How Infallible Is The Bible? How Much Of It Is Inspired?

By Pastor Bruce K. Oyen

Email: bk_oyen@hotmail.com

      This posting deals with two questions: How infallible is the Bible? How much of it is inspired? Before we answer these questions, we need to know what the word "infallible" means. The word "inspired" will be defined later in the posting.
The Definition Of "Infallible"
    The following definition of "infallible" (in red) is taken from this website: www.thefreedictionary.com. It says the word means this:

1. Incapable of erring: an infallible guide; an infallible source of information.

2. Incapable of failing; certain: an infallible antidote; an infallible rule.

3. Roman Catholic Church Incapable of error in expounding doctrine on faith or morals.
How Infallible Is the Bible?

    In answer to the question, "How infallible is the Bible?," some persons would say the Bible is not infallible, period. Some would say it is partially infallible, but not completely. Some would say they don't know the answer. Some would say it is completely infallible.

     We who are Christians believe the Bible to be God's Word in written form. Many of us Christians, including myself, believe the Bible, in its original writings, was completely infallible. We also believe that Bible translations are infallible only to the degree in which they accurately convey the message of what originally was in the Bible.

      However, there are Christians who, though they believe the Bible is God's Word in written form, do not believe in its complete infallibility. They believe it is partially infallible, and maybe mostly infallible, but not completely infallible.

      We can get some good guidance on this subject from a respected Protestant Christian theologian from the 1800's. His name is Charles Hodge. The following quotes (in red) are taken from chapter 6 of volume 1 of his 3-volume systematic theology. Chapter 6 is called "The Protestant Rule Of Faith," and is a goldmine of information about the Bible.

     After giving the Protestant rule of faith, Hodge concluded with these words: "From these statements it appears that Protestants hold, (1.) That the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the Word of God, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and are therefore infallible, and of divine authority in all things pertaining to faith and practice, and consequently free from all error whether of doctrine, fact, or precept. (2.) That they contain all the extant supernatural revelations of God designed to be a rule of faith and practice to his Church. (3.) That they are sufficiently perspicuous to be understood by the people, in the use of ordinary means and by the aid of the Holy Spirit, in all things necessary to faith or practice, without the need of any infallible interpreter."

     It is important to note that Hodge said the Bible is "free from all error whether of doctrine, fact, or precept." This means he correctly believed the Bible is completely, not partly, infallible.

     In chapter 6, Hodge has a section titled "The Scriptures are Infallible, i. e. given by Inspiration of God." Immediately after the title he wrote the following: "The infallibility and divine authority of the Scriptures are due to the fact that they are the word of God; and they are the word of God because they were given by inspiration of the Holy Ghost." This is significant because Hodge links inspiration and infallibility. He correctly believed that the two go hand-in-hand.
How Much Of The Bible Is inpsired? 

     Later in chapter 6, Hodge has a section titled "Inspiration extends equally to all Parts of Scripture." In the first paragraph Hodge wrote the following: "It means , first, that all the books of Scripture are equally inspired. All alike are infallible in what they teach. And, secondly, that inspiration extends to all the contents of these several books. It is not confined to moral and religious truths, but extends to the statements of facts, whether scientific, historical, or geographical. It is not confined to those facts the importance of which is obvious, or which are involved in the matters of doctrine. It extends to everything which any sacred writer asserts to be true." His point is very important.

     Immediately after these statements, Hodge gives several proofs for believing inspiration extends to all parts of the Bible. Here is number 1: "Because it is involved in, or follows as a necessary consequence from, the proposition that the sacred writers were the organs of God. If what they assert, God asserts, which, as has been shown, is the Scriptural idea of inspiration, their assertions must be free from error." 

     One significance of this statement  is the fact that in it Hodge affirmed belief in the Bible's inerrancy. What else can these words mean, if not that? Read his words again: "If what they assert, God asserts, which, as has been shown, is the Scriptural idea of inspiration, their assertions must be free from error."   

    Here is number 4: "Because Christ and the writers of the New Testament refer to all classes of facts recorded in the Old Testament as infallibly true. Not only doctrinal facts, such as those of the creation and probation of man; his apostasy; the covenant with Abraham; the giving the law upon Mount Sinai; not only great historical facts, as the deluge, the deliverance of the people out of Egypt, the passage of the Red Sea, and the like; but incidental circumstances, or facts of apparently minor importance, as e. g. that Satan tempted our first parents in the form of a serpent; that Moses lifted up a serpent in the wilderness; that Elijah healed Naaman, the Syrian, and was sent to the widow in Sarepta; that David ate the shew-bread in the temple; and even that great stumbling-block, that Jonah was in the whale's belly, are all referred to by our Lord and his Apostles with the sublime simplicity and confidence with which they are received by little children." Hodge correctly disagreed with anyone who said or says that only the Bible's doctrines/teachings are inspired and infallible. The Bible's "great historical facts," and its "incidental circumstances, or facts of relatively minor importance" were/are also inspired/infallible.

     Later in chapter 6 Hodge, has a section titled "Plenary Inspiration," which is a continuation of his previous comments on the subject. In this section, he wrote this: "The Church doctrine denies that inspiration is confined to parts of the Bible; and affirms that it applies to all the books of the sacred canon. It denies that the sacred writers were merely partially inspired; it asserts that they were were fully inspired as to all that they teach, whether of doctrine or fact." The significance of this is that, once again, it reveals that  Hodge correctly believed that even the facts of the Bible were inspired, not just its doctrines.
Infallibility, Inspiration, And Discrepancies And Errors In The Bible

     Later in chapter 6 Hodge has a section titled "Discrepancies and Errors." In the first paragraph he wrote the following: "It is of course useless to contend that the sacred writers were infallible, if in point of fact they err. Our views of inspiration must be determined by the phenomena of the Bible as well as from its didactic statements. If in fact the sacred writers retain each his own style and mode of thought, then we must renounce any theory which assumes that inspiration obliterates or suppresses all individual peculiarities. if the Scriptures abound in contradictions and errors, then it is vain to contend that they were written under an influence which precludes all error. The question, therefore, is a question of fact. Do the sacred writers contradict each other? Do the Scriptures teach what from any source can be proved not to be true? The question is not whether the views of the sacred writers were incorrect, but whether they taught error?"

    His point here is that, even if the Bible's writers had some wrong views on some subjects, God did not allow any of those wrong views to be expressed in their writings that became part of the Bible. We know from clear statements by Hodge that he correctly believed the Bible's writers did not teach any errors. Therefore, he correctly believed in the Bible's infallibility/inerrancy.

     It is hoped that this posting will do one of two things: 1.) Affirm your belief in the complete inspiration and complete infallibility/inerrancy of the Bible. Or, 2.) Lead you to believe in these important doctrines.
Some Further Thoughts On Hodge's View Of The Subject From Dr. Roger E. Olson
     Since first writing  this posting, I gleaned some statements about Charles Hodge's view of the Bible from a contemporary Christian theologian and author, Dr. Roger E. Olson. His information about Hodge's view of the Bible is found in his very interesting book called "The Westminster Handbook To Evangelical Theology."
    For example, on page 214, when dealing with the subject titled "Infallibility/Inerrancy," he makes reference to some theologians and then say this: "These theologians hark back to the leading lights of Protestant orthodoxy and scholasticism, especially to the nineteenth-century Princeton theologians Archibald Alexander, Charles Hodge, A. A. Hodge, and Benjamin Warfield, who responded to growing mainline Protestant liberal skepticism about the Bible with a strong reaffirmation of its supernatural inspiration, unique authority, and factual infallibility." 
    Then, on pages 323 and 324, when dealing with the subject titled "Scripture: Inerrancy/Infallibility, Dr. Olson wrote the following: "Both Hodge and Warfield were attempting to protect the Bible from the new higher criticism and from the skepticism that arose with it in the nineteenth century. They appealed to a deductive process of reasoning to defend the Bible's complete inerrancy even in matters of history and cosmology: God is the author of Scripture (through the process called inspiration); God does not lie or deceive; Scripture is inerrant. When examining the actual phenomena of Scripture, they found little disturbing evidence of actual error; when they could not explain an apparent error away, they simply appealed to the ignorance of the wider context of facts that would, if known, explain the contradiction or discrepancy."