The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy: The Introduction
Though inerrancy does have a major consequence on one’s sanctification, the Committee is not contending that belief in inerrancy makes a perfect Christian. The Committee “gladly acknowledges that many who deny the inerrancy of Scripture do not display the consequences of this denial in the rest of their belief and behavior.” Moreover, they are equally conscious that those “who confess this doctrine often deny it in life” by failing to bring thoughts and deeds into true subjection to the Word.
The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (CSBI) was issued in 1978 by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI). In the introduction, the Committee defined the Statement as consisting of three parts: a summary statement, Articles of Affirmation and Denial, and an accompanying Exposition. However, the Introduction to all three of these parts is instructive for the person who would know what the ICBI had in mind for their Statement.
An Historical Perspective
The Introduction is five short paragraphs, each with a very clear point. The first paragraph is a simple reminder that “the authority of Scripture is a key issue for the Christian Church in this and every age. For those who would like to explore this theme it would be helpful to consult the title edited by John Hannah, Inerrancy and the Church published in 1984. However, in this first paragraph the committee tips its hand. This is not merely an academic endeavor. Inerrancy is a matter of discipleship because the reality of discipleship is seen in “humbly and faithfully obeying God’s written Word.”
A Fresh Reminder
In the second paragraph the ICBI recognizes that in the present moment there is a great need to affirm “this inerrancy of Scripture afresh.” They go on to say, “We see it as our timely, duty to make this affirmation in the face of current lapses from the truth of inerrancy among our fellow Christians…” If I may take liberty at this point, the reason why Place for Truth is running this series is because we believe that the church over fifty years later needs a fresh reminder.
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
What is the Most Important Thing Taught in the Bible?
If you ever feel discouraged about your lack of progress in the Christian life, remember the words of 1 Corinthians 15. Let the words you find there bathe you once again as you reflect on Christ’s accomplishments, rather than focusing on your failures. He died and was buried in your place. Though you feel unworthy and condemned, in Christ you are graciously accepted and reconciled. And he not only bore your sin but was also raised again to new life, objectively—for you. It has already been accomplished.
If I were to ask you to write down the most important things taught in the Bible, what do you think you might include on your list? Worship, prayer, discipleship, faith, heaven, grace, the Trinity?
Now this next question is a little harder. Which of the topics that appear on your list would you end up placing at the very top? In other words, what is the most important topic in all of Scripture? Would you be able to come up with a single answer to that question, or do you think it’s just too difficult to rank biblical topics in this way?
Jesus himself said that some matters of the law were weightier than others.
You may be tempted by the thought that because the Bible is God’s inspired word, all its precepts are of equal weight and value. Yet, Jesus told the Pharisees, “You tithe mint and dill and cumin, but have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness” (Matt. 23:23). Now of course it wasn’t that tithing mint, dill, and cumin were unimportant things, but according to Jesus they apparently carried less weight and significance when compared with the much more important themes such as justice, mercy, and faithfulness.
There is also another passage in Scripture where a lawyer asked Jesus which of the commandments found in the law of Moses was the greatest. And as you may recall, Jesus didn’t end up saying that all the commandments were of equal value and importance, but he instead cited the words of Deuteronomy chapter 6, which says, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” This he said, “is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 22:36-40).
There is an important distinction between the most important commandment in the Law and the most important thing in all of Scripture.
Perhaps, then, following Jesus, we could say that “loving God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength” is the most important thing in all of Scripture. Well, if we consider carefully the lawyer’s original question, he didn’t actually ask Jesus, “What is the most important thing in all of Scripture,” but rather, “What is the most important commandment recorded in the Law of Moses?” This, as we’ll see, is an important distinction.
The thing we should notice at this point, however, is that Jesus didn’t seem to have any difficulty ranking various biblical themes in the order of their importance. And so, in light of this, what do you think every Christian should place at the very top of their list? What biblical idea should be considered the thing of first importance?
