Whitefield Theological Seminary

1605 E Gary Rd, Lakeland, FL 33801

Joshua Ishaya Mamza

S-211016

EYN LCC Masil. PO Box 100 Uba. Askira/Uba LGA Borno State

(+234) 8060047221

josh1dille@[Link]

DCC 901-Doctrine of Scripture

Doctor of Philosophy (Christian Intellectual Thought)

1
COURSE THESIS PAPER: “MODERN CHALLENGES OF INERRANCY AND
RESPONSE”

A Research Paper

Submitted to Whitefield Theological Seminary

In Partial Fulfillment

on the Requirements for the Course

DCC 901-Doctrine of Scripture

Doctor of Philosophy (Christian Intellectual Thought)

By

Joshua Ishaya Mamza

B.A., Kulp Theological Seminary (KTS), 2016

M.A., Jos Ecwa Theological Seminary, 2020

Ph.D., Whitefield Theological Seminary, Ongoing…

2
 Table of content

1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………..4

2. Definition of terms …………………………………………………...........................4

3. Historical perspective………………………………………………………………..6

4. Modernism and biblical inerrancy……………………………………………….…8

5. Contemporary challenges to inerrancy……………………………………………10

6. Response……………………………………………………………………………..18

7. Recommendation……………………………………………………………………25

8. Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….27

9. Bibliography

3
 INTRODUCTION

In a dispensation where truth is considered relative, many vicars preach about Christ's grace

and love without addressing sin and its consequences, manifesting in His wrath, judgment, or

second coming. Emphasizing the authority of the scriptures becomes crucial for people in this

confusing world. In this confused generation, it seems like people don't even know what they

are looking for. Reasoning, science, individualism, and technology are among the trending

trends in this world, and they are giving less regard to the work of God, as prophesized by

Apostle Paul: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but

according to their desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves

teachers and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables" (2

Tim. 4:3-4) and "Always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth…

these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds; disapproved concerning the faith" (2 Timo.

3:7-8).

Because of the generation we are in, this research topic is undoubtedly worthy of any

Christian, especially missionaries. This research work contains an introduction, the meaning

of inerrancy, historical perspective, Modernism and biblical inerrancy, recent challenges in

inerrancy, Contemporary challenges to inerrancy, response, recommendation, and conclusion.

MEANING OF INERRANCY

Inerrancy has been defined in many ways, but this research work aims to focus on the

challenges, so the researcher will not ponder on the meaning but rather on the scholarly work

on the challenges.

According to Manu and Oppong, "Inerrancy comes from the word 'inerrant,' and it is defined

as 'that does not err; free from error; unerring.”1

1
Manu, Obeng peter and Oppong, Kenneth, “biblical inerrancy: A reflection “world wide journal of
multidisciplinary research and development. Ghana: WWJMRD, 2017pp. 221-226
4
Sometimes the terms 'infallibility' and 'inerrancy' are used interchangeably. For John M.

Frame, "Inerrant means there are no errors;2 infallible means there can be no errors." While

for Paul Helm, "Inerrancy focuses our attention exclusively on questions of truth and

falsehood, whereas the older term, infallibility, when applied to scripture, emphasizes the fact

that the Bible is an unfailing guide to whoever may read it, and especially to the Christian and

the church, for the purpose for which it was given."3

Moreover, according to Wayne Grudem, "the Inerrancy of scripture means that scripture in

the original manuscripts does not affirm anything contrary to fact."4

The position that the Bible is inerrant means that the Bible is free from errors, and thus, we

can trust it as an authentic word of God communicated to us in human language. It must also

be noted that biblical inerrancy is applied to the original manuscripts of the Bible known as

the autographs: the original scripts of the Bible by the writers."5

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, prominent Neo-Evangelicals are actively

involved in an attempt to redefine the term “inerrancy” away from the historic,
orthodox position of the church throughout its history. Theological liberals in the
early twentieth century did the very same thing to the term “infallibility.” Infallibility
lost its meaning and became a meaningless term. The same is now being done with
“inerrancy” in the evangelical camp by historical-critical evangelicals. This section
sounds forth the warning to God’s people of those evangelicals who are attempting to
redefine the term “inerrancy.” It also explains its historic, orthodox meaning and
characteristics held from the earliest foundations with special attention given to the
historic International Council on Biblical Inerrancy and its Chicago Statements (1978)
on Biblical Inerrancy and Hermeneutics (1982) developed to combat such a drive.6
Since this research work is not mainly focused on the meaning, the above-established

meaning in light of the scripture is enough. The next topic introduces us to the challenges of

the inerrancy of the scripture from a historical perspective.

2
Frame 13

3
Helm 25
4
Grudem 90
5
Manu, Obeng peter and Oppong, Kenneth, “biblical inerrancy: A reflection “world wide journal of
multidisciplinary research and development. Ghana: WWJMRD, 2017pp. 221-226
6
Vital Issues
5
Historical Perspective "The philosophical influences of the Enlightenment are to blame for

undermining inerrancy. The first influence that led to modern criticism of the Bible was

inductivism, led by Francis Bacon (1561–1626)."7 In the first centuries of the Christian era,

Don Carson asserted that Christians engaged in detailed and protracted debates with

surrounding pagans. Some of this debate revolved around the credibility of the Bible, and the

focus of that debate changed with time.

Traditionally, Carson pointed out that Roman Catholics have thought of the Christian

revelation concerning Jesus as a deposit entrusted to the Church and best thought of in two

parts: (1) Scripture and (2) Tradition. Although valuing tradition as something to be respected

and evaluated, Carson said Protestants hold that the final authoritative revelation is Scripture

itself. In other words, traditionally Catholics hold that Scripture tells the truth, but that

complementary truth is found in extra-biblical Tradition, as determined by the Magisterium,

the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.

