular framing of the doctrine of Scripture Christologically, as you’ve put it, conveys the ‘telos’ of the ground and basis of Scripture, as well as the spiritual center and nature (ontology) of that described as ‘inerrancy’.


  3. My Bible work is also more organic. I may read simply because it is time to read. I will interpret, but with no particular spirit in the interpretation. Then as it is regurgitated and ruminated in the Spirit as needed, a spiritual interpretation becomes apparent. Other times I am driven to my knees in need, search Scripture, some salve is applied to my wounds, and answers may be forthcoming, or they may await an apocalypse of the Son of Man by the Spirit. In the meantime, we pine for his coming! Total grace; He leads me along, thanks be to God!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. @Mark,

    I think formulaic approaches, one way or the other end up running afoul vis a vis God, who is in an intimate non-formal (but formal) dynamic relationship with us. And as you rightly emphasize: God is God, and we wait on Him; thankfully He has come, comes, and is coming for us. He wants to talk and walk with us every second of every day.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. @Duane,

    amen, our relationship to Scripture as Christians is relational and dynamic and Spirit led through and through. It’s a desperate need we have, for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.