The apostle Paul reminds the Corinthian church of the most important thing in all of Scripture—the gospel.
Thankfully, we don’t have to go through the difficult process of weighing and comparing all the doctrines of the Bible in an attempt to answer this question, since the apostle Paul has already done the heavy lifting for us in the first few verses of 1 Corinthians 15:Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures… (1 Cor. 15:1-4)
According to verse 1, Paul makes clear that he is writing to the Corinthians in order to remind them of the gospel of Jesus.
In many churches today the focus ends up drifting away from the gospel to other things.
Now, I’m convinced that in far too many churches in our day the gospel appears to be taken for granted. And because it’s something that many pastors simply assume that everyone already knows, over time our focus ends up drifting away to other things—things that are more practical, relevant and me-centered.
Read More
Related Posts: -
The “F” Word: The Revival of Fundamentalism
An improper use of the term fundamentalism will create a false narrative that anyone who is opposed to critical race theory, intersectionality, or views Marxism as a threat to the church is merely an unlearned and overzealous right-winged Christian Nationalist who gleans theology from Tucker Carlson rather than Jesus Christ.
The way in which we use words matters. For instance, when we look at the way words morph in the sense of cultural usage, such etymology is indicative of the difficulty to anchor word meaning and word usage. That’s why it’s essential to study words when studying the Bible to understand how those words were being employed in the specific era and context of that biblical text.
In recent days, there has been a resurgence of the word fundamentalism or fundamentalist in blogs and social media as a means of describing or labeling people who oppose social justice or the whole deconstructive agenda within evangelicalism. Some voices are attempting to marginalize people by using the “F” word as a pejorative. David French, in an article that described the 2021 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention referred to a specific group of conservatives as “fundamentalist pirates.” He also used the language of “toxic fundamentalism.” In a similar vein, Thomas S. Kidd writing for The Gospel Coalition concludes:
And our current problems reflect yet another instance of people in churches being discipled far more by cable news and social media than by the church. The “spirit” of fundamentalism tells us that no difference, politically or theologically, is tolerable, and that our enemies must be destroyed. The spirit of Christ offers a better way: robust truth and robust kindness.
If such voices are left unchecked, it will mainstream the narrative that such groups are irrelevant or irrational in our present era of church history. An improper use of the term fundamentalism will create a false narrative that anyone who is opposed to critical race theory, intersectionality, or views Marxism as a threat to the church is merely an unlearned and overzealous right-winged Christian Nationalist who gleans theology from Tucker Carlson rather than Jesus Christ.
In short, it’s a smear campaign used as a power-grab agenda in order to control the narrative and retain power in specific circles of evangelicalism. To be clear, such a narrative will never win the day. Truth will prevail.
Fuddy-Duddy Fundamentalism
Fundamentalism was originally a term that described men who held to the fundamentals of the faith and opposed the modernist movement that attacked holy Scripture. When the tsunami of German higher criticism swept through the church, a band of scholars took up their swords for war. They sought to prove that modernism and Biblical Christianity were not in the slightest means compatible. This historic stand was viewed as the fruit of the Reformation, and men like J. Gresham Machen (the New Testament scholar) were men who became known as fundamentalists. To be clear, Machen didn’t embrace the title “fundamentalist” in the fullest sense. He explained:
Thoroughly consistent Christianity, to my mind, is found only in the Reformed or Calvinist Faith; and consistent Christianity, I think, is the Christianity easiest to defend. Hence I never call myself a “Fundamentalist”…what I prefer to call my self is not a “Fundamentalist” but a “Calvinist”—that is, an adherent of the Reformed Faith. As such I regard myself as standing in the great central current of the Church’s life—the current that flows down from the Word of God through Augustine and Calvin, and which has found noteworthy expression in America in the great tradition represented by Charles Hodge and Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield and the other representatives of the “Princeton School.”1
Although he attempted to define his positions apart from the fundamentalist movement, Machen is remembered historically as a fundamentalist for his valiant stand for truth. Over time the very term “fundamentalism” morphed into a banner for legalism rather than a banner of truth, and still to this day if you call someone a fundamentalist—it’s likely used as a term of derision rather than a compliment, much like the word Pharisee moved from a title of respect to a banner of legalism.