He further maintained that Protestants hold that Scripture alone reliably tells the truth. While

both Catholics and Protestants hold that Scripture tells the truth, by introducing an additional

source of truth, Catholics tend to domesticate Scripture to Tradition, while by adhering

exclusively to Scripture, Protestants tend to domesticate Tradition to Scripture. These

distinctions are complicated by different understandings of what is included in the Canon and

by complex debates regarding the sufficiency and the clarity of Scripture.8

In the New Testament, the astonishing influence of F. C. Baur (1792–1860) at Tübingen

University convinced many that the dating, provenance, and authenticity of the New

Testament books must be determined by one criterion only, viz. where they should be placed

on the axis of the developing tension between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. All
7
F. David Farnell Edt. Vital issues in the Inerrancy debate, (WIPF and stock, Eugene, Oregon: 2015) P. 30
8
D.A. Carson Ed. The enduring authority of the Christian scriptures, (William B. Eerdmans: Grand Rapid,
Michigan/Cambridge: 2016) P. 180
6
countervailing evidence was dismissed as untruth, whether that untruth was prompted by

error or deceit. Carson readily weathered the storms as he did not set himself against the

sweep of Christian confessionalism.9

MODERNISM AND BIBLICAL INERRANCY

Modernism is one of the greatest enemies of biblical Christianity; this is otherwise referred to

as Christian Liberalism, which is part of a broader religious, political, and cultural movement

in (first) Europe and then America that has as its foundation a secular humanistic worldview.

"The reason that historians and theologians refer to Christian Liberalism as Modernism is the
9
Ibid
7
fact that Christian Liberals have bought into and adopted the modern secular worldview.

They have adapted their teachings to reflect the spirit of this age."10

"Some common characteristics of modernism are a belief in Darwinian evolution, statism

(communism, socialism, welfare, and fascism), negative higher criticism, historical and

ethical relativism, and subversive gradualism."11

The foundational issue of the ultimate authority of the Bible has become the great dividing

line between Modernism and biblical Christianity. However, "the foundation of Christian

Liberalism is not the Bible but mankind or more specifically the modernist scholar, church

leader, or bureaucrat. The great presupposition of Modernism is a fallible Bible."12

Additionally, Christian Liberalism encompasses a fairly wide range of heretical viewpoints

regarding Scripture. They argue, by their anti-supernatural presuppositions, that "the Bible is

a human record of the religious evolution of Middle Eastern tribes from polytheism to

monotheism."13

According to Liberal Christian scholars, the Bible is full of legends and myths; thus, it does

not tell us God's word but rather reveals the religious teachings of an ancient religious

community. Their common slogans are: (a) The Bible is not truth itself but contains truth. (b)

The Bible is not a textbook regarding science. Therefore, one should not expect it to

accurately reflect what occurred during creation, etc. (c) The Pentateuch, the Gospels, and

other historical books were never intended to be taken as literal historical accounts. (d) The

Bible is full of contradictions. (e) The Bible reproduces the scientific errors, ethical views,

and social prejudices of the period in which it was written. Therefore, many of the Old

10
Ibid
11
Ibid
12
Brian M. Schwertley Writingscults and Heresies [Link]
heresies (retrieved on 20th Feb. 2022)
13
Ibid
8
Testament laws are unethical, unjust, and barbaric (f) the miracles recorded in the Bible

should not be regarded as true, for they violate the laws of nature.14

Many ruminate that the Bible is full of inconsistencies and errors, thereby seeing it as an

errant book. Below are arguments advanced in favor of such a position:

1. The Bible is historically inaccurate: "Anytime archeology or ancient history seems

to contradict with Biblical records, those who do not believe in Biblical Inerrancy
conclude that the Bible is wrong"15 "Unless every biblical name is authenticated
through research and every fact verified historical study, they assume that the Bible is
in error"
2. The Bible is not scientifically reliable: Those who argue against Biblical inerrancy
posit that "the Bible is full of scientific errors and therefore cannot be trusted in
spiritual matters either... They question the truth of the sun standing still, the Israelites
being fed with manna in the wilderness, and how Jonah survived that three days in the
belly of the fish"
3. The Bible is outdated: "Those who do not believe in biblical inerrancy claim that
the Bible was written many years ago, therefore, it has no relevance for our day.
Simply, the Bible cannot be our guide because its principles are outdated"
4. The Bible is the work of man: The Bible is held by those who reject biblical
inerrancy as the product of man's imagination and created stories. They see the Bible
as man's word rather than God's word. To them, the Bible is just any other religious
book like those is Mohammed and Confucius"16
By implication, the Bible cannot guide us to the way to salvation if it is just a religious book.

Nigerians will say “Is the work of white people” 17 But it has to be a comprehensive guideline

for all matters of life.

CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGES TO INERRANCY

Strauss held his appointment at the University of Zürich. When Das Leben Jesu first appeared

in English in 1846, one notable reviewer, Anthony Ashley Cooper, the seventh Earl of

Shaftesbury, declared it to be "the most pestilential book ever vomited out of the jaws of

14
Ibid
15
Manu, Obeng peter and Oppong, Kenneth, “biblical inerrancy: A reflection “world wide journal of
multidisciplinary research and development. Ghana: WWJMRD, 2017 pp. 224.
16
Sper 3.
17
Common among nominal believers in Nigeria
9
hell."18 Regarding this, Carson suggested that what should be clear by this point is that

Christians concerned to defend the truthfulness of Scripture found themselves confronting

opponents on two fronts: those from the heritage of the medieval church, which tended to

domesticate Scripture's truthfulness by appealing to Tradition, and those from the heritage of

rising philosophical naturalism, which tended towards the denial that God in Scripture has

spoken the truth.

