Skip to main content

"The Bible for Normal People" by Peter Enns and Jared Byas has really got me thinking about all sorts of stuff lately.

Tons!  Browse the episode titles, and see what strikes you- they tend to be a little tongue in cheek, and are always thought provoking. (Their tagline is, "the only God-ordained podcast on the internet.")

They also have excellent guests, and they do FAQ episodes. Great for some deep dives into scripture. 

Can I say, though, that I do really like Vos's description of the decision to shy away from the term "inerrant" here:  

Synod 1959 of the Christian Reformed Church appointed me, among others, to the Committee on Infallibility. The committee discussed at some length the usefulness of the word inerrant to describe the Bible. We concluded that it is not the most felicitous term to express the unique character of the Scriptures. We agreed that infallible and trustworthy fit the nature of the Bible more appropriately.

What’s wrong with inerrant? Well, it tends to characterize the Bible as an encyclopedia of unassailable facts on which we can build a case in any field of learning. Inerrant also tends to lead to an interminable discussion on the apparent “discrepancies” in Scripture. Finally, the term emphasizes the accuracy or exactitude of the Bible, while the Scriptures themselves emphasize the power of the word—Isaiah 55:10, for example: “For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return until they have watered the earth . . . so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and succeed in the thing for which I sent it” (NRSV).

We want to hear from you.

Connect to The Network and add your own question, blog, resource, or job.

Add Your Post