THEO 201
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 deny inerrancy say that the Bible nowhere
teaches its own inerrancy. Feinberg's rebuttal to this response is that, while the Bible nowhere
uses the word "inerrant" to describe itself, the concept of inerrancy is clearly implied by what the
Bible does say about itself.
2. In response to the Historical Argument: some who deny inerrancy claim that the church has
not historically confessed this doctrine. Instead, they argue, the Princeton theologians of the 19th
century invented it, thus turning inerrancy into a relatively new doctrine that most of the great
theologians of the church would not affirm. Feinberg's rebuttal to this response is that it is simply
historically inaccurate. A fair reading of the evidence leads to the conclusion that the church has
affirmed the inerrancy of Scripture for 2,000 years.
Page 1 of 2
THEO 201
3. In response to the Epistemological Argument: some who deny inerrancy say that the
presence of errors in the Bible does not mean we cannot trust it at all. After all, we trust our
spouses, even though we know they make mistakes. Why can't we do the same with the Bible?
Feinberg's rebuttal states that, if we allow that there are errors in Scripture, how can we
determine which parts are in error and which parts are not? Furthermore, unlike our spouses, the
Bible claims to be direct revelation from God, and thus if it errs, it makes God a liar.
4. In response to the Slippery Slope Argument: some who deny inerrancy say that there is no
necessary link between denying inerrancy and denying central doctrines of the Christian faith.
They point to examples of theologians who do not confess inerrancy and yet who continue to
hold on to the core doctrines of Christianity. Feinberg allows that these are true examples, but he
responds by noting that there are many examples of institutions and individuals who began to fall
away from the Christian faith after they let go of the inerrancy of Scripture.
For Further Reading
For beginners:
Grudem, Wayne. Bible Doctrine: Essential Teachings of the Christian Faith. Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1999.
[See especially pages 33–63 on the doctrine of Scripture.]
For more advanced students:
Carson, D. A., and John Woodbridge, eds. Scripture and Truth. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1992.
Carson, D. A., and John Woodbridge, eds. Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon. Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan, 1986.
Geisler, Norman L., ed. Inerrancy. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1980.
[The three volumes above are collections of scholarly essays on the doctrine of Scripture.]
Warfield, B. B.The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Phillipsburg, NJ: The Presbyerian and
Reformed Publishing Company, 1948.
[This work is the classic volume on the nature of Scripture in the history of American theology.]
Woodbridge, John. Biblical Authority: A Critique of the Rogers-McKim Proposal. Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan, 1982.
[This work has become a standard reference tool that establishes that the church has, in fact,
always believed in inerrancy.]
Page 2 of 2