What is Inerrancy? By Jack Kettler
In this study, we will seek to understand the teaching of “Inerrancy.” As in previous studies, we will look at definitions, scriptures, and confessional evidence for the glorifying of God in how we live. The terms “Inerrancy,” “Infallibility,” “Sufficiency,” and “Plenary Inspiration” are connected concepts in Scripture.
Without error, non-errant. In Christianity, inerrancy states that the Bible, in its original documents, is without error regarding facts, names, dates, and any other revealed information. Inerrancy does not extend to the copies of the biblical manuscripts. *
“Inerrant” simply means “without error,” or “true” in the sense that we normally speak of true sentences, true doctrines, true accounts, true principles. Were God to speak to us in person, “directly,” none of us would dare to charge him with error. Errors arise from ignorance or deceit; and our God is neither ignorant, nor is he a deceiver. Similarly, we dare not charge his written Word with error.” – John Frame
“The church has historically acknowledged that Scripture in its original manuscripts and properly interpreted is completely true and without any error in everything that it affirms, whether that has to do with doctrine, moral conduct, or matters of history, cosmology, geography, and the like.” – Gregg Allison
Infallibility of Scripture:
Question: What does it mean that the Bible is infallible? What is biblical infallibility?
Answer: The word infallible means “incapable of error.” If something is infallible, it is never wrong and thus absolutely trustworthy. Similarly, the word inerrant, also applied to Scripture, means “free from error.” Simply put, the Bible never fails. **
Sufficiency of Scripture:
Question: What is the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture? What does it mean that the Bible is sufficient?
Answer: The doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture is a fundamental tenet of the Christian faith. To say the Scriptures are sufficient means that the Bible is all we need to equip us for a life of faith and service. It provides a clear demonstration of God’s intention to restore the broken relationship between Himself and humanity through His Son, Jesus Christ, our Savior through the gift of faith. No other writings are necessary for this good news to be understood, nor are any other writings required to equip us for a life of faith. **
What is plenary inspiration?
Question: What is verbal plenary inspiration?
Answer: The Bible is God’s Word to humanity. It was written by human authors, but God prompted and guided them to write what they did. Every word, word form, and word placement found in the Bible’s original manuscripts was divinely and intentionally written. This is the orthodox view of the church and is known as verbal plenary inspiration. **
A Short list of Synonyms for Inerrancy:
Adjective: unerring, dependable, authoritative, flawless, certain, correct, exact, faultless, sure, true, trustworthy, unimpeachable, and unquestionable.
Gordon H. Clark on the Inerrancy and Infallibility of Scripture:
“The inerrancy of Scripture, as Quenstedt so carefully detailed it, is of fundamental importance. Nowhere else can we learn of salvation. Nowhere else could we learn of justification by faith alone. Nowhere else is there any information about Jesus Christ. Whatever later Christian authors have written about the virgin birth, the atonement, the resurrection, has its source in Scripture. If the Scripture is in error here and there, it is possible that it is in error here. Then too, from the standpoint of logic, there is a question the new so-called evangelicals are reluctant to answer. It is this: If the Bible contains falsehoods here and there, the theologian must have a criterion to distinguish the parts that are true from the parts that are false: What is the criterion? In a court of law, if the judge and jury detect a witness perjuring himself two or three times, or even once, they cannot accept any of the remainder of his testimony. If some things he says happen to be true, they must be proved by other witnesses. Therefore attacks on the evangelical position are obliged to state the criterion they use in separating the truths of the Bible from its falsehoods. What is this criterion by which, from its superior position, it convicts the Scripture of error? Are the Assyrian inscriptions infallible in matters of history? Is Swedenborg an inerrant authority on Heaven and Hell? Bultmann at least had the consistency to say, ‘We do not know a single thing Jesus ever said or did.’” (1)
The Inerrancy and Historicity of Genesis 1-3, Part 1 by John Yeo:
What is Biblical Inerrancy?
Webster’s Dictionary defines “Inerrancy” as: “exception from error.” It defines “infallible” as “1: incapable of error. 2: not liable to mislead, deceive, or disappoint. 3. Incapable of error in defining doctrines touching faith or morals.” In addition, the “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy” notes in Article 12: “WE AFFIRM that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.” According to the same document, divine inspiration pertains only to the original autographs of Scripture (Article 10) and that the Bible’s inerrancy is directly related to its divine inspiration (Article 15).
In Genesis 3:1, the serpent asked Eve, “Did God really say … ?” The devil from the outset of creation has attempted to deceive God’s people and to twist His Holy Word. The doctrine of inerrancy—although the word itself is not found in the Bible —has been understood to be an orthodox biblical teaching due to the Scripture’s self-attestation concerning its own veracity. Biblical inerrancy, therefore, is an important doctrine because it safeguards the canonical Scriptures from those who would say that the Bible is only a human product that is “like any other book” full of errors and mythological elements. In contradistinction, the Bible affirms its own truthfulness. The well-respected “Lion of Old Princeton,” B.B. Warfield, was accurate when he pointed out, “[What] Scripture says, God says.” How is this so? Key passages in the Bible reveal this vital truth:
“I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. It shall come about that whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him.” (Deuteronomy 18:18-19 NASB)
Note that God says that He would raise a prophet and put His words in his mouth. The words that the prophet speaks carry the full weight and authority as if God had spoken them Himself. This description regarding the “office of the prophet” reveals that the prophet was to be the depository of divine revelation. In other words, if the prophet sent by God spoke or wrote, that authoritative word would be binding upon the consciences of its hearers and equivalent to canonical Scripture.
“You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” (Deuteronomy 4:2 NASB)
The words God inspired Moses, the Prophet, to speak and write were considered covenantal words, i.e., canonical. As a result, they were not to be tampered with because they had their origin from the very mouth of God.
“Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar.” (Proverbs 30:5-6 NASB)
Notice that the word translated “tested” by the NASB is actually the word meaning “to refine” in the Hebrew MT text just as a goldsmith or silversmith would burn off the dross only to reveal the pure nature of the precious metal. The verse may be translated, “Every word of God is pure” (e.g., see the NKJV and Tanakh [Jewish Publication Society] translations). Notice that the warning to add to the canonical Word of God is also reiterated as in Deuteronomy 4:2.
“The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting.” (Psalm 119:160 NASB)
“Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.” (John 17:17 NASB)
These two verses declare the veracity of Scripture because they come from God. Note that Jesus Himself in John 17:17 equates the Word of God to truth itself.
“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2Timothy 3:16-17 NASB)
There is a clear “cause and effect” relationship in these two very important verses. The “cause” is what we’ve already pointed out: Scripture is divinely inspired by God. The “effect” is seen in the way the Scriptures may be applied: “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.” In sum, it is clear that the Apostle Paul affirmed the “God breathed-out” quality of “all Scripture” in order that it might serve as the source of all our Christian faith and practice.
“But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” (2Peter 1:20-21 NASB)
The Apostle Peter could not have been any clearer: Scripture did not originate in the mind of man, but in God. The Holy Spirit “moved” the writers of Scripture to communicate exactly what He wanted and preserved them from error at the same time (e.g., Proverbs 30:5: “Every Word of God is pure….”).
The force of the biblical passages above proves the logic and validity of the doctrine of inerrancy. In other words, if God had truly inspired the Prophet, Moses, to write on a scroll (as it says in Exodus 24:4; Deuteronomy 31:9, 22) then it would be more than rational to believe that He could have and would have prevented Moses from mixing error into His Word and to provide exactly what He wanted Moses to record. Thus, the doctrine of inerrancy is not simply a teaching that has been foisted onto the Bible in order to protect it. The Bible declares its own inerrant and authoritative quality so that the people of God might place their full trust in His Word and because His Word is the objective truth of God. (2)
Comments, “Inerrancy,” “Infallibility,” and “Sufficiency” are biblical teachings that stand or fall together:
It is important to see at the start of this study just how closely God is identified with the Scriptures. Consider this example from the book of Romans:
“For the scripture saith, whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.” (Romans 10:11)
The apostle Paul in the book of Romans says, “For the Scripture saith.” It is significant to note when you consult Isaiah 28:16 whom the apostle is quoting, you find that it is God speaking.