First, Carson said many scholars pit actions against words to prioritize the former and

diminish the latter. "This bifurcation has emerged in various ways. For example, several

decades ago a cluster of scholars emphasized the actions of God as the focus of his

revelation, downplaying the words of God."19

Ernest Wright continued that God's revelation is in the event of the burning bush, the event of

the exodus, and the event of Jesus's resurrection; the words describing those events are not

themselves revelation but merely "recitals" of the revelation.

Despite some lingering adherents to this program, not many support it today. For a start,

Carson noted that not many naked events are very significant unless words unpack them.

Jesus was crucified, died, and rose again: unusual, no doubt, but so what? Don't we need

words to explain that in dying Jesus bore our sins and that God resurrected Jesus from the

dead for our justification? Words are very frequently required to assign to events their

meaning.20

In his thought-provoking article, Timothy L. Price raises fundamental questions about the

nature of scripture, encouraging readers to delve deeper into its definition and contents. He

18
D.A. Carson Ed. The enduring authority of the Christian scriptures, (William B. Eerdmans: Grand Rapid,
Michigan/Cambridge: 2016) P. 180
19
Wright G Ernest. God who act: biblical theology as recital, STB8: London: Scm,

20
D.A. Carson Ed. The enduring authority of the Christian scriptures, (William B. Eerdmans: Grand Rapid,
Michigan/Cambridge: 2016) P. 180
10
challenges the conventional understanding that limits scripture to the canonical 66 books of

the Old and New Testaments. Instead, he contemplates the possibility that scripture might

extend beyond these recognized texts, encompassing lost or suppressed books that scholars

haven't included in the Bible.

While we’re at it, we should ask what is scripture. Is it what we have in the canon: 66
books of the Old and New Testament? Are they just subcomponents of these books;
interpreted as “inspired” not including the necessary grammar to make it readable?
Could scripture be more than what has been put forward by scholars who we can’t say
were inspired to produce their list of books, which we call the Bible? Worse yet, is the
Bible a purposed misrepresentation of the “complete words of God” because it lacks
certain books; lost to history or suppressed religious councils [not to be confused with
the “Gnostic lost books”], which have gone unnoticed by believers and no great effort
has been made to inform them of these details? 21
In the first part of his argument, Timothy prompts readers to consider whether the Bible as

we know it is a complete representation of God's word or if certain inspired writings are

missing due to historical events or religious councils' decisions. He draws attention to the

potential misrepresentation of the "complete words of God" and suggests that some texts

might have been excluded, intentionally or unintentionally, leaving believers unaware of their

existence.

Does the average church person know Paul wrote the Philippian church twice?
Philippians 3:1 tell us, “Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same
things again is no trouble to me, and it is a safeguard for you.”
The same question could be asked of 1 & 2 Corinthians and 3 John. Preceding letters
are referred to in these books. Paul writes in I Corinthians 5:19 (KJV), “I wrote to you
in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people.” We have
no epistle to the Corinthians before 1st or 2nd Corinthians. Yet Paul notes here that an
epistle existed at a prior point; not just an indiscriminate personal letter to the brethren
there at Corinth. In 3 John 1:9, John the apostle tells us, “I wrote to the church: but
Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, receives us not.” We
have no reference to this fellow in any other book of the NT, but yet John tells us “he
wrote” the church…
So, what was contained in the former letter to the Philippians? How about the real
1st Corinthians and the real 3rdJohn? Are we ready to sweep aside these lost texts
concluding that we have “the complete” word of God? Everything we still have from
John and Paul is not questioned as to inspiration. So, why wouldn’t these other works
also be inspired? We cannot assume that God intended these letters to be lost. If God

21
[Link] (retrieved date 25th 02, 2022)
11
 meant for certain books not to be available in the modern Bible, why would He leave
proof they existed?22
Proceeding with his arguments, Timothy explores Scriptural evidence and Moral basis to

question the scope of scripture. He presents compelling examples, such as Paul mentioning

previous letters he wrote to the Philippians and Corinthians, which aren't part of the current

Bible. He also highlights John's reference to a letter he wrote to a specific church, indicating

the possibility of lost works that could be equally inspired.

The second part of Timothy's argument centers on the Moral basis to question the nature of

scripture. He points out instances in the New Testament where authors express personal

opinions or include details not universally found in all copies of the gospels. This leads him

to challenge the notion of the scriptures' inerrancy, arguing that perfect works would not have

missing texts or textual variations.

In 2 Corinthians 8:10, Paul writes, “I give my opinion in this matter, for this is to your
advantage, who were the first to begin a year ago not only to do this, but also to desire
to do it.” Is Paul’s opinion here what we should call scripture; an authoritative and
inspired written piece we cannot minimize or avoid?
In other places, we find details scholars give us concerning additions to the gospels of

Matthew and John, which various collections of letters including the vaunted Textus

Recepticus do not uniformly contain. Thus, we must question the claim of the

scriptures’ inerrancy. Perfect works do not have missing texts, nor textual arguments between

scraps or versions….23

Timothy's article skillfully raises crucial questions, inviting readers to critically examine the

extent and contents of scripture. By blending insightful analysis with thought-provoking

examples, he encourages readers to question the traditional assumptions about what

constitutes God's word and whether the current canon truly captures the entirety of divine

inspiration. His arguments serve as a compelling call for open-mindedness and further
22
Ibid