Read More
Related Posts: -
What Happened at the RPCNA Synod 2022?
Much of this year’s time dealt with complaints…The complaints dealt primarily with two categories this year. The first category had to do with responses to Covid regulations and freedoms. The second set of complaints dealt with the Synod Judicial Commission (SJC) that was set up to investigate the pastoral response to a sexual abuse case in one of our Indiana congregations. It is important to note that this SJC was NOT investigating the sexual abuse, but investigating the pastoral/shepherding response to the sexual abuse.
The 190th annual synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA) met on the campus of Indiana Wesleyan University (IWU) in Marion, Indiana. Rev. Bruce Parnell (Stillwater, OK) began with preaching on “taking up the cross,” encouraging the court to not trivialize the message, but to make self-denial the mark of your Christian life. Each morning began with excellent preaching from Romesh Prakashpalan (Dallas), Kyle Sims (ARP fraternal delegate from SC) and Matt Kingswood (Russell, ON). The court then was introduced to first time delegates; seventeen ruling elders and eight pastors were introduced. Bill Edgar was able to introduce his son, Alex, and Russ Pulliam was able to introduce his son David. This highlights the covenantal nature of Christ’s church. Following introductions, the court elected this year’s officers: Harry Metzger: moderator; John McFarland and Andrew Barnes would serve as clerk and assistant clerk.
Several items were accomplished at synod right away. One congregation transferred presbyteries (Durham, NC). A letter was received from the Great Lakes Gulf concerning an “injustice and wrong” of giving credentials to a former minister while a trial was impending. A committee was formed to study a proper response to abuse in the church with the view of an oversight board.
Several of our church’s boards and agencies were heard from: Home Mission, Global Mission, and church planting committees in other parts of the world (South America, East Asia, etc). The Global Mission board recommended several changes to their by-laws and these were sent back to them for further consultation. The court also heard from Geneva College, RP Seminary, The RP Home, and other committees and agencies. Geneva College reported that a cappella Psalm singing and preaching highlight their weekly chapel services as well as the college seeking to promote Sabbath keeping on their campus. President Troup also highlighted the fact that the whole curriculum is “driven by” the mediatorial kingship of Christ.
Much of this year’s time dealt with complaints. Although some may consider it a “waste of synod’s time,” this is a real part of the work of a higher court: “It belongeth to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith and cases of conscience, to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God, and government of His Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministration, and authoritatively to determine the same…” (Westminster Confession, 31.3). The complaints dealt primarily with two categories this year. The first category had to do with responses to Covid regulations and freedoms. The second set of complaints dealt with the Synod Judicial Commission (SJC) that was set up to investigate the pastoral response to a sexual abuse case in one of our Indiana congregations. It is important to note that this SJC was NOT investigating the sexual abuse, but investigating the pastoral/shepherding response to the sexual abuse.
The first Covid-related complaint was against the Atlantic Presbytery for not allowing their ministers to write religious exemption letters exempting members from Covid vaccinations. This complaint came from the Hazelton congregation. Although the presbytery had removed this requirement against exemption letters, the synod voted against the Atlantic Presbytery saying that it is within the right of ministers to write religious exemption letters and “The actions of Atlantic Presbytery were in opposition to the Westminster Confession 20.2-4 and Reformed Presbyterian Testimony 4.8, 20.4-5, and 26.5,8.” Essentially, this action was against applications of Christian liberty. The second Covid-related complaint was against the State College session and the Presbytery of the Alleghenies (POA). This complaint was because State College was not requiring masking during the height of state-imposed Covid restrictions. The synod voted in favor of State College Church and the POA. Although not all agreed with the way these votes went, the synod did uphold Christian liberty, an essential teaching of Presbyterianism. The second set of complaints were related to the Synod Judicial Commission (SJC) and their judicial actions against the former pastor of the Immanuel Reformed Presbyterian Church. Between Synod 2021 and 2022, the SJC spent over 10,000 man hours investigating the shepherding and pastoral responses to the sexual abuse (again, they were never tasked with investigating the abuse itself).
