Page 33 - Doctrine and History of the Preservation of the Bible revised

even though the Bible may be tainted with factual errors. The authority of Scripture is in the subjective
experience of the individual rather than in the Scriptures themselves.

Basically, neo-orthodoxy teaches us that the Bible points to Christ, whether he is real or not. They
believe Christ comes from the Bible and experiencing Him is all that is important.

In response to this argument, if the Bible has errors in it, then the portrait of Christ is erroneous. And
regardless of whether a person responds or has an encounter with Christ through the Bible, the Bible
remains the objective and authoritative Word of God. The Bible is outside of us. It is the objective truth
whether we believe it or not, or whether we experience it or not. The revelation of God to man can be
experienced, but whether man experiences it or not, it remains true.

Conceptual Inspiration
This view says that the big concepts or ideas present in the Bible are inspired, but not the words. He left
the words up to the authors of each book. The problem with this view is that it flies in the face of both
Jesus and Paul as they affirmed the concept of verbal inspiration in Matthew 5:18 and Galatians 3:16.

Partial Inspiration
The partial inspiration theory teaches that some parts of the Bible are inspired, and some parts are not.
Normally the person who holds this position makes the decision of what is not inspired based on what
his personal preferences are. The person holding this view generally relates the matters of salvation and
faith as inspired, but the parts that deal with history, science, chronology, and other “non-faith” matters
may be allegorical or perhaps in error.

The partialists reject both verbal and plenary inspiration, but hold that the Bible holds significance in
guiding mankind to salvation or knowing who God is. However, this position has real problems. Charles
Ryrie writes (Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology, Victor Books, Wheaton, IL, 1987):

But is not the biblical teaching about salvation based on historical facts? Suppose those facts are
inaccurate? Then our understanding about salvation might also be erroneous. You cannot separate
history and doctrine and allow for errors (however few) in the historical records and at the same time be
certain that the doctrinal parts are true.

The basic question the partialists face is what parts of the Bible can we trust and what parts are in error?
The answer is based on the subjective views of the person holding this position.

Divine Dictation
This view is also called the mechanical view of inspiration. It holds that the whole Bible was dictated
word for word by God; the writers were passive, much like a secretary taking dictation. This claim
renders the Bible similar to the Koran which was supposedly dictated in Arabic from heaven. Some parts
of the Bible are said to be the direct words of God. However, for the most part, the books of the Bible
reveal a distinct contrast in style and vocabulary suggesting that the authors entered into the process of
penning scripture with their minds. If the dictation theory were true, the style of the books of the Bible
should be uniform, which they are not.

31