Is Inerrancy Enough?

As I said, in terms of definition, my aim here is not to rehash old debates about what inerrancy is. In light of the society’s recent actions, it is appropriate for us to take the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978) as a common point of departure for the definition of inerrancy. We must, however, take note of one item in the ETS’s resolution on the Chicago Statement. The resolution affirms that "The case for biblical inerrancy rests on the absolute trustworthiness of God and Scripture’s testimony to itself." This item is important not merely because it gives a theological grounding to the factual claims of the Bible (though this is true enough). The statement is important because it also implies a necessary connection between the Bible’s accuracy and its authority as divine revelation. In other words, with respect to accuracy the very words of the Bible are true because God Himself is true and cannot lie. But with respect to authority, the statement also requires recognition that the Bible is authoritative because God Himself is authoritative. The Scripture’s connection to the Deity makes it not just a sourcebook for accurate religious information, but also the guidebook whose very words command the obedience of all its readers. As the Chicago Statement itself affirms, "Holy Scripture . . . is to be believed, as God’s instruction, in all that it affirms; obeyed, as God’s command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God’s pledge, in all that it promises."