Conversation with a Colleague about Inerrancy (Part 2)

Last updated on: May 31, 2018 at 5:45 am by James F. McGrath

Conversation with a Colleague about Inerrancy (Part 2) 2018-05-28T21:50:24-04:00 James F. McGrath

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.

Here is some more of my conversation with a colleague about inerrancy:

COLLEAGUE

Thoughts on Frame’s points under the criticisms section?

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/an-interview-with-john-frame-on-apologetics-to-the-glory-of-god/

JAMES

I think the problem is that there is still the assumption that not only is there an ultimate authority, but also the assumption that the human being engaging in the circular argument has grasped the meaning and will of that authority so perfectly that none of the uncertainty that comes with being human needs to temper the conversation.

Isn’t this just foundationalism in another form, except that instead of trying to build everything on the certainty of one’s own existence as per Descartes, the attempt is to start with not merely God but “the God of Scripture” which means not the God of whom the biblical authors wrote as human beings, but a God presumed (in a manner that is shielded from all critical examination) to be described in Scripture with sufficient precision through a process overseen by the divine hand so as to ensure that, once again, any limitations of human comprehension or language are negated.

I can understand the appeal of wanting to simply step into that circle. It is very reassuring. But it still seems to me to result from a human desire to avoid humbly accepting the fallibility of human reason, thought, and comprehension.

Those are my thoughts on the “criticisms” section, very briefly. I look forward to talking more about this!

James

COLLEAGUE

I think your response continues to demonstrate the difference between us. Here you have questioned whether or not there is an ultimate authority, it seems, while I believe that there is an ultimate authority, that we can know that with certainty, and that we can understand the Bible enough to grasp the meaning and will of God—though perhaps not “perfectly,” as you suggest, but with a high degree of certainty.

You suggest that this (I assume by “this” you might be referring to presuppositionalism?) is just another form of foundationalism built on the certainty of “the God of Scripture” (as opposed to just God). I suppose that is correct, and it seems like you’re working to discredit the authority and inspiration of the Bible.

I find it ironic, I suppose, that you think we should “humbly [accept] the fallibility of human reason, thought, and comprehension” while asserting your ability to determine that the Bible isn’t authoritative and what it does or doesn’t say. Is it not possible that your inherent fallibility precludes you from submitting to the authority of God’s Word? You seem certain that uncertainty should be the hallmark of one’s epistemology. Do you think Isaiah 5:21 has anything to say about this?

Frame writes, “In Christian epistemology, God’s word is the ultimate criterion of certainty. What God says must be true… So God’s word is the criterion by which we can measure all other sources of knowledge… Our certainty of the truth of God comes ultimately, not through rational demonstration or empirical verification, useful as these may often be, but from the authority of God’s own word.” (https://frame-poythress.org/certainty/)

JAMES

I am pretty sure that when I was an inerrantist I used to try to play this sort of “gotcha” game myself. If I wanted to, I could presumably play it right back at you and say that unless you are an inerrant ultimate authority yourself, presumably you could be wrong in your perception that the Bible is supposed to be the ultimate authority. But I think it is more helpful to emphasize that I really mean what I say about human fallibility, I changed my mind about the Bible because of evidence within the Bible itself, and I am open to changing it again if I believe the evidence justifies my doing so.

I had no desire to get away from inerrancy. On the contrary, it was the recognition that I was doing something inherently contradictory and self-defeating – defending my inerrantist doctrine about the Bible against evidence within the Bible itself – that led me to change my mind. It is precisely because I found that inerrancy disrespects and refuses to accept what the Bible actually says that I begrudgingly chose the Bible over biblical inerrantism.

I’m not sure that there is anything to add in response to your email except that, unless you simply assume that the Bible is the Word of God, rather than the words of the human beings to whom the works within it are at times explicitly but most often at least implicitly attributed, then the quote from Frame doesn’t carry much weight if any, and indeed seems like just another attempt to deny human fallibility and grasp at a certainty that belongs to God alone, by turning the Bible into a pope with pages. I can understand the attractiveness of doing so, but unless you are going to accept the responsibility of making a case for this in a non-circular way, presumably you are giving up on anything that deserves to be called apologetics, since circular argument isn’t making a case for your beliefs, it is insulating them from scrutiny in a way that seems deliberately designed to make them unattractive to those outside, placing a stumbling block between your hearer and the gospel. When this is done in conversation with someone who used to hold your viewpoint and abandoned it because of the evidence within the Bible itself, it is obviously going to make your stance seem even less credible and less worthy of serious consideration, as it appears to be precisely what I used to think, coupled with an admission that you cannot make a case for it but must simply assume it!

The conversation will continue next time…

Previous Post

May 30, 2018

Conversation with a Colleague about Inerrancy (Part 1)

Next Post

June 1, 2018 Conversation with a Colleague about Inerrancy (Part 3)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 Corinthians 1 John 1 Peter 1 Samuel 1 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Corinthians 2 Kings 2 Peter 2 Samuel 2 Thessalonians 2 Timothy academia Acts of the Apostles afterlife Akhaten Alcatraz American Academy of Religion Amos Anglican Arabic Aramaic archaeology art artificial intelligence astronomy atheism atonement Babylon 5 Baptists Battlestar Galactica Bible Biblical Studies Carnival biblioblogging Black Mirror Blade Runner Book of Job book review Buddhism Call for Papers China Christianity Christmas Christology Chronicles Coptic creation Daniel Deuteronomy Doctor Who Dune Easter Ecclesiastes economics education Eldad Keynan Enoch Seminar Ephesians eschatology Esther Evangelicals evolution Exodus Expanse Ezekiel Ezra fantasy Fringe fundamentalism Galatians games Ge'ez genealogy Genesis Gnosticism Gospel of Jesus' Wife Gospel of John Gospel of Judas Gospel of Luke Gospel of Mark Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Peter Gospel of Thomas Greek Harry Potter Hebrew Hebrews Hinduism historical Jesus history Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Holidays horror Hosea humor incarnation India inerrancy information literacy inspirational Intelligent Design Ireland Isaiah Islam Israel Italy James Jeremiah John the Baptist Jonah Joshua Judaism Jude Judges Judith Lamentations languages Latin Leviticus libraries literature Lord of the Rings LOST Mandaeans Mandaic memes Methodism Micah monotheism morality Mormons movies music mythicism NASSCAL Nehemiah new perspective New Testament news Numbers Orthodox paganism panentheism pantheism Patheos Paul and his letters Pentecostals Philippians Philippians 2:6-11 philosophy physics Planet of the Apes podcast politics Progressive Christianity Protestantism Proverbs Psalms pseudoscience racism religion Revelation Roman Catholicism Romania Romans Ruth scams science science fiction Secret Gospel of Mark Society of Biblical Literature Song of Songs Star Trek Star Wars Stargate Swahili Syriac Taoism technology Terminator The Handmaid's Tale The Hobbit The Matrix theodicy theology theory Timeless Titus tomb Torchwood travel TRON Uncategorized United Kingdom Westworld X-Files young-earth creationism Zechariah

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 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 July 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 March 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 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 February 2007 January 2001

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz