Ttal Inerrancy f Scripture Fundatins fr a Biblical Eschatlgy What we believe abut the future directly results frm hw we view the Scripture. In rder t study this dctrine crrectly, we must agree as t where we will g fr ur infrmatin and t what degree we will accept this infrmatin. 1. Inerrancy Defined This frces us t begin by affirming the authrity f the Bible. Paul Feinberg defines inerrancy f the Scriptures as fllws: "Inerrancy is the view that when all the facts becme knwn, they will demnstrate that the Bible in its riginal autgraphs and crrectly interpreted is entirely true and never false in all it affirms, whether that relates t dctrine r ethics r t the scial, physical r life sciences." Several pints must be highlighted: Inerrancy cannt be prven at the present time. The reasn is because we d nt knw all truth at this time. Hwever, inerrancy has yet t be disprven als. The Bible in its entirety in inerrant. The Bible is nly affirmed t be inerrant in the riginal writings. While these d nt appear t exist, we d pssess thusands f handwritten cpies. By examining these cpies, the incnsistencies amng them becme identifiable and can then cmpile a text that allws a great deal f cnfidence. Inerrancy takes int accunt the nrmal language f Scripture, including figures f speech, free qutatins and apprximatins. 2. Arguments fr Inerrancy The Biblical Argument The Bible claims inspiratin (2 Timthy 3:16). The criteria fr distinguishing whether Gd is cmmunicating t man is ttal and abslute truthfulness (Deuternmy 13:1-5; 18:20-22). The Bible uses itself in a way that supprts inerrancy. At times an argument rests upn a single wrd (Jhn 10:34-35), the tense f a verb (Matthew 22:32), and the difference between the singular and plural (Galatians 3:16). These arguments wuld be cnsiderably weakened if the Bible cntained errrs. The Bible teaches its wn authrity. "It is written" (Matthew. 4:4,7,10), it is unbreakable (Jhn 10:35) and it is imperishable (Matthew 5:17-18).
The Scripture is equated with Gd s authrity - what the Bible says, Gd says and vice versa: Gd Said Genesis 12:3 Exdus 9:16 The Bible Said Genesis 2:24 Psalm 2:1 Psalm 2:7 Psalm 16:10 Psalm 95:7 Psalm 97:7 Psalm 104:4 Isaiah 55:3 The Bible Said Galatians 3:8 Rmans 9:17 Gd Said Matthew 19:4-5 Acts 4:24-25 Hebrews 1:5 Acts 13:35 Hebrews 3:7 Hebrews 1:6 Hebrews 1:7 Acts 13:34 The Scriptures teach that Gd cannt lie (Numbers 23:19; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18). Since the Bible is frm Gd and His character is behind it, it must be withut errr. The Histrical Argument Biblical inerrancy has been the view f the church thrughut church histry. Fr example, Augustine: "I mst firmly believe that the authrs were cmpletely free frm errr." Luther: "At times they [the fathers] have erred as men will; therefre I am ready t trust them nly when they prve their pinins frm Scripture, which has never erred." The Epistemlgical Argument If the Bible is nt inerrant, then any claim it makes may be false. Nt all its teachings wuld then be false but sme might be. Only inerrancy assures the reader f truthfulness. As Jesus put it in, "If I tld yu earthly things and yu d nt believe, hw shall yu believe if I tell yu heavenly things?" (Jhn 3:12) If Gd s teaching in sme areas is suspect, His credibility becmes questinable in all areas.
