Biblical Inerrancy?

In most discussions on subjects of Christian theology and life application, the Bible is used as the primary source of support. Oftentimes, one or both of the participants in the discussion will refuse to accept the validity of the portion of the text cited. The reasoning for dismissal of that section can vary, but whether the individual is as technical as a Greek or Hebrew word analysis or as emotional as “My God wouldn’t say that”, they can all be summed up as a simple dissonance between the person’s idea of what is right and what the text says.

I had a talk with my pastor once about the need to believe the whole Bible. He asked me, “Does someone need to believe that Jesus is their Lord as well as their Savior to be saved? Do they need to believe in the virgin birth?” After some discussion, I accepted that the answer was definitely “No.” The grace of God, in salvation to the sinner, does not require belief in all of the doctrines of scripture.

However, while our discussion ended there, I have since given the subject more thought. The question is not, “Do we need to believe in the virgin birth (or fill in disputed scripture passage here) to be saved?” Instead, it is, “Do saved people have to believe the virgin birth to be true if they know it is in the Bible?”

Yes.

There are some details required for this to be true, though. Two, to be precise. First, the individual must understand that the evidence for Christ, as the Son of God, resurrected for the remission of sin is the written Bible. While there are other evidences, it is this that we base our faith and faith statements upon. Secondly, they must understand that the same Bible which declares Christ arisen is the same Bible which declares the information in dispute.

That said, why would those necessitate belief in said information? Allow me to explain, as best I can, the case for Biblical inerrancy:

Postulate 1) A Christian is someone who believes that Jesus Christ was the son of God, who came to earth as a man, was crucified, died, and was buried, and rose again to defeat death and make the forgiveness of sins possible. Not only does the Christian believe this, but they have placed their whole life in His service.

Postulate 2) The details required for this faith to become known and grow are found in the Bible.

Even if the person never sees a Bible, the Gospel is drawn from it.

Postulate 3) There are vast amounts of details within the Bible that do not contribute to the basic Gospel above.

While all parts of the Bible tie in to the Gospels, an isolated examination of much of this would not make the connection evident.

Postulate 4) As the source of both the Gospel of Christ and the attendant instructions, poetry, history and prophecy are one in the same – the Bible – there is no reason why any one part of it is more or less likely to be true than any other.

Therefore) If you believe the Good News of Christ, you must accept the rest of the Bible as true also.

Furthermore, consider this: Using the definition of Christian given above, is it a rational argument to say that a person can believe that there is an Almighty God, who has an only begotten son, who, though he was God, came to earth as a human being and accepted a brutal torture and death on the cross, then rose again from the dead, then ascended into heaven – but they can’t believe that Noah had all the required animals in the ark? Which is more fantastic? The virgin birth is harder to believe than the resurrection of the dead? The existence of Satan is crazier than God walking among us?

There is only one reason to disbelieve part of the Bible – PRIDE. We think we know better than God, so we deny the truth, despite the clear lack of logic in such a denial. Biblical inerrancy can’t be a disputed doctrine among true Christians – it has to be a clear truth.

For those readers who have a snap answer ready, just go back to the above paragraph – The omnipotent God, became a commoner from some ridiculously small nation in a corner of the world, then died and rose again, but _____________ is impossible? Hardly.