Several complainants against the SJC were concerned with various issues from the investigation and trial, including the accusation that the SJC proceeded unjustly, that the trial of Mr. Olivetti was “publicly” live-streamed, the investigators were biased, that a professional investigation ought to have occurred, a request to “annul” the results of the trial, and even against the fact that Mr. Olivetti is currently suspended from privileges of the Lord’s Table. Each complainant was able to present their case, the SJC would respond, and then there was a time of debate and questions and answers. The hearing and answering complaints was approximately 1/3 of our time in session. The votes on the complaints related to the SJC and Immanuel Church were: Olivetti complaint 1 was not sustained 109 to 14. Olivetti complaint 2 was not sustained 117 to 9. The Faris complaint was not sustained 120 to 13. The Bloomington session complaint was not sustained 114 to 16. The Riepe complaint was not sustained 125 to 1. The Dillon complaint was not sustained 89 to 40. The Dillon complaint (asking for Mr. Olivetti’s Table privileges to restored) was clearly most persuasive, but failed to persuade a majority of the synod. Although the church heard of much division over this matter, the synod was clear and united in supporting the work of the SJC. Several men dissented from the actions, registering their names (and some their reasons) for being against the actions of the synod. These were difficult deliberations, but the Spirit of God gave us one voice and it was very, very clear that the synod loves these men from Immanuel Church, the victims and their families, and seeks to see them restored. Several restoration commissions were established to help shepherd this hurting congregation following a very difficult season in the life of their church. May Christ speak comfort clearly to them and restore, renew, and revive them following this dark season. The Prophet Isaiah said, “A bruised reed He will not break, And smoking flax He will not quench; He will bring forth justice for truth.”
A discussion on prison inmate church membership resulted in allowing church membership for inmates as long as they may be baptized (unless already) and sessions can provide oversight. A well-written paper on the nature of the covenant of communicant membership was returned to the authors. This paper sought to identify whether our membership queries were oaths or vows. Many who spoke did not appreciate rooting the queries in the inter-Trinitarian relationship. That paper will come back next year. A discussion about Zoom trials, which allows for some videoconferencing in trials when “not reasonably feasible.” This decision will have to go down in overture, requiring the sessions to agree with this decision. Vital Churches spoke of pastoral “burn out” and the need for pastors to take their vacations and an occasional sabbatical. One person rightly noted that sabbaticals are historically for academic work (such as writing). Speaking of writing, Crown and Covenant reported on the difficulties of procuring materials for publishing. Several new books are coming out this year, and it seems that Daniel Howe’s (Providence, RI) book on the Lord’s Day is quite spectacular.
The Reformed Presbytery of Canada was formed and a commissioning service sent them forth to preach the Gospel in the Dominion of Canada. The moderator was emotional as several congregations and mission churches were set apart to form their own national church. The moderators of presbyteries as well as the presidents of boards and institutions gave them the right hand of fellowship and then Psalm 72 (the national motto of Canada) was sung as the men went forward.
Other highlights are too many to write. The times of prayer and singing were rich and powerful. The fraternal delegates. The good finances and sacrificial giving of the churches. The unity of the Spirit and the bond of peace were quite evident. Difficult things have been done and will be done—but the glory of Christ remains central to all that we have sought to do. Hopefully this year will provide some healing from our struggles and we can look back on this synod being reminded that God is ever gracious to us and his love is evident among the brethren.
Nathan Eshelman is a Minister in the Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America and serves as Pastor of the RPC in Orlando, Fla. SourceRelated Posts: