INERRANCY: the Real Issue

by T.C. Pinckney and Eldridge Miller                                                            Vol. VI, No. 2, March 1993

We conservative Southern Baptists can be thankful that the "moderates" have now largely abandoned their long-proclaimed position that the SBC controversy is "just a preacher fight" or "merely a power struggle." All too many good-hearted Southern Baptists, many laymen but some pastors too, have fallen for that propaganda. Now even leading "moderates" admit that the authority of God's Word has been the main issue all along, just as conservatives have said.

The November 1992 Banner printed an article, "Moderates Recount Efforts," which told of a moderate meeting at Mercer University in Georgia on 8-9 October. It is worth repeating this basic point: Cecil E. Sherman, leader of the moderate movement 1980-1985 and currently full-time coordinator of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, described moderate political efforts but acknowledged that more than politics and position was at stake. "Two groups did politic because they disagreed on basic theology and polity. Where the ‘fundamentalists' are going to take the Southern Baptist Convention is to their theology. Where the moderates would have taken the Southern Baptist Convention is to their theology. And the theology of the two groups was, is, and will be quite different."

This is an exceedingly important confirmation of what conservatives have said all along! Readers may want to copy or clip Sherman's quote and keep it handy in your wallet so that you can correctly cite it to your moderate or misled friends.

Now I want to offer you another instance where such admissions were made. Following is an article which appeared in the Oklahoma Baptist Messenger. It was written by Eldridge Miller, pastor of First Baptist Church of Sallisaw, OK, and member of the SBC executive committee:

The Daily Oklahoman announced a meeting of "moderate" Southern Baptists in Norman to provide information that could not be obtained from the pastor "if he wants to keep his job." They called it a heritage conference, an apparent inference that our real history, decidedly different from the emphases of our conservative resurgence, would be aired. Another reason given for the conference was because so-called "moderates" among the overall conservative denomination have felt their contributions to Southern Baptist life and heritage are being ignored.

Yet another announced reason was to promote the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and its goals. Repeatedly, those attending were challenged to divert mission funds from the Cooperative Program to the objects of the Fellowship's choosing, which include Habitat for Humanity, a non-Baptist organization, and the formation of a divinity school to tout the theological positions of the Fellowship. Jimmy Allen, former SBC president and former president of our Radio and Television Commission, recently wrote our pastors encouraging them to bypass support for our Annie Armstrong Home Mission Offering and give instead to the Fellowship's "Vision America" fund. Allen is now co-chair of the Fellowship's Global Mission Ministry Group.

Unexpected by some was the addressing of the Fellowship's position on the Bible, an issue discussed head-on by both Cecil Sherman, coordinator of the Fellowship, and Grady Cothen, former president of our Sunday School Board. Cothen appeared to make inerrancy both indefinable and non-understandable, and then said, "The idea of inerrancy is the root of the problem in the Southern Baptist Convention." Sherman spoke from the Fellowship's position paper (written by Sherman and Walter Shurden), and defended it, which states, "The Bible neither claims nor reveals inerrancy as a Christian teaching. Bible claims must be based on the Bible, not on human interpretations of the Bible." We should be grateful that these two men (1) admitted that the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship does not espouse inerrancy, and (2) plainly stated that the focus of our controversy has been theological (i.e., inerrancy) and not political.

The Fellowship rejects Article I of our Baptist Faith and Message which includes the statement that we believe the Bible has "truth without any mixture of error, for its matter." Also, in decrying inerrancy as a human interpretation of the Bible, seemingly ignored is the fact that non-inerrancy is also a human interpretation of the Bible.

The very core of Christian history is an unequivocal belief in the absolute truthfulness of the Bible. Irenaeus wrote, "We must believe God, who has given us the right understanding, since the Holy Scriptures are perfect, because they are spoken by the Word of God and the Spirit of God."

Augustine testified, "I have learned to yield this respect and honor only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error." Jerome averred, "When you ... have realized that its laws and testimonies (the Divine Scriptures) are the bonds of truth, then you can contend with adversaries..."

