About COR
Background
History
COR's
Director
Historic
Steering
Committee
Current Steering Committee
COR Documents
History
Foundation
Docs
Worldview
Docs
Translations
Españolas
Russian
ICBI
Early
Days
More
on ICBI
Inerrancy
Statement
20 Inerrancy Questions
Hermeneutics
More
Intl. Church Council
Solemn
Assembly
Reformation of America
Adopting Orgs.
Resources & Links
Contact Us
Make a Donation
|
|
Falsehoods that Neo-Orthodox and
Liberalized Evangelicals Want Us to Believe About the Bible
(Las
Traducciones Españolas)
By Dr. Jay Grimstead
Neo-orthodoxy is a thought system that is opposed to the
biblical view of reality. These two systems are in competition for the minds of
evangelicals living today.
In 1978, a group of theologians met in Chicago, under the
banner of the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI), to forge a document
for Church history that would stand in opposition to the neo-orthodox drift
among evangelicals. At the time of that meeting, the theological agenda was
being set by neo-orthodox theologians. As with all historic documents of
Christianity, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy grew out of an effort
by the leaders of Christianity to gather together by common consent and hammer
out a biblical position to stand in opposition to a current heresy.
The ICBI statement was formulated into a set of
Affirmations and Denials. As Francis Schaeffer reminds us, in today’s
philosophically confused world, where words are distorted, devalued, and
deliberately redefined, we cannot be
certain that we have been understood
unless we say clearly what we do not
mean as well as what we do
mean.
Among the 19
Articles in the Chicago Statement, Articles III through XIX stand in direct
opposition to specific neo-orthodox doctrines which are currently being taught
in classes and in the writings of many professors at so-called “evangelical”
seminaries in America.
Following is a list
of neo-orthodox heresies and false representations that liberal evangelicals
want us to believe concerning the Bible. To the right of each heresy, is an
Article from the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy that stands in
opposition to the heresy. This chart may be useful as a “checklist” by
committees seeking to hire staff for churches and organizations to determine if
candidates have been “liberalized.” Most neo-orthodox, liberalized
evangelical students and pastors do not know they have been influenced as they
have and may claim otherwise. This list will be a useful test of their claims.
(See also "Twenty
Questions" that will reveal whether you or your church leaders are Orthodox
or Neo-Orthodox in their view of Scripture.)
Neo-Orthodox Heresy
|
Biblical
Position (Chicago Statement)
|
1. The Bible is merely a witness to revelation
or becomes revelation in encounter. The Bible itself is not
absolute, divine revelation. Black marks on a white page can never be
revelation in and of themselves.
|
Article
III
WE AFFIRM that
the written Word in its entirety Is revelation given by God.
WE DENY that
the Bible is merely a witness to revelation, or only becomes revelation in
encounter, or depends on the responses of men for its validity.
|
2. Human language is inadequate as a vehicle to
communicate divine, absolute truth.
|
Article
IV
WE AFFIRM that
God who made mankind in His image has used language as a means of
revelation.
WE DENY that
human language is so limited by our creatureliness that it is rendered
inadequate as a vehicle for divine revelation. We further deny that the
corruption of human culture and language through sin has thwarted God’s
work of inspiration.
|
3. Later revelation sometimes contradicts earlier
revelation. Love is often opposed to biblical justice.
|
Article
V
WE AFFIRM that
Gods revelation in the Holy Scriptures was progressive.
WE DENY that
later revelation, which may fulfill earlier revelation, ever corrects or
contradicts it. We further deny that any normative revelation has been
given since the completion of the New Testament writings.
|
4. The Bible is in a certain sense the Word of God
(singular) but the words of the Bible are not the Words of God (plural).
Though the Bible is in some sense inspired, the exact words and sentences
are not inspired in the way Hedge and Warfield stated the case.
|
Article
VI
WE AFFIRM that
the whole of Scripture and all its parts, down to the very words of the
original, were given by divine inspiration.
WE DENY that
the inspiration of Scripture can rightly be affirmed of the whole without
the parts, or of some parts but not the whole.
|
5. The Bible,
as a book, is not qualitatively different from any other book. The
biblical writers were unusually sensitive to God’s movement in their
lives and in the history around them and recorded, as best they could,
what they observed without miraculous intervention wherein God was
choosing each word.
|
Article
VII
WE
AFFIRM that inspiration was the work in which God by His Spirit, through
human writers, gave us His Word. The origin of Scripture is divine. The
mode of divine inspiration remains largely a mystery to us.
WE
DENY that inspiration can be reduced to human insight, or to heightened
states of consciousness of any kind.
|
6. The doctrine of inerrancy as Warfield states it
requires that God dictated the sentences and bypassed the
personalities of the human authors.
|
Article
VIII
WE AFFIRM that
God in His Work of inspiration utilized the distinctive personalities and
literary styles of the writers whom He had chosen and prepared.
WE DENY that
God, in causing these writers to use the very words that He chose,
overrode their personalities.
|
7. Since to “err is human,” all human writings,
including the Bible, are tainted with error, misconceptions, and
overstatement or understatement.
|
Article
IX
WE AFFIRM that
inspiration, though not conferring omniscience, guaranteed true and
trustworthy utterance on all matters of which the Biblical authors were
moved to speak and write.
