On the
Infallibility of Scripture
Questions have
been raised of late and in various circles concerning the background to and
continued applicability of the adjective ‘infallible’ with respect to the
Bible. At the 2003 General Convention of the Lutheran Church of Australia
(LCA), it was pointed out that in 1990 the Lutheran World Federation formally
struck the word ‘infallible’ from its doctrinal basis. Reasons for people’s
discontent with the word may not necessarily be the same. Some, anxious to
avoid being allied with purportedly mechanistic theories of scriptural
inspiration, may have grown shy of any talk of the Bible as inerrant or
infallible. Others, in the interests of broader accessibility, may want to cull
down on wording in doctrinal formulations.
There
are problems with both these views. But the real trouble is among those whom
implicit trust in the authority of sacred Scripture has been subverted by a
‘hermeneutic of suspicion’ and a subjectivist approach to biblical
interpretation. To them, the Bible has been reduced to a collection of purely
human writings, subject to error, bias, and limitation, and therefore quite
unworthy of being considered, let alone called, ‘infallible’.
According to the doctrinal basis of the
LCA, member congregations ‘accept without reservation the Holy Scriptures of
the Old and New Testament, as a whole and in all their parts, as the divinely
inspired, written, and inerrant Word of God, and as the only infallible source
and norm for all matters of faith, doctrine and life.’ The wording in this
sentence is very carefully selected and deliberately arranged, not only to
exclude any possible ambiguity, but also to bind pastors and members of the LCA
to the only reliable means of maintaining doctrinal unity and the wholesome proclamation
of the gospel.
Among other noteworthy points, we notice
in the above formula that the Scriptures, ‘as a whole and in all their parts’,
are actually declared to be the Word of God. The Word of God is
not simply found in Scripture, nor are the two testaments merely spoken
of as witnesses to the Word of God. They are the Word of God –
‘divinely inspired, written, and inerrant.’ Second, we notice that these
Scriptures function for us ‘as the only infallible source and norm for all
matters of faith, doctrine and life.’ All matters: here we give voice to
Scripture’s claim to a universal primacy, one properly pertaining not only to
us Lutherans, but to all who would claim the name Christian, apostolic,
catholic or church. The true Christian church knows no normative, definitive,
and binding source for all matters of faith, teaching and practice other
than the written Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.
And this source, we submit, is
‘infallible.’ It cannot fail. It is entirely trustworthy, because it has its
origin in the God ‘who does not lie’ (Tit 1:2). The Lutheran Confessions apply
the word ‘infallible’ (Ger. unfehlbar) to Scripture, calling it ‘the
pure, infallible, and unalterable Word of God’ (rein, unfehlbaren und
unwandelbaren Wort Gottes). While the Latin version here translates the
word unfehlbar with immota, which means unshakable or immoveable,
the Latin word infallibilis had long been used in the equivalent sense.
In the 14th century Wycliffe spoke of Scripture as ‘the infallible
rule of truth.’ And in the early 15th century ‘the great Gerson’, as
the Confessors later acclaimed him, described Scripture as ‘the sufficient and
infallible rule for directing the entire body of the church.’
In expressing their unquestioned submission to
Scripture in this way, the Lutheran Reformers were simply echoing what Jesus
and the early church had said about their relation to sacred Scripture. Jesus
regarded and used the Law, the Prophets and the Writings – in other words, all
the writings of the Old Testament – as the definitive, written word of God
(Luke 24:44-45). He spoke of their validity and authority as perpetually
binding: they ‘cannot be dissolved’ (Jn 10:35). In looking to them as the only
infallible source and norm, the church reflects Scripture’s own claim that both
testaments – ‘the apostles and the prophets’ - constitute the foundation upon
which she stands firm (Eph 2:20). Those prophets proclaimed not their own
opinions, but ‘were carried along by the Holy Spirit’ (2 Pet 1:20-21). The
Apostles regarded Scripture both in its parts and in its entirety as
‘God-breathed’, possessed of the power and sufficiency ‘to make wise for
salvation’, and therefore ‘profitable for teaching, rebuking, correcting and
training in righteousness’ (2 Tim 3:15-16).
For the Apostles of course the word
‘Scripture’ first of all meant the Old Testament. Yet even before the end of
the apostolic era the epistles of Saint Paul were placed on a par with ‘the
other Scriptures’ (2 Pet 3:16). The Apostles were conscious in their exposition
of the Old Testament that they taught ‘as men approved by God’ (1 Thess 2:4),
wanting their hearers to receive their oral and written teaching ‘not as the
word of man, but as it actually is: the word of God’ (1 Thess 1:13). In the
written teaching of the Apostles, the commands of Christ and the words of the
prophets come together (2 Pet 3:1-2). Thus in receiving their teaching we
receive Christ himself (Matt 10:40; Lk 10:16).
The same understanding is also evidenced
in the post-apostolic period. Two examples may be taken as representative.
Writing near the end of the first century AD, Clement of Rome regarded the
Scriptures as completely genuine, with ‘nothing incorrect or falsified written
in them.’ In the promise of Jesus to the Apostles in John 16:12 – ‘The Spirit
will lead you into all truth’ - the early church recognised the divine
guarantee of the infallibility of their teaching office. So the great church
Father Irenaeus could write, ‘The Apostles, being disciples of the truth, are
above all falsehood.’
This account has been far from
comprehensive. Yet it amply demonstrates that when we accept the Bible as the
only ‘infallible’ source for all matters of belief, teaching and life, we are
simply following the belief, practice and express will of Jesus, the Apostles,
and the early church. In doing so, we do not thereby neglect - still less
disparage - other sources: creation, tradition, reason, experience. But we
recognise the fallibility of these other sources, and therefore subject
them to the infallible norm as their definitive judge. We are rightly wary of
any moves that throw into question the applicability of the attribute
‘infallible’ to Scripture. Every Lutheran should be only too ready to commit
him or herself anew every day to submit to Scripture and its teachings as God’s
unfailing, unerring Word. For such submission alone is fully congruent with the
Bible’s divine authorship, its Christic content, and its salvific goal.
Pastor
Adam G. Cooper