Ask a Question - or - Return to the Faith and Spirituality Forum Index

Question Title	Posted By	Question Date
Infallibility of the Bible	Chas	Monday, April 18, 2011
Question: I know that many Protestants claim that the Bible is infallible while Catholics say it is inerrant. While the Protestants claim they are capable of interpreting the Bible fallibly they read a certain text and claim that it says what it says because the Bible is infallible so their interpretation is correct, BUT could be wrong, which I say is going around in circles, sorta like saying "running around like a chicken with its 'legs' cut off."; which when you think about it makes about as much sense. But St. Augustine uses the term "infallible scripture" in The City of God, Book XI, Chapter 6: "Since then, God, in whose eternity is no change at all, is the Creator and Ordainer of time, I do not see how He can be said to have created the world after spaces of time had elapsed, unless it be said that prior to the world there was some creature by whose movement time could pass. And if the sacred and infallible Scriptures say that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, in order that it may be understood that He had made nothing previously,—for if He had made anything before the rest, this thing would rather be said to have been made “in the beginning,”—then assuredly the world was made, not in time, but simultaneously with time. For that which is made in time is made both after and before some time,—after that which is past, before that which is future. NPNF1: Vol. II," How can we reconcile that? I think I understand that he is saying that the Scriptures are infallible in its religious message. Is that correct? If so which is more proper to say; "The Bible is infallible", or "The Bible is inerrant"? Thanks and God Bless..
Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OMSM(r) Dear Chas: Inerrant and infallible mean the same thing. Both terms mean "incapacity for error". Protestant fundamentalists, not Catholics, are the ones that tend to use the term Inerrant. By that term they are saying that everything about the Bible, its chronology, history, biology, sociology, psychology, politics, physics, math, and every dotted "i" is the absolutely and literally accurate and incapable of error or any interpretation other than what is plainly read. This notion is nonsense and not the way to interpret anything, let alone the Bible. For example the equation 1+1 cannot be interpreted on literal face-value and thus give an answer of "2". If the equation is in the binary number system then 1 + 1 = 10 (and 10 in binary means "2"). Things are not always literally obvious on their face. In the Declaration of Independence we read that "all men are created equal". On literal face-value interpretation that would mean that only adult males are created equal. Women, girls, and boys are not. Boys will somehow transform into being created equal when they become men. Woman are out of luck. Obviously, such a literal face-value interpretation is wrong and is even silly. The infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible is in its message, not in its every word and dotted "i". For example, there are two stories about how Judas killed himself. St. Matthew reports that Judas hung himself (Matthew 27:5). The writer of Acts reports that Judas threw himself to the ground and in doing so burst open, and his guts spill out (Acts 1:18) suggesting, though not stating, that Judas through himself down from a great height. Two completely different stories. The reason for two different stories is that no one knows how Judas died. Matthew and the writer of Acts were simply reporting what they had heard. But, under the inspiration of God, both writers were reporting an infallible fact -- that Judas killed himself. Does this contradiction mean that the Bible is not infallible? No. The message here is that Judas killed himself. It does not matter how. An excellent article on this is written by Eric Sammons, Catholic Scripture Interpretation. God Bless, Bro. Ignatius Mary Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below: Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum. Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum

Question Title

Posted By

Question Date

Infallibility of the Bible

Chas

Monday, April 18, 2011

Question:

I know that many Protestants claim that the Bible is infallible while Catholics say it is inerrant. While the Protestants claim they are capable of interpreting the Bible fallibly they read a certain text and claim that it says what it says because the Bible is infallible so their interpretation is correct, BUT could be wrong, which I say is going around in circles, sorta like saying "running around like a chicken with its 'legs' cut off."; which when you think about it makes about as much sense.

But St. Augustine uses the term "infallible scripture" in The City of God, Book XI, Chapter 6:

"Since then, God, in whose eternity is no change at all, is the Creator and Ordainer of time, I do not see how He can be said to have created the world after spaces of time had elapsed, unless it be said that prior to the world there was some creature by whose movement time could pass. And if the sacred and infallible Scriptures say that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, in order that it may be understood that He had made nothing previously,—for if He had made anything before the rest, this thing would rather be said to have been made “in the beginning,”—then assuredly the world was made, not in time, but simultaneously with time. For that which is made in time is made both after and before some time,—after that which is past, before that which is future. NPNF1: Vol. II,"

How can we reconcile that? I think I understand that he is saying that the Scriptures are infallible in its religious message. Is that correct? If so which is more proper to say; "The Bible is infallible", or "The Bible is inerrant"?

Thanks and God Bless..

Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OMSM(r)

Dear Chas:

Inerrant and infallible mean the same thing. Both terms mean "incapacity for error".

Protestant fundamentalists, not Catholics, are the ones that tend to use the term Inerrant. By that term they are saying that everything about the Bible, its chronology, history, biology, sociology, psychology, politics, physics, math, and every dotted "i" is the absolutely and literally accurate and incapable of error or any interpretation other than what is plainly read. This notion is nonsense and not the way to interpret anything, let alone the Bible.

For example the equation 1+1 cannot be interpreted on literal face-value and thus give an answer of "2". If the equation is in the binary number system then 1 + 1 = 10 (and 10 in binary means "2"). Things are not always literally obvious on their face.

In the Declaration of Independence we read that "all men are created equal". On literal face-value interpretation that would mean that only adult males are created equal. Women, girls, and boys are not. Boys will somehow transform into being created equal when they become men. Woman are out of luck. Obviously, such a literal face-value interpretation is wrong and is even silly.

The infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible is in its message, not in its every word and dotted "i". For example, there are two stories about how Judas killed himself. St. Matthew reports that Judas hung himself (Matthew 27:5). The writer of Acts reports that Judas threw himself to the ground and in doing so burst open, and his guts spill out (Acts 1:18) suggesting, though not stating, that Judas through himself down from a great height. Two completely different stories.

The reason for two different stories is that no one knows how Judas died. Matthew and the writer of Acts were simply reporting what they had heard. But, under the inspiration of God, both writers were reporting an infallible fact -- that Judas killed himself.

Does this contradiction mean that the Bible is not infallible? No. The message here is that Judas killed himself. It does not matter how.

An excellent article on this is written by Eric Sammons, Catholic Scripture Interpretation.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary

Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below:
Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum.
Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum
Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum
Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum
Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum