The Debate about the Bible: Inerrancy Vs. Infallibility

by Professor of the Philosophy of Religion Stephen T Davis

1977

Genres: Theology

149 pages, Paperback

Published September 1, 1977

Reviews

[LAMONT D · Rating 4 out of 5]

A resource from my Seminary days that I reread and glad I did. It sounds like a mouth full (inerrancy versus infallibility) but this document with a copyright of 1977 is still valuable research as I dive back into what I really believe about the Bible, the Holy Scriptures and God's Word to us. I look at my own church and their beliefs posted on their website, and they do not use either of these words which is fine. It states that God's holy written word was written by human authors under the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spriit. But does that mean it has absolutely no errors of any kind, i.e. inerrancy, or are there verses in the Bible that can be questioned but only to matters that do NOT pertain to matters of faith and practice, i.e. infallibility? In other words, the author's belief in this work is that the Bible is amazingly reliable, but not inerrant on all other matters. This paper by Stephen T. Davis talks about that debate and defines for us each term and why he believes he can still be an evangelical but still fall into the infallibility camp. Examples are given that seem inconsequential in nature (and they are), but yet point to something that doesn't makes sense in regard to a historical or scientific matter. To some this has been heresy in the past to speak of such a belief, but to me it is freeing and just solidifies my belief in what I read every day in regard to the inspired Word of God that is profitable for teaching me what is true, for my correction and for teaching me to do what is right (2 Timothy 3:16).

[Noah Jones · Rating 4 out of 5]

Almost five - the book is excellent, but it just isn't trying to do anything too grand. Davis makes a case against inerrancy that is probably as good as you could do at an introductory level in 200 pages. I especially appreciate his critique of what he calls the epistemological argument for inerrancy - whether inerrancy is true or not, that argument is not a good one and represents Christians' false expectations for a very specific kind of certainty that God never promised.

[Jeffrey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Davis lays out a good introduction into the three different views on the topic of errors in the bible (hard inerrancy, soft inerrancy, and infallibility). The first view holds that the bible is true in all that it says cross discipline (science, history, faith, practice), the second that the bible is true in all that it affirms or teaches (again across discipline) and the third arguing that while the bible is reliable it does contain errors (typically historical and scientific but not in matters regarding faith and practice). Davis takes the latter position and argues against both types of inerrancy first deconstructing three typical arguments in its favor (biblical, epistemological and slippery slope) and then crafts a positive case for infallibility. The strength of the book is its deconstruction on the view that inerrancy is taught in the bible. I think Davis could have flushed out more his views that the bible is reliable (a low # of errors) as well as infallible (in matters of practice and faith) more. However, a strong contender with a foreword by someone who does not hold his position. A needed read.