Substantive accuracy

From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

Substantive accuracy is the view that the scriptures were written by wise and intelligent men who either observed the things they recorded, or based their accounts on reliable and accurate sources. This view is based primarily on the literary characteristics of the Bible and its consistency with the physical evidence.

1 Accurate or Inerrant?
2 Theological implications
3 Related References
4 See Also

Accurate or Inerrant?

However, while this view sees the Bible as accurate, it does not see the Bible is inerrant. On the contrary, it asserts that there are some obvious but minor errors and contradictions in the Bible. However:

The minor contradictions and errors are seen as insignificant, and far outweighed by the remarkable consistency and truth shining through the Bible;
The minor contradictions and errors are seen as adding to the credibility of the Bible, as evidence that it must have originated from independent sources, thus making the remarkable consistency throughout that much more striking.

For example, a person holding to this viewpoint examines the four accounts of Jesus's resurrection, notices the differences, and admits that they may very well be incompatible. However, the fact that the four accounts are slightly different is then taken as evidence that the accounts originated separately, rather than originating from a single source. The fact that there are four independent historical accounts of the event which are so similar in all the significant details is then seen as strong evidence that the event as generally described actually occured.

Consequently, those holding this viewpoint generally have little to argue about with those subscribing to Biblical inerrancy on any substantive matter. They believe that the Bible is accurate in its description of the creation and events that followed. They only contest the belief that the Bible is completely inerrant, because they see no reason to believe this, either from any claim to inerrancy on the part of the Bible, or by a simple glance at several facts which they consider to be obvious but minor errors and contradictions.

Theological implications

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness;" IITimothy 3:16 It is argued that while scripture is indeed God-breathed and useful as this passage says, there is no reason to conclude from this verse that the Bible is inerrant. Adam was literally God-breathed, but he made mistakes. Why should being "God breathed" mean being without error? And if the author of this verse intended us to believe that the Bible was without error, why didn't he say so?
The Bible is not seen as the "Word of God." Jesus alone is seen as the word of God, for He is the only One called the Word of God in scripture itself; The Bible is seen as a book written by wise and inspired men of God who experienced and understood the Word of God through the prophets and through Christ himself;