23
Ibid
12
exploration, prompting us to consider the possibility that God's message might extend beyond

the boundaries of the recognized [Link] the inerrancy of Apostle Paul, as quoted

in 2 Cor. 8:10, "I give my opinion in this matter, for this is to your advantage, who were the

first to begin a year ago not only to do this but also to desire to do it." And 2 Cor. 7:12, "To

the rest I say this (I, Not the Lord) If any brother has a wife..." and 1 Cor. 7:25, "Now about

virgins: I have no command from the Lord..." It is apparent that Paul was not speaking his

mind; rather, he says that he does not have the sayings of Jesus to confirm what he was about

to write. However, he writes as one who has apostolic authority and is under divine

inspiration. This is confirmed in the last part of 1 Cor. 7:25, "Now concerning the unmarried,

I have no command from the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who, by the Lord’s mercy, is

trustworthy." This means that Paul's writing, which has no direct words from Jesus to use as a

reference, should still be considered God's word. Verse 40b further highlights Paul's belief in

his inspiration, as he wrote, "... And I think that I have the Spirit of God" (1 Cor. 14:37-38).

This clarifies everything after Paul depicted that if anyone thinks that he is a prophet or

spiritual, he should acknowledge that what he is writing is a command of the Lord. If anyone

does not recognize this, he is not recognized.

Another challenge is that of accommodation. According to this set of people, "To err is

human," and God has accommodated himself to human weakness. They hold the view that to

uphold inerrancy is to squeeze out the human dimensions of holy writ. Virtually all Christian

theologians use the language of accommodation to describe how God uses human writers,

including their experiences and their use of language, to describe the different modes of

inspiration.

Nevertheless, confessional Christians insist that error is not part of the essence of what it

means to be human: any individual human may say something that is unequivocally truthful,

13
even though it is not an exhaustive statement. The many biblical texts that attest to God's

glorious kindness in accommodating himself to our limitations also attest that in his

providence he preserves his Word in its truthfulness.

Among the 50+ post series from the classic work by Wayne Grudem on July 25, 2019, some

interesting facts drew attention to this research work.

The Bible contains no errors. But it may not be apparent to the critical reader of
Scripture. One reason is the Bible often communicates in everyday language. Similar
to the way we communicate in common parlance, the Bible often estimates numbers,
gives approximate quotations, and tells other true things in a way that would be
understood as true by its original readers but not always to 21st-century readers. In
addition, the Bible sometimes includes non-standard grammar or styles, but what is
being communicated is still true.
The Bible is not a 21st-century academic research journal. It is a collection of
manuscripts that were written thousands of years ago by a group of people living
thousands of years ago. The precision we expect in current academic papers cannot be
transferred to documents where the original readers did not expect the same level of
detail. So when reading the Bible, we expect general precision as did the original
readers of the Bible. It is true, but quotations may be loose and numbers may be
estimated. Nevertheless, the words recorded in Scripture are still without error.24
Dr. Wayne Grudem depicted that:
Many objects to the Bible’s own teaching about inerrancy. There are several reasons
why people object to the truthfulness of the Scriptures.
One common objection is the non-biblical assertion the Bible is only true in matters of
“faith and practice.” They divide the Bible into “faith and practice” areas and “fact”
areas. According to the argument, the Bible is true in the “faith and practice” areas,
but cannot always be trusted in the “fact” areas.25
DA himself rejected this attack by claiming that the issue with this contention is that the

Bible does not make such a differentiation. Instead, it affirms that "all Scripture is inspired by

God and beneficial for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness."

(2 Timothy 3:16, emphasis added). Moreover, the authors of Scripture who cited passages

from the Bible never separated the areas of "faith and practice" from the rest of the text. They

relied on all the details of Scripture, such as David eating bread (Matthew 12:3-4), Jonah in

the great fish (Matthew 12:40), or Elijah living with the widow at Zarephath (Luke 4:25-26).

24
Grudem, Wayen. Systematic theology. Lei center, England: inversity press, 1994: reprint Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2000.
25
[Link]/blog/the-inerrancy-of-scripture-chapter-5/ (retrieved date 25 02,2022)
14
No "fact" presented in the Bible is challenged by its own writers, even if it entails miracles or

appears difficult to believe.26 Another challenge addressed by DA was

It is a non-biblical term and some scholars are uncomfortable with non-biblical

terminology describing attributes of the Bible. This is a weak argument especially
since theology utilizes many terms to describe what the Bible teaches, though the
terms are not contained in Scripture. Consider the words Trinity or incarnation –
neither of those important terms are found in the Bible and yet both describe
important areas in theology. Part of mature field of study includes a growing
vocabulary to describe the findings in a field.
Others object to inerrancy on the grounds we do no longer have the original
manuscripts. Since those who believe in inerrancy of Scripture only affirm inerrancy
for the original manuscripts, it seems disingenuous to believe in the inerrancy of
documents that no longer exist. The problem with this objection is that we know what
the original documents recorded up to 99 percent accuracy. In other words, there are
very few areas of the Bible that are in question-related to the original documents
because of the progress of textual criticism – the science of understanding an original
ancient text.
Another important objection inerrancy relates to how the Biblical authors
accommodated their message to the hearers and thus affirmed or taught false ideas in
the process. This objection suggests that biblical authors affirmed, even incidentally,
falsehoods for the sake of accommodating to their hearers who believed falsehoods at
the time. Although this charge makes sense to anyone who doubts the divine
authorship of Scripture, it’s a variation of the previous charge of saying some things
are simply untrue in the Bible. The same God who wrote and preserved the Scriptures
for readers through redemptive history, is the same God who can communicate
without error regardless of whether the hearers believed some false things.
Finally, others have simply charged the Bible with containing simple errors – whether
scientific, historical, or other such errors. By either explicitly stating or implying the
Bible contains inaccuracies, these critics suggest the Bible cannot be trusted because
of multiple passages that contain errors. Those who believe in inerrancy agree with
the critics there are “problem passages.” Throughout church history, many
theologians and apologists have attempted to answer these problem passages in a way
that maintains the inerrancy of Scripture. Sometimes the explanations to the
difficulties are easier to spot than others and other passages are more difficult to
explain. Yet all of these problem passages can be explained to those who will read the
Bible with a charitable perspective.27
In “The Art of Imperious Ignorance” Carson further maintained that the ignorance of the