WE DENY that
the finitude or fallenness of these writers, by necessity or otherwise,
introduced distortion or falsehood into God’s Word.
|
8. Since the original manuscripts no longer exist, it
is a waste of time to even talk of them being errant or inerrant.
|
Article
X
WE AFFIRM that
inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of
Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from
available manuscripts with great accuracy. We further affirm that copies
and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they
faithfully represent the original.
WE DENY that
any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of
the autographs. We further deny that this absence renders the assertion of
biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant.
|
9. The Bible may be “infallible” but it is not
inerrant.
|
Article
XI
WE AFFIRM that Scripture, having been given by divine
inspiration, is infallible, so that, far from misleading us, it is true
and reliable in all the matters it addresses.
WE DENY that it is possible for the Bible to be at
the same time infallible and errant in its assertions. Infallibility and
inerrancy may be distinguished, but not separated.
|
10. The Bible
is true in matters of faith and practice, doctrine and morals, but it is
not necessarily true when it speaks on matters of interest to history and
science.
|
Article
XII
WE AFFIRM that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant,
being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.
WE DENY that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are
limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of
assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that
scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn
the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood.
|
11. Inerrancy is negated by misspelled words,
informal grammar, hyperbole, and round numbers.
|
Article
XIII
WE AFFIRM the propriety of using inerrancy as a
theological term with reference to the complete truthfulness of Scripture.
WE DENY that it is proper to evaluate Scripture
according to standards of truth and error that are alien to its usage or
purpose. We further deny that inerrancy is negated by biblical phenomena
such as a lack of modern technical precision, irregularities of grammar or
spelling, observational descriptions of nature, the reporting of
falsehoods, the use of hyperbole and round numbers, the topical
arrangement of material, variant selections of material in parallel
accounts, or the use of free citations.
|
12. If there are no present solutions to apparent
contradictions and apparent errors, there never will be such solutions.
|
Article
XIV
WE AFFIRM the unity and internal consistency of
Scripture.
WE DENY that alleged errors and discrepancies that
have not yet been resolved vitiate the truth claims of the Bible.
|
13. The Bible
does not teach inerrancy.
|
Article
XV
WE AFFIRM that the doctrine of inerrancy is grounded
in the teaching of the Bible about inspiration.
WE DENY that Jesus’ teaching about Scripture may be
dismissed by appeals to accommodation or to any natural limitation of His
humanity.
|
14. The doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture is new
on the scene of Church history. It was invented by Francis Turretin in the
17th century and was popularized for our century by B. B. Warfield. It was
not believed by the early Church, Augustine, the Roman Catholics, or the
Reformers.
|
Article
XVI
WE AFFIRM that the doctrine of inerrancy has been
integral to the Church’s faith throughout its history.
WE DENY that inerrancy is a doctrine invented by
Scholastic Protestantism, or is a reactionary position postulated in
response to negative higher criticism.
|
15. The testimony of the Holy Spirit must work in
conjunction with the Written Word in order for it to be Gods Word to us.
|
Article
XVII
WE AFFIRM that the Holy Spirit bears witness to the
Scriptures, assuring believers of the truthfulness of God’s written
Word.
WE DENY that this witness of the Holy Spirit operates
in isolation from or against Scripture.
|
16. Higher
criticism and removing “cultural encrustations” from the text are
necessary in order to properly interpret Scripture.
|
Article
XVIII
WE AFFIRM that the text of Scripture is to be
interpreted by grammatico-historical exegesis, taking account of its
literary forms and devices, and that Scripture is to interpret Scripture.
WE DENY the legitimacy of any treatment of the text
or quest for sources lying behind it that leads to relativizing,
dehistoricizing, or discounting its teaching, or rejecting its claims to
authorship.
|
17. Inerrancy may be rejected without any serious
consequences to the Church or to personal holiness.
|
Article
XIX
WE AFFIRM that a confession of the full authority,
infallibility, and inerrancy of Scripture is vital to a sound
understanding of the whole of the Christian faith. We further affirm that
such confession should lead to increasing conformity to the image of
Christ.
WE DENY that such confession is necessary for
salvation. However, we further deny that inerrancy can be rejected without
grave consequences, both to the individual and to the Church.
|
The above article originally appeared in Crosswinds magazine,
Volume II, Number 2. Copyright ©1994 Coalition on Revival.
|
|
Support this Ministry by Donation
View or print these documents with the free Acrobat Reader.
-
Twenty-Four Year Plan
Invitation Brochure
Christian Foundation
Documents
Biblical Inerrancy
(Signatories)
42 Worldview Essentials
The
Kingdom
of God
Manifesto for the Church
Christian Worldview
Documents
Worldview Law
Worldview Government
Worldview Social/Political
Worldview Education
Worldview Discipleship
Worldview Medicine
Worldview Psychol/Counseling
Worldview Science/Technology
Worldview Art/Media
Worldview Economics
Worldview Business/ Occupat.
Worldview Evangelism
Worldview Christian Unity
Worldview Family
Worldview Poor/Hurting
Worldview Pastoral Renewal
Worldview Colleges/Universities
Translations
Spanish Translations
Las Traducciones Españolas
Other Resources
Neo-Orthodox Falsehoods
Leader's Questions
|