I had chance to listen to
the final podcast of Doug Pagitt’s debate with Bob Dewaay over the weekend. I began listening to the debate back at the end of April
(click here for my thoughts). The same trends in the first 2 parts of the discussion carried in to the third part, though the third part of the podcast is a Q&A time.
One of the things that comes up in this 3rd part is the issue of scripture and how to explain or characterize the Bible in terms of its authority and credibility. Pagitt gives a brilliant statement about the term “inerrancy,” which has been
the buzz word for evangelicals over the last 25+ years or so in describing the Bible. He says this: “The Bible is better than the word ‘inerrant’ allows it to be. I’m more comfortable talking about the Bible as it talks about itself than using words like ‘inerrant.’” Pagitt then goes into a brief description about the power of scripture to infiltrate hearts and change us. Dewaay, however, seems to completely miss Pagitt’s conception of the power of scripture and goes straight back to defending the term “inerrant” by trying to say that Jesus was arguing for “inerrancy” when He said that
not the least stroke of a pen would pass from the Law. The problem is, as Pagitt points out in the discussion, the term “inerrant” is insufficient – especially in summarizing what Jesus said in Matthew 5!
“Inerrant” is a term that applies to facts and data – “without error.” Is the Bible “without error?” Well, if you’re talking in terms of everything being in the Bible that God wants to be in the Bible, then sure – it’s “without error.” And if you’re asking if the Bible describes God’s character and is never wrong about who God is, then yes – it’s “without error.”
But here’s where the problem arises. The Bible isn’t a book of facts and data. When I read the Psalms, for example, I’m reading poetry and it seems very inappropriate to ask if poetry is “inerrant.” With that in mind, I have to agree with Pagitt that the term “inerrant” is insufficient. Sure, where there are facts and information that can be true or false, scripture is “without error.” But the Bible isn’t just full of facts and data. It’s so much more than that!! It’s alive and effective and active in bringing about supernatural change and Divine connection to humanity,
as the author of Hebrews attests and which people like Bob Dewaay would affirm. So if we can agree on how Hebrews describes God’s communication of Himself to us, why would we want to limit scripture with a term such as “inerrant?” Because “the liberals” were attacking the Christian faith in unprecedented ways in the mid-20th Century and biblical scholars were compelled to give an answer.
However, I think that if the Evangelical church can get beyond these reactions to modern day liberal attacks on faith
(which is really where terms such as “inerrant” come from), the picture of God and of faith that we portray will be so much bigger. When we argue for the “inerrancy” of scripture, we’re playing their game. It’s the game of Enlightenment confidence in rationality, in the scientific method, and in a philosophy that says, “There is no mystery or problem in the universe which we humans cannot solve or overcome.” It’s that very worldview that begins with the assumption that there is no God. Not only has the Christian faith withstood the tests and attacks of such historical ideologies and worldviews
(such as the Enlightenment), but it has thrived, though at times and in different regions of the world, limping along. There are sufficient answers in the defense from attacks on the Christian faith, as the last 50+ years has demonstrated. But the Christian faith
(indeed, God Himself) is not limited to those answers nor those questions.
Technorati Tags: church, Bible, inerrancy, theology, mission, Pagitt, DeWaay
.jpg)
