Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Bibliolatrous Baptists form International Network

ABP is reporting that Southern Baptists and Conservative Baptists have formed a new International Baptist Network to compete with the Baptist World Alliance. This network will be held together by Fundamentalist doctrine.

For them, first and foremost is the belief that "the Bible is the inerrant, inspired Word of God without error, and is the only authority for Christians and churches."

The Mainstream Baptists website has posted several articles that expose the heresy of the doctrine of "inerrancy." Here are a couple links where readers can find the material:

Inerrancy Test
Baptist Faith & Message Revision

All that I would add to the present conversation is the observation that moderate, Mainstream Baptists have never affirmed a doctrine of "sola scriptura" as formulated by the International Baptist Network. Instead we have affirmed a doctrine of "suprema scriptura."

Anyone who knows the details about how and when the scriptures were written, collected and canonized cannot plausibly deny that tradition is also a source of authority for Christians and the churches.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Regarding your innerancy test, you ask the following question:

Do you have to believe the Bible is inerrant to be saved?

Yes/No
.

A new believer may not know what innerancy is technically but understands their sinfulness and makes a profession of faith in Jesus Christ based on hearing God's word and believing it is true. Therefore, I don't understand how a believer can be growing all the while doubting the authority of God and His word. If Satan can't keep someone from coming to Christ, he'll certainly try to keep them from maturing and living in God's will. Remember the nature of deception and where it comes from.

I'd also point out that if the church is not being guided by God and His Word, what are they looking to for guidance? What need has been provided for elsewhere that wasn't in Scripture? Has Scripture failed us, or are we looking elsewhere because of our nature?

>All that I would add to the present conversation is the observation that moderate, Mainstream Baptists have never affirmed a doctrine of "sola scriptura" as formulated by the International Baptist Network. Instead we have affirmed a doctrine of "suprema scriptura."

For further reading on this, I suggest this short commentary,

SOLA SCRIPTURA.

Roger

Dr. Bruce Prescott said...

Roger,

The issue for me on "Sola Scriptura" is not an issue regarding the reliability of scripture. "Suprema Scriptura" does a better job of acknowledging the role the church played in collecting the scriptures, preserving them, and deciding which books should be considered canonical. It acknowledges the authority of something outside the Bible itself -- a church tradition -- in approving what we know as the canon of scripture.

Chris Capoccia said...

usually when fundamentalists speak of innerancy, they are saying that the original manuscripts were without error because of God?s perfection through the inspiration process. There is then a second doctrine of preservation that describes how we continue to get a highly reliable Bible today.

The ?Innerancy Test? link muddies the waters by asking, ?Is the Bible you read and hold in your hands inerrant?? Only a few in the ?King James Only? camp would hold this position. Others recognize that the copying and translating processes are human and can contain error.

Dr. Bruce Prescott said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dr. Bruce Prescott said...

Chris,

What need is there for an "inerrant" Bible if the one we can actually read is only "highly reliable?"

Anonymous said...

Bruce,

You said:
>It acknowledges the authority of something outside the Bible itself -- a church tradition -- in approving what we know as the canon of scripture.

That contradicts scripture - see the text below from a previous article that I linked to:

--------------
When he disputed with the Pharisees on their view of tradition, Jesus proclaimed, "Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition..." (Mark 7:13). Scripture therefore determines whether tradition is acceptable.

...

Clearly, Jesus accepted Scripture as the supreme authority and subjected Himself to it (Luke 24:44). And, as followers of Christ, our view of Scripture cannot be inferior to His.

Scripture derives none of its authority from the church; its authority is inherent because it is the very Word of the living God: "All Scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16)
.
--------------
Roger

Micah Valine said...

It seems to me that the bibliocentric way that fundamentalists (including myself) view Christianity is a clear distortion of historical early Christianity.

First and foremost, Christianity has always been a set of facts. In essence, it is the gospel proclamation of who Christ is and what he has done. In the early church, this message gospel was supported by many things: the Jewish scriptures, writings and testimonies of the apostles and others, apostolic practice, and even the decisions of the apostles in council together.

The Bible is important, and it is the supreme standard by which the host of other sources of Christian belief and practice ought to be judged. But in many respects, it is more accurate to view the New Testament as an artifact of Christianity rather than the foundation upon which it was built.