6 thoughts on “Inerrant, Infallible, or God Breathed”
Oluoch Hannington
Thank you Dan for writing this, you have addressed the challenge that many new converts go through after receiving Christ as their personal savior.
They get a challenge of defending their faith through the scriptures which they don’t know how to explain.
When they go to their pastors, the pastors also cant give them answers because they lack revelation in the word of God.
Revelation is progressive, but we have to come to the perfect knowledge of God.
Blessing Dan Harvey.
As I was reading your concern about inerrant and infallible, I realized you were objecting to where these men were drawing the line of faith. I was wondering where you would draw the line. Your line is very simple. But would God breath any errors or fallacies? How could errors and fallacies be “profitable for teaching, rebuke, correction, and instruction in righteousness”? No matter where you draw the line, there are issues to explain. No matter where you draw the line, many skeptics will not be convinced. Everyone, even atheists require faith. Logic and reason do not even coming close to giving credibility to their versions of existence. Everyone needs some elements of faith. As I view the atheist world view, there is a whole package of elements that are required that lead to horrendous dishonesty and immorality of tragic proportions. I have examined the evangelical world view and have found many elements of it’s package deal that are severely disobedient to God’s word, but they don’t come close to the package deal of atheism or agnosticism. I have had to do a lot of cleaning up my practice of following Jesus and sharing it with others. Sadly, it is not well received by believers, even those who I have known for 20+ years. But I persevere. I have yet to be beaten with rods like the apostle Pauls was on his journey of faith.
Liberal believers drew the line eliminating many books, all miracles, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, anything they didn’t like. They have serious issues with reality. They constantly move their line as secular faith objects to their line.
Churches, even those that hold to the inerrancy line are still very divided. This is a SERIOUS problem for demonstrating the truth of the deity of Christ to the lost. I am amazed anyone is saved in this routine. I have figured out why they are divided. It is baked into the SEVERE corrupted and disobedient practice of clergyism and institutionalism. These traditions of men change the identity of believers into an institution, rather than members of a body, a family, a spiritual building of which there is only one. I was raised on “those who preach the gospel should get their living from the gospel”, or pay the preacher. I have figured out that hired Bible experts have twisted or falsely translated 3 passages, and used them to nullify the clear teaching of 9 passages that teach spiritual leadership is always combined with marketplace work. Obeying the apostle Paul’s instructions and example would cure the church of all it’s brand names and pulpit and pew buildings. A lot more explanation is needed on this.
The line to draw is simple (2 Tim 3:16). Then the question reduces to one of interpretation, like all other debates among Christians. Going further than that in doctrinal statements causes unnecessary division in the church and drives many away from the faith.
I understand that those who do not believe will likely find other reasons. I just don’t think it is a good idea to make it easy for them, and hard for believers who find themselves on the defensive.
Thank you Dan for writing this, you have addressed the challenge that many new converts go through after receiving Christ as their personal savior.
They get a challenge of defending their faith through the scriptures which they don’t know how to explain.
When they go to their pastors, the pastors also cant give them answers because they lack revelation in the word of God.
Revelation is progressive, but we have to come to the perfect knowledge of God.
Blessing Dan Harvey.
Thanks for your commentary. It is easy to get into trouble when contending with words like inerrant and infallible.
I had not heard of the ICBI.
They remind me of Aunt Millie. “I’m right. I know I’m right. And that settles it.”
That is a good description
As I was reading your concern about inerrant and infallible, I realized you were objecting to where these men were drawing the line of faith. I was wondering where you would draw the line. Your line is very simple. But would God breath any errors or fallacies? How could errors and fallacies be “profitable for teaching, rebuke, correction, and instruction in righteousness”? No matter where you draw the line, there are issues to explain. No matter where you draw the line, many skeptics will not be convinced. Everyone, even atheists require faith. Logic and reason do not even coming close to giving credibility to their versions of existence. Everyone needs some elements of faith. As I view the atheist world view, there is a whole package of elements that are required that lead to horrendous dishonesty and immorality of tragic proportions. I have examined the evangelical world view and have found many elements of it’s package deal that are severely disobedient to God’s word, but they don’t come close to the package deal of atheism or agnosticism. I have had to do a lot of cleaning up my practice of following Jesus and sharing it with others. Sadly, it is not well received by believers, even those who I have known for 20+ years. But I persevere. I have yet to be beaten with rods like the apostle Pauls was on his journey of faith.
Liberal believers drew the line eliminating many books, all miracles, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, anything they didn’t like. They have serious issues with reality. They constantly move their line as secular faith objects to their line.
Churches, even those that hold to the inerrancy line are still very divided. This is a SERIOUS problem for demonstrating the truth of the deity of Christ to the lost. I am amazed anyone is saved in this routine. I have figured out why they are divided. It is baked into the SEVERE corrupted and disobedient practice of clergyism and institutionalism. These traditions of men change the identity of believers into an institution, rather than members of a body, a family, a spiritual building of which there is only one. I was raised on “those who preach the gospel should get their living from the gospel”, or pay the preacher. I have figured out that hired Bible experts have twisted or falsely translated 3 passages, and used them to nullify the clear teaching of 9 passages that teach spiritual leadership is always combined with marketplace work. Obeying the apostle Paul’s instructions and example would cure the church of all it’s brand names and pulpit and pew buildings. A lot more explanation is needed on this.
The line to draw is simple (2 Tim 3:16). Then the question reduces to one of interpretation, like all other debates among Christians. Going further than that in doctrinal statements causes unnecessary division in the church and drives many away from the faith.
I understand that those who do not believe will likely find other reasons. I just don’t think it is a good idea to make it easy for them, and hard for believers who find themselves on the defensive.