Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Mercy Not Sacrifice

Home
About
My Book
Archives
More
- Theology
- Culture
- Politics
- Sermons
- Bible
- Devotions
- Daily Office
- Podcast

Home
Progressive Christian
Three different conceptions of Biblical authority

Three different conceptions of Biblical authority

Last updated on: July 17, 2014 at 1:59 pm by Morgan Guyton

Three different conceptions of Biblical authority 2014-07-17T13:59:21-05:00 Morgan Guyton

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Thanks very much for your responses to my last post on Biblical inerrancy. Though some were a bit snarky, they were actually quite helpful to my sermon preparation process, which was my goal with the post. What has emerged out of that wrestling is that there seem to be three ways of understanding Biblical authority, which basically amount to three interpretations of the most cited proof-text for Biblical authority: 2 Timothy 3:16: “All scripture is God-breathed and useful for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness.”

1) Everything in the Bible is literal, historical, and biological unless clearly presented as otherwise.

This view of Biblical authority could be called “literalism,” which is often conflated with “inerrancy.” For a Biblical literalist, if the Bible says the entire world was covered with water in the story of Noah’s Ark, that means that the oceans rose 29,000+ feet to cover Mount Everest. If the Bible says that Adam and Eve were kicked out of a garden whose entrance is guarded by an angel with a sword, then there is still a physical location on Earth where the Garden of Eden historically was located that may or may not still be guarded by an angel with a sword (16th century conquistador Juan Ponce de Leon thought it was in Florida). The “literalist” position is perhaps best represented by Young Earth Creationists like Ken Ham, the founder of Answers in Genesis. For a Biblical literalist, the Tower of Babel story in Genesis 11 that I dealt with in my last post is entirely literal. That is, all of humanity not only had one language but lived in a single location in the plain of Shinar (rather than being nomadic hunter-gatherer tribes who had to migrate constantly for survival).

2) The human author’s intended meaning of every Biblical passage is always correct.

This seems to be the most definitive way to capture the Biblical “inerrantist” position. Portions of the Bible can be metaphorical or allegorical. There are multiple genres at work in the Bible. But the author’s intended meaning is without error. This is the position I was critiquing in my last post, though I probably wasn’t precise enough in the claim I was making. It doesn’t matter whether the Tower of Babel story is considered to be historical or not. What God says in the story makes God look bad in a way that most inerrantists would not want God to look: “Look, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one another’s speech” (Genesis 11:6-7).

A consistent inerrantist has to concede that the God of this quote does not have any morally punitive reason for confusing the languages of humanity. He says rather, “Nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.” So God is pitting Himself against human progress for being human progress because He considers progress itself to be a threat. The God represented by this quote is a God that the atheists would love to pin on Christianity, a God who wants humanity to remain illiterate, prescientific, and governed by superstition. An inerrantist can certainly weigh this quote in balance with all the other representations of God in the Bible and say that God is not only against human progress but He’s also holy, loving, all-powerful, etc. But to be an inerrantist means that you cannot consider any Biblically attributed act or speech of God to be less accurate than any other because all are equally inerrant, faithful representations of God. There cannot be a range of accuracy without the concession of error. Maybe I’m wrong. If so, offer a more precise definition of inerrancy.

3) The Holy Spirit has a teaching purpose for everything in the Bible even if it goes against the human author’s intended meaning.

This third option is the view of Biblical authority to which I hold, because I take 2 Timothy 3:16 at face value and add nothing to it. If “all scripture is God-breathed,” that means no more and no less than to say that the Holy Spirit is the editor-in-chief who has reigned over the compilation process from start to finish. It doesn’t mean that the Holy Spirit told Moses to sit on a rock and start taking dictations. It simply means that whatever combination of historical events, myths, and legends the Bible is derived from, the Holy Spirit had a reason to keep what has been kept, which based on 2 Timothy 3:16 has something to do with “teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness.”

Where I am going to part ways with the inerrantists is that I believe the Israelites may have grown over time in their ability to represent God faithfully, with the culmination of this growth being the unity of the God of Israel and the Israel of God in Jesus Christ. Another way of saying this is God prepared His people over hundreds of years for the coming of their messiah, and the Old Testament documents God’s refinement of their understanding of what He really wants from them. While I have used the Tower of Babel story for “teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness,” I do not think that the words attributed to God in the Tower of Babel story are an inerrant representation of God’s character. Likewise, I suspect that some of the violent events in the Old Testament attributed to God are less accurate representations of God’s character than the witness of Jesus in the New Testament.

John 1:18 says, “No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.” No one has ever seen God? Really? Uh… what about Abraham, Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc? This verse’s claim is pretty huge. Yes, I know you can sidestep and dismiss it by saying, well it just means nobody has ever seen the “face” of God or something like that. But for Jesus to be a uniquely faithful revelation of the Father’s heart, the other verses in the Bible cannot be equally reliable means of making God known. So John 1:18 is really the verse that torpedoes Biblical inerrancy.

Too many evangelicals think that we learn about the Father from the Old Testament and the Son from the New Testament. No! Jesus is the One who makes the Father known, though the Old Testament has plenty to teach us or the Holy Spirit wouldn’t have kept it. But the gospel accounts of Jesus should govern our assessment of God’s character in the Old Testament. If the claim of John 1:18 is legitimate, then seeing what makes Jesus smile and what makes Jesus angry clarifies and even corrects what God is presumed to care about in the Old Testament. It should be no surprise that to me, the most important clarification and correction Jesus makes is when He says, “I desire mercy not sacrifice.”

Biblical interpretation

Previous Post

January 11, 2014

The two verses that torpedo Biblical inerrancy

Next Post

January 15, 2014 Do we want to live in a world where people get shot for texting?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Advent Beauty Will Save the World Bible Big Picture: Ephesians Bloggers Book Christian salvation and the Beautitudes Culture Daily Office Danceable Homiletics Deadly Sins Deep Roots: Genesis Devotions Dominican Republic May 2011 El Principio Misericordia (The Mercy Principle) Five verses God tattooed on my heart Fundraising FutureGospel Good Biblical Words Henri Nouwen Interview Jennings' Christian Imagination Jesus inside the beltway Jesus Is My Candidate Jesus vs the Pharisees Jesus vs. Plato Journey to Eternity Looking Back on 2012 Love Actually Monday Merton Monday Merton Music Occupy the manger On Earth As It Is In Heaven Original Sin Podcast Poetry Politics Prayer Psalm 119 Radical Jesus 101 Reviews Sermon on the Mount Sermons Spanish Bible study Special Series Spiritual but not religious Synchroblog Theology Things that made me think Thomas a Kempis Ugliness Into Beauty Uncategorized Viaje Dominicano 2013 Walking in the Valley (Lent) Welcome: It's More than a Mat Wild Goose 2013 Wrestling

Select a Month March 2022 January 2022 December 2021 September 2021 April 2021 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did the wise men follow to find Jesus?

Select your answer to see how you score.

A prophet An angel A map A star