Difficult Questions • Difficult Questions • Advanced
Biblical Inerrancy
Primary question: Is it reasonable to hold that the Bible is without error, and if so, in what sense, given apparent internal discrepancies and the process of its transmission?
Argument map
Click any node to inspect it. Expand branches to go deeper.
Common mistakes
Don't say
Defining inerrancy in a way no careful contemporary defender actually holds (e.g., requiring strict modern scientific or statistical precision).
Instead
Engage the doctrine as formulated in documents like the Chicago Statement, which explicitly excludes such a wooden standard.
Don't say
Treating every harmonization attempt as equally successful.
Instead
Distinguish well-supported historical-critical resolutions from more strained or ad hoc harmonizations, and be honest about texts that remain genuinely difficult.
Don't say
Implying that all serious, Bible-affirming Christians hold identical views on inerrancy's scope.
Instead
Acknowledge the range of positions (strict inerrancy, infallibility, limited inerrancy) held by serious scholars with high views of scriptural authority.
What would change my mind? — Christian position
If specific difficult texts were shown to resist any plausible resolution even accounting for genre and ancient convention, and to constitute clear, direct contradictions in what the original authors intended to affirm, strict inerrancy would need to be qualified or abandoned in favor of a more limited view of scriptural authority.
What would change my mind? — Skeptical position
If a skeptic came to recognize that many alleged contradictions rely on imposing modern precision standards foreign to the text's own genre and intent, they might revise a common objection, even while remaining unpersuaded that every difficulty is fully resolved.
Why does this matter?
The doctrine of inerrancy shapes how believers approach apparent difficulties in scripture and functions as a foundational commitment for many denominations and institutions, making careful, honest engagement with both its philosophical coherence and its specific textual challenges essential for credible apologetics.
For further study
Primary and secondary sources on both sides of this question. Reading the strongest opposing case is part of the work, not a concession.
The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy — International Council on Biblical Inerrancy
The foundational contemporary evangelical statement on the doctrine.
Why Are There Differences in the Gospels? — Michael Licona
Applies ancient biographical convention to explain Gospel differences.
Holy Scripture — G.C. Berkouwer
A Reformed alternative emphasizing infallibility of scriptural purpose.
Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties — Gleason Archer
A comprehensive traditional harmonization resource.