Martin Luther said, "He who adheres to the Scriptures will find that they do not lie or deceive." Elsewhere he wrote, "Scripture cannot err," and "The Scriptures have never erred." Calvin gave the following appraisals of the Bible: "The sure and infallible record ... the inerring standard ... the pure Word of God ... free from every stain and defect ... the inerring certainty ... unerring light ... infallible Word of God ... (and) infallible oracles."

Augustine, in discussing alleged inconsistencies, declared, "I decide that either the text is corrupt, or the translator did not follow what was really said, or that I failed to understand it." Luther, with less patience with those who find errors in Scripture, said, "It is impossible that Scripture should contradict itself; it only appears so to senseless and obstinate hypocrites."

Many Baptist leaders in our history have testified to the Bible's inerrancy. According to Roger Williams, Scripture was written "and penned by chosen Pen-men as Pens in the hand of the Holy Spirit ... every word, Syllable and Tittle in that Scripture or writing is the Word, or immediate will of God." J. L. Dagg wrote, "the whole of revelation (the Bible) has perfection, that it exactly fulfills the design of Him who designed it." He wrote that the Bible "is in truth the word of God ... Positively it is divine truth; negatively it is not human error."

James Petigru Boyce wrote that he "believes in the perfect inspiration and absolute authority of the divine revelation." He believed "in the verbal inspiration of its writers ... (that they) were guided in their very language by Him to whom are ‘known all His works from the beginning of the world'. He wrote that the Bible "must be secured from all possibility of error, so that its teaching may be relied on."

Basil Manley said, "The Bible is truly the Word of God, having both infallible truth and divine authority in all that it affirms or enjoins... The whole Bible is truly God's Word written by men." He wrote that "it is not incredible that God would inspire the record ‘that is, control, protect from error, authorize its utterance. "'

John Broadus wrote, "The inspired writers ... were preserved by the Holy Spirit from error ... there is no proof that the inspired writers made any mistake of any kind."

F.Y. Mullins, in defining his position quoted from James Orr, wrote "It remains the fact that the Bible, impartially interpreted and judged, is free from demonstrable error in its statements, and harmonious in its teachings...." He wrote that the dynamic inspiration theory was consistent with the view "that men were enabled to declare truth unmixed with error."

John Sampey wrote, "As to the inspiration of the Bible, conservatives hold that the writers were preserved from all error by the inbreathed Spirit guiding them ... Some liberals believe in a sort of inspiration which ... did not preserve them from error." Sampey counted himself among the conservatives.

The list could go on and on, including John Gill, Charles Spurgeon, Francis Wayland, B. H. Carroll, R. G. Lee, and present leaders W.A. Criswell, James Draper, Adrian Rogers, Jerry Vines, Charles Stanley, Morris Chapman, Joel Gregory, John Bisagno, Ed Young, Nelson Price, and many others!

Does the Bible claim inerrancy? Note the following (all from NIV):

Psalm 12:6: "And the words of the Lord are flawless, like silver refined in a furnace of clay, purified seven times."

Proverbs 30:5: "Every word of God is flawless: he is a shield to those who take refuge in him."

Psalm 119:89: "Your word, O Lord, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens."

Jesus in John 10:34: "...the Scripture cannot be broken – "

Jesus in John 17:17: praying to the Father: "Your word is truth."

Jesus in Matthew 5:18: "I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

It is possible to cite some former Southern Baptists who did not subscribe to the idea of inerrancy, such as Crawford Toy, (who was dismissed from the faculty of Southern Seminary because of his views on the Bible), but these were on the periphery of Southern Baptist life, not at its center. Southern Baptist pastors and churches are free, under God to do whatever they believe to be His will, but those tempted to go the way of the Fellowship should understand that they do not subscribe to our belief in the inerrancy of Holy Scripture, and that their plan for world missions, theological education, literature, press releases, and other objects are reactionary to and competitive to our Cooperative Program way of doing missions together.