The Argument frm Analgy Bth Christ and the Scripture have human and divine aspects. In bth the human side is withut errr r imperfectin (Hebrews 4:15; Jhn 17:17). If the human element requires imperfectin t exist then we wuld have t say the nt nly is the Bible errant, s was Jesus Christ. A Cnsistently Literal Methd f Interpretatin In additin t accepting the authrity f the Bible, a student f prphecy must use a prper system f Bible interpretatin (called "hermeneutics"). This prper system is called the literal methd f interpretatin. The Literal Methd f Interpretatin Defined The literal methd is als knwn as the nrmal methd. It emplys the fllwing elements int its system f interpretatin: Histrical - the cultural backgrund and circumstances f the writer are cnsidered. Grammatical - the wrds are taken in their nrmal sense unless it is evident that a figure f speech r symbl is used. Cntextual - the wrds are cnsidered in light f their immediate and brad cntext. Rhetrical - nting the special features f the particular type f literature used. The literal methd f interpretatin allws fr symbls and figures f speech and adheres t the glden rule f interpretatin, "if the plain sense makes gd sense, seek n ther sense". This cncept is better understd when cmpared with its ppnent, the allegrical methd f interpretatin. Under this system, the wrds are ften understd in a symblic sense that results in a different meaning f the text. If the allegrical methd was applied cnsistently, the Bible wuld be reduced t fictin, with the meaning f the text replaced by whatever representatin the reader gives t the wrds. Evangelicals wh use this allegrical hermeneutical system d s usually in the area f prphecy while using the literal r nrmal hermeneutical system fr the rest f Scripture. It may be accurately regarded as incnsistent. The Literal Methd f Interpretatin Defended Why shuld we first seek the plain, literal sense f the prphetic text? 1. Linguistic Reasn The purpse f language requires the literal methd f interpretatin. If Gd riginated language fr the purpse f cmmunicatin, is fllws that the nrmal use f language will accmplish that purpse.
The Bible des nt seem t demand a deeper r hidden sense f language which deviates frm its nrmal use. T emply such as unique linguistic device fr the Bible wuld nt aid cmmunicatin but nly add t misunderstanding. 2. Biblical Reasn All f the well ver 300 OT prphecies cncerning the cming f Jesus Christ were all fulfilled literally in the NT. In nne d we find the allegrical methd f interpretatin. Of the rest f the prphecies that have been fulfilled all were fulfilled literally. 3. Lgical Reasn All bjectivity is lst when the literal methd f interpretatin is nt cnsistently applied. Literal interpreting limits the reader frm making assertins withut a clear supprt frm the text itself. T deviate frm the literal apprach pens a Pandra's bx f pssible meanings f the text. In summary, hw yu apprach reading the Bible will dictate what yu understand the Bible t teach. Differing views f eschatlgy are rted in differing systems f interpretatin. Observing a Distinctin Between the Church and Israel in Scripture Seeing a difference between the Church and the natin f Israel is the all-determinative cnvictin n which Dispensatinalism is based. This distinctin is based upn the nrmal, literal methd f interpretatin. What des a distinctin between the Church and Israel mean? Simply put, whenever the Bible speaks f the natin f Israel it means Israel and whenever the Bible speaks f the church it means the church. Israel is nt the church and the church is nt the natin f Israel. Why d we believe in a distinctin between the Church and Israel? 1. The church did nt exist prir t Acts 2 a. Jesus said "I will build my church" (Matthew 16:18) Therefre, the church was at that pint future. b. The church began n the day f Pentecst Acts 1:5 gives the prmise f the cming f the Hly Spirit. Acts 11:15-16 shws this prmise was fulfilled in Acts 2. 1 Crinthians 12:12-13 shws that the baptism f the Hly Spirit frms the unin f the believer int the bdy f Christ.
Ephesians 1:22-23 and Clssians 1:18 shws the church is called the bdy f Christ. In summary, the church began n the day f Pentecst. It did nt exist prir t the cming f the Hly Spirit. 2. Israel will be restred A great deal f OT prphecy teaches that Israel will ne day be restred t the land since the cvenants can nt be fulfilled apart frm a regathering - Isaiah 27:12; 43:5-7; Jeremiah 12:15; 24:6; Ezekiel 20:42; 28:25-26; Hsea 12:9; Jel 3:1; Ams 9:14-15; Micah 4:6; Zephaniah 3:20; Zechariah 10:10. The disciples ask Jesus in Acts 1:6 when the kingdm will be restred t Israel. Jesus answers nt that Israel will nt be restred but that the timing f the restratin will remain hidden. Finally, Paul affirms that Israel has nt be rejected frever but will be restred in Rmans 11. In cnclusin, it is essential that Israel and the Church nt be cnfused. Gd has made prmises t Israel that He will fulfill and t attempt t claim that the church is fulfilling all f these prmises requires nn-literal interpretatin.