Inerrancy

THE ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST INERRANCY

In the article "Bible, Inerrancy of" in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Paul Feinberg (the author of this particular article) presents four arguments for inerrancy, followed by responses to those arguments from those who deny inerrancy.  However, in the latter section he also includes rebuttal arguments for the position defending the inerrancy of Scripture.  Here is a simple explanation of what these arguments mean:

ARGUMENTS FOR INERRANCY

1. The Biblical Argument.  This argument simply states that we should believe in inerrancy because the Bible teaches its own inerrancy.  We should accept the Bible's claim about itself.

2. The Historical Argument.  This argument states that the church has historically believed in the inerrancy of Scripture, and thus it is a doctrine with long-standing support in tradition.  This may not offer irrefutable proof of inerrancy, but it is still an important point to take into account when evaluating the value of this doctrine.

3. The Epistemological Argument.  This argument is a bit more complicated, but basically it amounts to saying that if you deny inerrancy, you have no sure foundation for knowledge at all. If we cannot rely on the Bible as the source of truth, then our claims to know anything have become suspect.  

4. The Slippery Slope Argument.  This argument states that if you give up inerrancy, you will begin to give up more and more of the Christian faith until you (or those who come after you) end up denying central doctrines of the Christian faith.  In other words, the doctrine of inerrancy is necessary to serve as a fence that keeps our doctrine within proper scriptural boundaries so as to preserve our faith from corruption. 

RESPONSES FROM THOSE WHO DENY INERRANCY

Feinberg goes on to note that not all Christians agree with the above arguments.  Those who deny inerrancy often respond with the following arguments:

1. In response to the Biblical Argument, some who...