Council was not a humble agnosticism but an imperious imposition. Some strands of

postmodern thought follow a similar route. They claim to know, most imperiously, how much

26
Ibid

27
[Link]/blog/the-inerrancy-of-scripture-chapter-5/ (retrieved date 25 02,2022)
15
we cannot know about what the Bible is saying. If they were less certain about their

epistemology, they might be more certain about their ability to read.

Virtually every Christian doctrine has had doubt cast upon it by some people, but nothing has

been more repeatedly undermined than what God has said, beginning as early as Genesis 3:1.

Historically, it has been common to relativize Scripture's authority by adding other

authoritative sources; in recent times, it has been more common to question the Bible's

truthfulness, historical reliability, moral probity, and interpretive coherence, by taking away

from Scripture its transparent qualities. "Responding to such challenges is not the picky

pastime of defensive cranks but the inevitable result of holding the same view of Scripture

reflected by Jesus himself."28 According to Grant, "it is everywhere taken for granted that

Scripture is trustworthy, infallible, and inerrant... No New Testament writer would ever

dream of questioning a statement contained in the Old Testament."29

Moral Challenges

Finally, Carson said at different periods in the history of the church, and especially so during

the last half-century, some critics have sought to undermine the truthfulness (and thus the

inerrancy) of Scripture by holding up to ridicule various elements of biblical ethics, including

accounts of genocide, and what the Bible says about hell, homosexuality, women's rights, and

religious exclusivism. Some of these topics are briefly treated elsewhere. It is enough for our

purposes to make clear how many challenges to inerrancy are, in reality, a discomfort with

biblical truth in its terms.

Late Clark Pinnock asserted that “The Bible has predictions that were not fulfilled; Jesus

even made a false prophecy; God is not bound to his word.”30 And others.

28
Wenham, John. Christ and the bible Grand Rapids: makerbooks, 1994
29
Grant, C. Fredrick. Introduction to new thought. New York: Abingdon- lo kesbury press, 1950. P 75.
30
Norman L. Geisler and Willian C. Roach, Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy of scripture for a New
Generation, (Baker publishing group: Grand Rapid, Michigan; 2011). P. 46
16
Bart D. Ehrman, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a leading

expert on textual criticism as well as "one of the strongest academic voices speaking against

the inerrancy of Scripture" admits the following: 31 (a) The original manuscripts were not

reliable and are non-existent. (b) The transmission of manuscripts was unreliable. (c) Many

changes in the manuscripts are significant. These changes affect the doctrine of inerrancy,

etc.

RESPONSE

In response to the recent challenges to inerrancy, God did bless us with people who are not

just scholars but men filled with the Holy burn with passion for the word of God. Below is a

collective of a few responses among others.

Before we get to people like Norman Geisler, let's start with a Distinguished Professor of

Archaeology called Steve Collins. Here is his response about Biblical inerrancy:

As an archaeologist who deals with material evidence along with Ancient

Near Eastern cultures and texts, and who is also an evangelical Christian, I
often find the debate about biblical inerrancy puzzling, if not irritating. For
me, the concept of inerrancy is tied to divine intent. It is clear to me that
Scripture has come to us as God’s unique representation of reality, an
aggregate of authentic ancient records and eyewitness accounts driven by
divine selectivity toward the ultimate goal of bringing forth the final record of
31
Ibid p. 65
17
 the New Covenant through Messiah, Jesus. Because it is self-evident that God
does not superintend error, ‘doctrinal’ inerrancy is axiomatic. Further, on the
pragmatic side of the issue, my 45+ years of examining biblical texts in the
light of archaeology and history (and vice versa!) have given me unequivocal
confidence in the Bible’s ‘inductive’ inerrancy; i.e., I have yet to identify
anything in it that I would consider being in error. In my mind, an errant
Scripture is an affront to logic, science, and faith.32
Kenny Rhodes depicted that the “Inerrancy is the epistemological rationale for all theological

knowledge, a sublime first principle; without its ground and defense, fallen man is left as

both arbiter and judge of what God hath said. Inerrancy is grounded in the nature and

character of God. God cannot err, therefore, God’s ‘breathed-out’ word, in the original

autographs, cannot err33.

late Michael J. Ovey. It is well exemplified, Ovey says, in the Council of Sirmium (AD 357)

that:

The historic position has always been that God speaks to His people through the
Bible, which is inspired by God and thus is fallible (or inerrant) from cover to cover" 34
By this "the Bible is absolutely errorless in any of the subjects it touches on in
teaching whether statements about history, natural history, ethnology, archaeology,
geography, natural science, physical or historical fact, psychological or philosophical
principle, or spiritual doctrine and duty35
This denotes that the Bible is the ultimate and final authority in all matters of worship,

doctrine, and discipline.

The three-axiom presented by Farnell are excellent responses worthy of consideration.

First being “Garmmatico Historical (does not equal and cannot be equated with)
Historical Criticism; Second A bad methodology/ideology always leads to bad
theology Thirdly: Lordship always over scholarship “When pride comes, then comes
dishonor, but with the humble is wisdom” (Prov 11:2) or, stated more bluntly in
another way in the warnings of the New Testament: “It is required of stewards of
God’s Word that one be found trustworthy” (1 Cor 4:2); “The things which you have
heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who
will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim 2:2); “For the time will come when they will
not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate
for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their
ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths” (2 Tim 4:3–4)36
32
[Link] (Retrieved date 10th February, 2022)
33
Ibid
34
Ibid
35
Bahnsen 152-153- [Link]/[Link] (Retrieved on 10th February, 2022)
36
F. David Farnell Edt. Vital issues in the Inerrancy debate, (WIPF and stock, Eugene, Oregon: 2015) P. 527
18
William R. Eichhost said "If Scripture contains the communication of God to man, it can be

logically inferred that its contents will reflect the nature of God. Both the nature of God and

the character of Christ are at stake in our view of the Bible" 37

John Calvin once said, “Our faith in doctrine is not established until we have a perfect

conviction that God is the author of Scripture”38

Ed Hindson has it to say that

No one defended the inerrancy of the Scriptures more than Jesus. He quoted biblical
passages in responding to his disciples (Matt 16:21), his critics (Matt 22) and the devil
himself (Matt 4:4, 7, 10). He referred to almost every controversial story in the Old
Testament including Noah, Jonah, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, and Daniel. He emphasized
technical details of interpretation (Ps 110:1) and dared to claim the entire Old
Testament message was all about him (Luke 24:44). We are ultimately left with one
of two choices: poor dumb Jesus or poor dumb scholars. I’ll stick with Jesus every
time.39
Ramesh Richard

Unless the Bible is free of error, the Christian faith is minimized to an intriguing
phase in human moral development. That reduction carries Christological, salvific,
even eternal consequence. Further, the epistemological conviction and missiological
confidence needed to reach spiritually lost people, and especially those who hold to
the inerrancy of their Scriptures, are rendered vacuous at best and void at worst.”40
He continued that "if the Bible is the word of God but is not completely true, it must be either

because God was deliberately lying or because He was ignorant of the facts. Neither of these

alternatives is acceptable to the Christian. Deceit and ignorance are not characteristics of

God. To associate such attributes with His word would be equally devastating"41

Thus, Archer states: "The original manuscripts of the Biblical books must have been free

from all mistakes, or else they could not have been truly inspired by the God of truth in

whom is no darkness at all. God could ever have inspired a human author of Scripture to

write anything erroneous or false" 42

37
(Eichhost 5).
38
John Calvin
39
[Link] (Retrieved date 10th February, 2022)
40
[Link] (Retrieved date 10th February, 2022)
41
Ibid 5
42
Ibid
19
 The issue of the erosion of inerrancy has been carefully examined. Several questions
were posed at the outset: Can this view of total inerrancy be reaffirmed for the
twenty-first century? Does the ICBI statement need to be revised or even discarded?
Is it possible to be a biblical scholar and still believe in unlimited inerrancy? After
reviewing all major arguments thoroughly, my considered response is that we can and
should reaffirm inerrancy for a new generation. After careful examination, it is
evident that the real problem with contemporary deviations from inerrancy is not
factual but philosophical. Some of these new ideas come from the philosophy of
meaning, some from the philosophy of language, and some from the philosophy of
hermeneutics. But at root, they are all philosophical problems.43
Franklin Graham stated

To demonstrate trust in the inerrant Word of God is to exhibit faith in the One who
spoke life into existence. History and human nature prove the truth of the Bible every
day, but the greatest evidence is seen in changed lives that cannot be denied. Tis
infallible Book is its own great commentary: ‘The entirety of your word, Lord, is
truth’ (Psalm 119:160)44
Ravi Zacharias says “The Bible is the Word of God, and God cannot err. So, to deny

inerrancy, rightly understood, is to attack the very character of God. Those who deny

inerrancy, soon enter the dangerous terrain of denying all Scriptural authority for both

doctrine and practice.”45

Norman Geisler
The inerrancy of Scripture is the foundational doctrine in which all other doctrines
rest, and the Psalmist rightly said, ‘If the foundation is destroyed, then what can the
righteous do?’ John H. Munro Senior Pastor, Calvary Church, Charlotte NC; World-
Wide Bible Teacher of Back to the Bible “If I did not believe in the inerrancy of Holy
Scripture I would resign as a preacher and teacher of the Bible which is the Word of
God written. I can authoritively say, ‘Tus says the Lord’ when I preach the Bible as it
comes from a God who cannot lie. ‘Let him who has my word speak my word in
truth’ (Jeremiah 23:28). To question the inerrancy of Scripture inevitably leads to
weak and confusing preaching with disastrous consequences!” John Warwick
Montgomery Distinguished Research Professor of Philosophy, Concordia University;
Director, International Academy of Apologetics “The inerrancy of Holy Scripture is
the watershed theological issue in the church today–as it has been in every generation
since the rise of modern secularism and rationalistic biblical criticism. Every single
denomination, theological seminary, and Christian college that has departed from it
has begun an inexorable decline and loss of biblical witness. The saving gospel itself
cannot be sustained apart from a trustworthy Statement on the Importance of
Inerrancy from Prominent Christian Leaders.46
John Ankerberg Show that
43
Norman L. Geisler and Willian C. Roach, Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy of scripture for a
New Generation, (Baker publishing group: Grand Rapid, Michigan; 2011). P. 344
44
Franklin Graham
45
Edt. F. David Farnell Vital Issues in the Inerrancy Debate (Wipe stock; Eugene, Oregon: 2015) p.530
20
 The Bible provides the foundational beliefs of Christianity. Biblical inerrancy,
properly understood, affirms Scripture’s accuracy in every area it’s addressing. God’s
Word records the history of humanity, the teachings of our Savior, numerous fulfilled
prophecies, and the principles of our faith. Despite numerous attacks by skeptics and
opponents, its words continue to stand true and change lives today.”47
Mark L. Bailey

