Solid Doctrine Friday: Biblical Inerrancy

Have you ever wondered if the Bible could be wrong in its historical depictions of past events? Have you ever heard it suggested that some accounts, which are clearly presented in the Bible as historical facts, may actually be something closer to legend? If these thoughts have ever crossed your mind, you’ve found yourself up against the doctrine of biblical inerrancy.

What is inerrancy?

Inerrancy is simply the assertion that the Bible is without error.

Inerrancy is a foundational doctrine of the historic Christian faith. The very earliest church fathers (including but not limited to the Apostles themselves) stated in no uncertain terms their confidence in the inerrancy of scripture. A few samples:

Observe that nothing of an unjust or counterfeit [false] character is written in them (Clement of Rome, A.D. 30-100)

But when you hear the utterances of the prophets spoken as it were personally, you must not suppose that they are spoken by the inspired men themselves but by the divine Word who moves them (First Apology, p. 36). (Justin Martyr, A.D. 100-165)

The Scriptures are indeed perfect, since they were spoken by the Word of God [Christ] and His Spirit (Against Heresies 2.28.2). (Irenaeus, second century A.D.)

Visit the Defending Inerrancy link in the comments for many, many more cited examples of the earliest church fathers expressing their belief in the doctrine of inerrancy.

Then there is, of course, the letter from Paul to Timothy:

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

And Hebrews:

For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)

Why does this matter?

It really all comes back to the very first temptation in the Garden:

“Did God really say?”

In order for unbiblical worldviews such as Progressive Christianity and the New Age to take root, they must first undermine the authority of scripture, which clearly denounces them in no uncertain terms.

But what if the Bible was just written by fallible human beings and can therefore sometimes be wrong? (This is a common case brought against the writings of Paul.)

What if its representations of God, especially in the Old Testament, were not entirely accurate, but rather the “best guesses” of a more primitive culture, based on their limited understanding and not ACTUALLY representing the true God?

Once you’ve brought into question the inerrancy of scripture, you are welcome to bring in replacements for the parts you don’t like. Who can stop you? By what standard could anyone say that you’re wrong? All truth becomes subjective.

As you sit in church, read blog articles, and converse with friends, keep your ears open for hints that they may be giving up on this essential doctrine. If they do, you can be sure that the sacking of other essential doctrines is not far behind.

See the comments for more resources on inerrancy.

RESOURCES:

The Rationality of Belief in Inerrancy (J.P. Moreland)

Why is Inerrancy Important? (Defending Inerrancy)

Did Early Christians Believe the Bible Was Inerrant and Authoritative? (Alisa Childers)

If the Gospels are Inerrant, Why Do They Contain Discrepancies? VIDEO (Stand to Reason)

Solid Doctrine Friday: Penal Substitutionary Atonement

This is a repost from the private Facebook group SoulAnchor. In the group we discuss false teachings currently infiltrating the church, seek to increase our knowledge of God through theology and doctrine, and learn more about how to gracefully answer skeptics. If you are a Christian holding to the doctrines of the historic Christian faith and would like to join our group, please visit http://facebook.com/groups/soulanchor and request to join.

Surely He Has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows;

Yet we esteemed Him stricken,

Smitten by God, and afflicted.

But He was wounded for

our transgressions.

He was bruised for our iniquities;

The chastisement for our

peace was upon Him,

And by His stripes we are healed.

All we like sheep have gone astray;

We have turned, every one,

to his own way;

And the Lord has laid on Him

the iniquity of us all.

(Isaiah 53:4-6)

As we continue in discussing Progressive Christianity, we want to take Fridays to cover some doctrinal basics of historic Christianity. Today we want to look at the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement, hereafter referred to as PSA.

PSA states that Jesus died on the cross as our substitute- that’s where the word substitutionary comes in. Isaiah 53:6 makes it clear that every one of us has “turned… to his own way”. Psalm 14:1-3 makes our problem clear:

“They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none who does good…They have all turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is none who does good, no, not one.”

God is perfectly righteous and just, and will “by no means (clear) the guilty” (Exodus 34:7). He must rightfully punish the overwhelming sinfulness of humankind. That’s where the word “penal” come in. It means relating to or prescribing the punishment of offenders under the legal system. And under God’s legal system… we’re all offenders.

The doctrine of PSA states that on the cross, Jesus took the punishment that we deserved for our sin upon himself, acting as a substitute in our place and draining the full cup of God’s wrath, that His anger toward our sin might be completely satisfied for all time. “For the transgressions of my people He was stricken.” (Isaiah 53:8) Sometimes the Isaiah 53 verses are called “clobber verses”, but as this article from TGC puts it (https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/3-reasons-changed-mind-penal-substitution/) it’s not just a few cherry-picked prooftexts that lay out this doctrine clearly; it’s the whole arc of scripture from beginning to end.

More resources on Penal Substitutionary Atonement:

SimplyPut podcast: Propitiation (this is just 5 minutes) https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/propitiation/id1460030295?i=1000478131277

American Gospel: Christ Crucified http://www.americangospelfilm.com/watch-christ-crucified-ag2.html

(This is an excellent 3-hour documentary explaining PSA as well as the opposing viewpoints. Well worth your time! I have a hard copy I’m happy to loan out.)

If perhaps not with the entire mouthful of 5 dollar words, were you taught about penal substitutionary atonement? Have you interacted with anyone who had trouble accepting it? It’s a common doctrine for Progressive Christians to reject.

A common response to PSA by Progressive Christians is the assertion that it’s “cosmic child abuse”, that such a response to sin makes God vengeful and hateful. They’ll sometimes say that Jesus was a political revolutionary who was executed by the state (for a thorough response to this position as well as other resources, see Sharayah’s blog: https://snayskitchen.wordpress.com/2020/06/16/answering-zealot-by-reza-aslan-introduction/)

Another response is the Moral Influence Theory, which suggests that Jesus’s death on the cross was a demonstration of God’s love and NOT his wrath. While most Christians who hold to historic beliefs see it as both a demonstration of love for the sinner AND wrath against sin, Progressive Christians will often reject the “wrath” part entirely and insist that any chastising, bruising, or wounding of Christ on the cross was inflicted only by humankind and not by God.

For more on how Progressive Christians view PSA:

Does Isaiah 53 Support Penal Substitutionary Atonement? (Alisa Childers) https://www.alisachilders.com/blog/does-isaiah-53-support-penal-substitutionary-atonement-a-refutation-of-the-progressive-christian-interpretation-of-the-suffering-servant

Cosmic Child Abuse? Answer Moral Objections to the Atonement with Mike Winger (Alisa Childers) https://www.alisachilders.com/blog/cosmic-child-abuse-answering-moral-objections-to-the-atonement-with-mike-winger-i-dont-have-enough-faith-to-be-an-atheist-radio