Consise statement: The Bible is, in its entirety, the verbally inspired and totally infallible Word of God.
- Plenary verbal inspiration: The Bible is verbally inspired in its entirety by God, down to the very letter in the original text. (John 16:12-13, Acts 1:16, 1 Corinthians 2:13, 2 Timothy 3:15-17, 2 Peter 1:20-21, 2 Peter 3:16)
- Infallible and inerrant: The text is totally free of any errors of any kind. (Proverbs 30:5, Matthew 5:18, Matthew 24:35, John 17:17)
- Biblical study through the Holy Spirit: We are commanded to learn and study the Bible, and the work of the Holy Spirit is required for proper understanding. (Luke 4:4, Romans 15:4, 1 Corinthians 2:12-16)
I believe that God the Holy Spirit supernaturally guided the fallible human authors of Scripture in such a way that his message was recorded perfectly and completely, without interfering with the free will, literary style, or personal perspective of the author. It is key to note that this inerrancy applies to the original text only, and not necessarily the further copies and translations; when the most accurate answer is being sought in study, it may be necessary to refer to the original texts for further information or insight.
This is not simple dictation, or any similar process in which the human author’s mind was not actively engaged in the writing. The personality, culture, style, and outlook of the authors comes through without distorting the message in any way, and is not reflective of any lack of control over the text on God’s part, but rather an evidence that God did not coerce the free will of his followers in the writing of these texts.
Some professed Christians propose that the Bible is only partially inspired, usually suggesting that there are historical errors or inconsistencies due to the authors’ mistakes, and it is only the doctrinal principles that are inerrant. This view is inherently flawed and has never been evidenced; archaeology has never contradicted a biblical reference and has only proven time and time again that the Bible is correct in its accounts, even giving discovery where previously there was no corroborating evidence for the events recorded. By suggesting that the Bible contains historical errors, they reject the Scriptures as an entirely trustworthy source and seek to filter what they want to agree with through a fallible lens.
We are therefore to study the Bible with the knowledge that it is the wholly perfect and God-breathed word to us, being mindful of our own limitations and biases as well as our sinful nature, in order to discover the commands and intentions of God, which can only be revealed to us through the sanctification of the Holy Spirit.
A little announcement of intent: my current plan is to work my way through a statement of faith, fleshing out various doctrinal positions so that I have a written and accessible record of my beliefs on both core and secondary doctrines. This post is intended as a sort of preface to that series.
Going through 2 Peter right now in the Trial series means that there is lots of talk about false teachers and other heretics. It’s one of those big, scary issues that a lot of people like to ignore or gloss over because it’s so uncomfortable a topic. Almost nobody likes using the word “heretic,” and the ones that do generally like using it a bit too much. It’s a very harsh, very specific term, however – which means it is easy to define. A heretic needs to meet two criteria, and it’s really quite common to see the term used incorrectly when one does not apply. So before I begin to address the ideas of core beliefs or start work on a statement of belief, I’d like to define some terms.
1) A heretic must claim to be a Christian. An atheist is not a heretic. He is an atheist. If you don’t claim to be a musician, I can scarcely hold it against you when you can’t play “Mary Had a Little
Lamb” on the piano.
2) A heretic must reject a core Christian doctrine. Driscoll calls these “primary doctrines,” defined as doctrines that are critical to the Christian faith. If someone denies any of these doctrines, they would be by definition not a Christian. This is in contrast to secondary doctrines, which would be those doctrines on which Christians can disagree while still being united in Christ.
So, what are the core doctrines?
I mentioned in an earlier post that the Nicene Creed was a good way to summarize the core beliefs of Christianity, but sometimes the language of the Creed is a little unclear and disputed. So, let me clearly restate here what I believe to be the core, fundamental doctrines of Christianity:
- The Bible is, in its entirety, the verbally inspired and totally infallible Word of God.
- Man was created in the image of God, but because of Adam’s original sin is fallen, inherently sinful and rebellious against God, and is unable to remedy this condition.
- God is eternal and triune; one God in three persons – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
- Jesus, who is fully God, became also fully man (without ceasing to be God), was born of the virgin Mary, led a sinless life, died a substitutionary death for mankind, physically rising from the dead three days later, and then ascending into heaven, where he still is, and he will return again one day to judge the living and the dead alike.
- Salvation is obtained only by grace, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and is not effected by nor enhanced by any works which we do.
I believe these are a good summary of the essential doctrines of Christian faith; I will expand more on them later, but know that in future post, when I refer to “core doctrines,” these are the doctrines I speak of.
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
This passage has caused me more fear and self doubt than any other in Scripture, because it tells the story of people who have heard the word and done the deeds and seem genuinely shocked when Jesus rejects them at the seat of judgment. These people sure sound sure of their salvation when they are begging Jesus to reconsider, and the possibility that you could be so sure and have borne what seems to be such good fruit and still not make it is a very scary thought.
I have yet to find an interpretation of the passage that I am confident in and can endorse, so I will instead list my questions and thoughts and see if any of my readers have any ideas. Growing up, I was taught that this passage referred to people who simply claimed to be Christians but never repented and never showed any fruit, being unregenerate because they have never actually been saved. My teachers said that these were the hearers of the Word, but not the doers – those who came to church as kids or who had learned all about the Bible but never believed, never let it change them because they never turned over control of their lives to God. It kind of felt like being told there was a monster in your closet ready to eat you if you disobeyed your parents.
I don’t think that it’s a correct interpretation. Here’s why. Continue reading The most terrifying verses in the Bible