I’m in a situation right now where I can’t commit to be part of the church community I call home because I can’t sign their statement of faith. Part of the statement is that Scripture (Protestant canon) is “inerrant in the originals”.
The first problem I have is that signing something means I make the promise to not change my views. This is inconsistent with an honest faith that allows for uncertainty and critique. This is more to do with my general hesitancy to sign statements in order to be a member.
More specifically to “inerrancy in the originals”, it just doesn’t hold water. It can’t be proven in any way since we don’t have the originals. It has as its presupposition the circular reasoning that “God is perfect, the Bible is his word, therefore it is perfect”. Perfect meaning in this case without error. The problem with this is that when put up against what we know about the making of Scripture, it is disproven. It includes editors, redactors, compilers, and scribes. Its order, composition, and interpretation has been influenced by tradition, community, context, and time. Check out this video if you want to know more.
More importantly, the scriptures don’t make this claim. Paul says it is “inspired”, theopneustos in Greek. It’s a made-up Greek word meaning “god-breathed”. In the context of the verse he was referring to the Hebrew Scriptures. Including the New Testament writings as inspired scripture comes later, but I digress. What does it mean to be “god-breathed”? I like to start with the first pages of the Hebrew Scriptures. “the Lord God formed the human from the topsoil of the fertile land and blew life’s breath into his nostrils. The human came to life.” (Gen 2:7) The first thing God breathed into existence in the narrative was the human. He called it “tov tov”, very good. Not perfect, not without error, but very good. I see no reason not to think of the scriptures in the same way.
Instead of making a negative claim like “inerrant”, I prefer positive claims like “true” or “inspired”. These positive claims hold an open hand to how we then interpret and talk about the Scriptures we value so highly.
I also might add that from a pastoral perspective we need to ditch the term “inerrant” altogether. Our children will go to college, or take any meaningful course on the Bible, and discover almost immediately that “inerrancy” does not hold. If that is the only framework they are given, it is no wonder they leave the faith or have a significant faith crisis. We need to give them the tools and terms to allow for growth and change.
justin is reading 