Both the incarnation of Jesus and the inspiration of the Bible, as products of the Holy
Spirit, can and must be without error or we have challenged the ability and impugned
the character of Almighty God to do what his Word says he did (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet
1:20, 21; 1 Cor 2:9–16). If an omnipotent God by his Spirit can take a human agent
and conceive his perfect Son, that same omnipotent God can use human agents
through whom his Spirit can communicate his mind to humanity through the Holy
Scriptures.48
Paige Patterson The inerrancy of Scripture is an essential and not optional doctrine for the

church. Otherwise, we are cast on a raging sea of subjectivism with a high priesthood of

scholars who assume the position of God, telling what we should and should not believe.”49

Al Mohler President “Inerrancy is nothing less than the affirmation that the Bible, as the

Word of God written, is totally true and trustworthy. When the Bible speaks, God speaks.

Richard Land President, Southern Evangelical Seminary

The inerrant Scripture is our fixed, North Star by which we can be led by God to a
saving knowledge of him and his plan and purpose for our lives. Once you surrender
the objective, infallible, inerrant nature of God’s revelation of himself to us, all you
are left with is each interpreter’s subjective, autobiographical, idiosyncratic God, who
may bear little or no resemblance to the one, true, immutable God with whom we
must all deal ultimately50
Walter's main point is that the Inerrancy of the Bible asserts that all its claims are true and

align with real-life and historical events as intended by its writers. Scripture's total

truthfulness is crucial because it is what Scripture itself teaches, and without it, we would be

left to interpret God's word subjectively.51

46
Norman L. Geisler and Willian C. Roach, Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy of scripture for a
New Generation, (Baker publishing group: Grand Rapid, Michigan; 2011). P.
47
Edt. F. David Farnell Vital Issues in the Inerrancy Debate (Wipe stock; Eugene, Oregon: 2015) P. 534
48
Ibid
49
Edt. F. David Farnell Vital Issues in the Inerrancy Debate (Wipe stock; Eugene, Oregon: 2015) P. 534
50
Ibid
51
Ibid
21
According to Daniel “The doctrine of inerrancy is ultimately an issue of Christology. Jesus

affirmed the complete truthfulness and reliability of Scripture. Matthew 5:17–18; Luke

24:25– 27; John 10:35, 17:17 make this abundantly clear. To live under his Lordship is to

hold his view of the Word of God.”52

Elmer L. Towns believes that inspiration guarantees the accuracy of every word in the

original language. Therefore, he advocates for studying, translating, and understanding the

meaning of Scripture to live by its teachings, with a focus on the Holy Spirit's role in its

inspiration.53

Farnell emphasizes the importance of inerrancy, rooted in the perfection of God's character.

To question the accuracy of God's Word is seen as blasphemous.54

Howe points out that if we can't trust the Word of God in earthly matters that we can verify or

falsify, how can we trust it in heavenly and spiritual matters that we cannot verify? Trust in

the accuracy of Scripture is fundamental.55

Roach highlights the axiom of inerrancy as an article of faith and a guideline for biblical

interpretation. It affirms that God speaks His mind to humanity through the agency of human

writers, resulting in errorless, cognitive-propositional revelation.56

Bruce has it to say that “Inerrancy is entailed in our understanding of inspiration and without

it, divine promises would give no assurance, and divine commands would require no

obedience.”57 Weiland a Professor of Biblical Studies at the Veritas Evangelical Seminary

depicts that

52
[Link] (Retrieved date 10th February, 2022)
53
Edt. F. David Farnell Vital Issues in the Inerrancy Debate (Wipe stock; Eugene, Oregon: 2015)P. 534
54
Ibid
55
Ibid
56
Ibid

57
Edt. F. David Farnell Vital Issues in the Inerrancy Debate (Wipe stock; Eugene, Oregon: 2015)P. 534
22
 There is a real sense in which ‘inerrancy’ is the most important doctrine of the Bible,
for every other major (and minor) doctrine is derived from that one source, whether it
be the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, or salvation by faith alone in Christ alone.
Inerrancy is taught throughout the Bible, but the words of Psalm 19:7 powerfully
crystallize the teaching, ‘The law of the Lord is perfect.58
Phil Roberts “There is no greater encouragement to the evangelist, proclaimer or teacher of

God’s Word than to know that the Bible they use is trustworthy, reliable and inerrant. Such

truth is as wind to the sailing ship. “I, the Lord, speak the truth.’ Isaiah 45:19.”59

Mark emphasizes the importance of holding to the inerrancy of Scripture to focus authority

on the divinely inspired texts of the Old and New Testaments, rather than relying on fallible

human judgment. 60

Phil Ginn, a Senior Resident Superior Court Judge in Western North Carolina, advocates for

upholding the inerrancy of God's Word, as compromising its foundation would lead to the

downfall of true Christianity. 61

Hoffman, an Attorney at Law, emphasizes that the inerrancy of Scripture reflects the power

of God. Analyzing alleged errors is essential to reaffirming the perfection of God's Word. 62

The recommendation by Donald provides ten guidelines for Evangelical scholarship,

promoting a balanced and coherent approach to the study of Scripture. 63

58
[Link] (Retrieved date 10th February, 2022)
59
Ibid
60
Ibid
61
Paul K. [Link] (retrived date 11 January, 2022)
62
F. David Farnell Edt. Vital issues in the Inerrancy debate, (WIPF and stock, Eugene, Oregon: 2015) PP. 530-
538
63
Hofmeier, James K., and Dennis R. Magary, eds. Do Historical Matters Matter to Faith? Wheaton, IL:
Crossway, 2012.
23
 RECOMMENDATION

The first recommendation will be the Ten guidelines for Evangelical Scholarship by Donald:

1. See what is there, avoiding maximal conservatism, anachronistic approaches,

harmonizing and homogenizing, and partial appeals to historical evidence.

2. Affirm the full humanity of the scriptures, recognizing that they are the word of God

in the words of men.

3. Define the nature of inspiration inductively, not deductively, by examining the

phenomena of scripture and doing justice to it as it is.

4. Acknowledge that no presupposed position is entirely possible, and strive to step

outside of our presuppositions and imagine "what if." Recognize that only a relative

degree of objectivity is attainable.

5. Modify the classical historical-critical method to allow openness to the transcendent,

the action of God in history, and the possibility of miracles. Develop a method that is

appropriate to the subject of study.

24
 6. Maintain a unified worldview, avoiding a schizophrenic attitude toward truth and

criteria for validation. Recognize that all truth is God's truth, whether arrived at

through rationality or faith.

7. Acknowledge that in the realm of historical knowledge, matters cannot be definitively

proven or disproven, but are based on probability and inference from the evidence.

Engage in good historical criticism that provides the most coherent explanation of the

evidence.

8. Avoid the extremes of pure fideism and pure rationality-based apologetics,

understanding that both faith and reason have their proper place. Seek a creative

synthesis of both approaches.

9. Develop humility and avoid undue confidence and arrogance of critical orthodoxy,

which may depend on presuppositions alien to the documents themselves.

10. Approach criticism with a creative tension between intellectual honesty and

faithfulness to tradition, continually reexamining both sides, and trusting that rightly

engaged criticism will ultimately vindicate Christian truth. Note: The Holy Spirit

cannot be appealed to in solving historical-critical issues or issues of truth claims.

However, for believers, the inner witness of the Spirit confirms the truth of

existentially or in the heart. Concede that our knowledge is fragmentary and partial,

and our wisdom is limited. Full understanding will only come after our perfection,

and then it will no longer be understanding alone but also worship. 64

The inerrancy of Scripture is crucial for every Christian to pay attention to. As Paul urged

Timothy to "Study and show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be

ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15), this warning is relevant for

Christians in this generation where truth is often considered relative. Many regard the Bible
64
[Link] .
25
as an old book to be stored away in archives. Christians must return to studying the Word of

God with faith as the lens for understanding and tools of evaluation. This is the only way to

counter the harmful influence of philosophical reasoning and scientific approaches that may

hinder our understanding of Scripture.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, just as Eichhorst concluded his argument by saying that if the Bible is God's

word, 'it must reflect his attributes,' for He is a God of truth and light, and the Scriptures

repeatedly affirm the veracity of God (1 John 1:5).

Inerrancy serves as a safeguard against human spontaneity usurping the normative authority

of Scripture in the life of the church.

As Norman wrote..."Beware of Philosophy: A Warning to Biblical Scholars.” The

exhortation still stands, the casualties still mount, and sadly many of the people discussed in

this book are among them. My academic advice has not changed. How can good, godly, and

scholarly persons avoid the pitfalls of adopting philosophies that undermine the historic

evangelical stand on inerrancy? My advice is the same: (1) Avoid the desire to become a

famous scholar. (2) Avoid the temptation to be unique (3) Do not dance on the edges. (4)

Steer right to go straight. (5) DO not trade orthodoxy for academic respectability. (6) Reject

any methodological inconsistency with the Bible or good reason.65

65
Norman L. Geisler and Willian C. Roach, Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy of scripture for a
New Generation, (Baker publishing group: Grand Rapid, Michigan; 2011). P. 344
26
 Bibliography

Carson, don. Contemporary challenge to inerrancy: An assay TGC us Edition

[Link] Org/ essay/ contemporary challenge-to-inerrancy access

on 21 Dec, 2021

Geisler, L. Noman and reach c. Williams. Defending inerrancy affirming the accuracy of

the scripture for a new generation. Grand rapids, Michigan: bakerbooks, 2011.

Wenham, John. Christ and the bible Grand Rapids: makerbooks, 1994

Wright G Ernest. God who acts: biblical theology as recital, STB8: London: Scm, 1992.

Eichhorst, e- Williams. The issue of bible inerrancy in definition and defense. Grace

Journal 1, pp. 1-15

Archer, L. Gleson. A survey of Old Testament introduction Chicago, Illinois; moody

press, 1964.

Stevick, S Daniel. Beyond fundamentalism Richmond, Virginia: John Knox press, 1964.
27
Grant, C. Fredrick. Introduction to new thought. New York: Abingdon- lo kesbury press,

1950.

Frame, M. John. Is the bible inerrant? ilim magazine online, volume 4 , number 19,

2002.

Helm, Paul “B.B Warfield’s part to inerrancy: an attempt to correct some serious

misunderstanding. West minister theological journal, 2010.

Grudem, Wayen. Systematic theology. Lei center, England: inversity press, 1994: reprint

Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.

Wikipedia bible inerrancy https:[Link]/wiki/biblical-inerrancy. Accessed

on 21. Dec, 2021.

Roberts, Kyel. Seven problems with inerrancy (evangelicalism, II2). Vnsystmetic

theology: pathios, 2015. Accessed on 21. Dec, 2021.

Manu, Obeng peter and Oppong, Kenneth, “biblical inerrancy: A reflection “world wide

journal of multidisciplinary research and development. Ghana: WWJMRD, 2017pp. 221-

226.

28