Is inerrancy a shibboleth?

shib·bo·leth noun: a custom, principle, or belief distinguishing a particular class or group of people, especially a long-standing one regarded as outmoded or no longer important.

In America, “inerrancy” as defined in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (CSBI) is a standard used by fundamentalists to determine who is orthodox and who is a heretic. (Interestingly, the Bible never refers to itself as inerrant.)

Inerrantists hold to the view that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact; however, since none of the Bible’s original autographs have even been found, this claim cannot be verified nor can the claim that modern Bibles are inerrant to the extent that they agree with the original autographs.

Furthermore, even among those who claim to be inerrantists, there is no consensus concerning what is factual and in what sense it is factual. For example, J.I. Packer, who helped pen the CSBI, calls Genesis 1 a “prose poem” and says he doesn’t know whether Eve actually spoke to a serpent or if there was an actual tree of Life or Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Likewise, French theologian Henri Blocher, who also signed the CSBI, believes those two trees should be viewed as symbols rather than actual trees.

Biblical scholar F.F. Bruce and more recently Bishop N.T. Wright have said Americans are far more likely to argue over inerrancy while Brits are happy to just agree with scripture that the Bible is the inspired word of God. In addition, C.S. Lewis, considered by many to have been the most influential Christian apologist of the 20th century, believed the Bible contained some error and myth.

Pastor and author John Piper affirms inerrancy, but he says the Bible does contain imprecise language here and there, such as Jesus’ statement that the mustard seed is the smallest seed. Nevertheless, Piper says since this is inconsequential to the point Jesus’ was making, it doesn’t count as an error.

I’ve heard other Christians say that when Old Testament books speak of the dome or the firmament that protects the earth from the waters above, these instances should be viewed as God accommodating the limited knowledge of ancient authors, not errors.

Qualifications such as these caused Roger Olson, author and professor of theology, to write this:

What’s ironic is that many strong inerrantists who insist belief in the Bible’s inerrancy is necessary for authentic evangelical faith define inerrancy in highly questionable ways. In other words, “inerrancy” has become a shibboleth. So long as you affirm the word you can go on to define it however you want to and you’re still “in.”

But even the strictest scholarly adherents of inerrancy kill that definition with the death of a thousand qualifications. Some who insist that you must be evangelical to be faithful to Scripture’s authority say inerrancy is consistent with biblical authors’ use of errant sources. In other words, they say, the Bible is nevertheless inerrant if it contains an error so long as the author used an errant source inerrantly.

As you can see, those who hold to inerrancy often hold views diametrically opposed to one another simply because one interprets the text literally while another interprets it figuratively.

While many Christian leaders in the US claims to be inerrantists, the wide spectrum of definitions for this term and the fact that hermeneutics vary make me think this word has outlived its usefulness and is indeed a shibboleth. After all, when a word can mean anything, it ceases to mean anything.

______________________________________________
Further examples:

Michael Licona, New Testament scholar, Christian apologist, historian, and Associate Professor in Theology at Houston Baptist University, believes in inerrancy but also believes it’s best to see the story of graves opening up in Matthew 27 as a poetic device, not a historical event. (New Testament scholar Craig Blomberg, who is currently a Distinguished Professor of the New Testament at Denver Seminary and Paul Copan, Christian theologian, apologist, and professor at Palm Beach Atlantic University, while disagreeing with Licona both feel that Licona’s view does not violate the doctrine of inerrancy.)

Denis Lamoureux, who holds a professorial chair of science and religion at St. Joseph’s College at the University of Alberta, believes in inerrancy and also believes in theistic evolution. (Tim Keller, theologian, apologist, and founder and senior pastor at Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA) also believes in inerrancy, but says Genesis 1 cannot be taken literally and thinks it probable that Adam and Eve were historical figures who showed up at some point in the evolutionary process.)