To establish this further:
“Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.” (Isaiah 28:16)
Then in Romans, we read:
“For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.” (Romans 9:17)
Was God speaking or the Scriptures? If there is any doubt, we know for sure after reading “And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth” Exodus 9:16 says that it is God speaking, whereas, Romans says, “the Scripture saith.”
Therefore, it is clear that God and the Scriptures are so closely identified as to be synonymous. In essence, we learn from these examples, “thus saith the Lord God” and the phrase “the Scriptures saith” can be and are used interchangeably. (Underlining and bolding emphasis mine)
The Biblical view of the Old Testament Scriptures
The scriptural passages in this section of the present study give a biblical rationale for putting confidence in the Word of God. The passages cited in this section from the Old Testament teach that the Old Testament itself is the Word of God. The New Testament passages cited in this section refer to the Old Testament as Scripture or the very Word of God. Because of this, there is no reason to doubt that the Old Testament is the Word of God.
The following five passages speak of the Word of God:
“Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it, that ye may keep the commandment of the Lord your God which I command you.” (Deuteronomy 4:2)
“Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” (Psalms 119:105)
“Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” (Proverbs 30:5-6)
“Whoso despiseth the word shall be destroyed: but he that feareth the commandment shall be rewarded. (Proverbs 13:13)
“The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand forever.” (Isaiah 40:8)
We see that these five passages set God’s Word apart from the writings of men by the fact that God’s words are “pure,” “a lamp and light,” and are “eternal.” If you despise the Word by rejecting or altering it, you will be destroyed. What man can claim this about his writings?
Furthermore, when reading the Old Testament, there is no mistaking that God is speaking to man beginning in Genesis 1:3 with the phrase “And God said” or the similar phrase “And the Lord said.” Exodus 32:9. In addition, you have God speaking using the familiar terminology “Thus saith the Lord” or “saith the Lord” in places such as Genesis 22:16, Exodus 5:1, all the way to Malachi 1:2. In the prophets we read passages like “And say, Here ye the word of the Lord” (Jeremiah 19:3). There are many variations of these above phrases. In fact, there are many hundreds of Old Testament passages like this, which establish the divine authenticity of the Old Testament.
How does the New Testament view the Old? Consider the importance of the following New Testament verse:
“These were more noble minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)
Searching the Scriptures daily should be the practice of all believers. The believers in Berea used the Scriptures as a test for the truth or falsity of a given message and are commended for this practice. In this particular instance, the Bereans were commended for examining even the Apostle Paul’s message. Surely, this gives the individual Christian the basis for questioning church doctrine if not established biblically. This verse from Acts 17:11 deals primarily with the Old Testament Scriptures since at this stage in redemptive history the New Testament was in the process of being given and compiled. Because of this, we can infer that the Old Testament is the Word of God. It was the Old Testament that was searched by the Bereans to see if Paul’s message was true.
Consider the words of Christ himself when speaking of the Old Testament Scriptures:
“…the Scripture cannot be broken.” (John 10:35)
The Sufficiency of Scriptures:
The self-evident testimony of the Scriptures is that they are sufficient. The Scriptures are entirely adequate to meet the needs of the believer. This teaching is all over the face of the Scriptures. The believer can have confidence in the Scriptures. God’s Words are described as “pure,” “perfect,” “a light,” and “eternal.” This conclusion is one that can be drawn from or deduced from the Scriptures by good and necessary consequence. Reliability and sufficiency go hand in hand. An insufficient or incomplete document is not reliable. (3)
B. B. Warfield observations Inerrancy:
“The religion of the Bible thus announces itself, not as the product of men’s search after God, if haply they may feel after Him and find Him, but as the creation in men of the gracious God, forming a people for Himself, that they may show forth His praise.”
“What is important to recognize is that the Scriptures themselves represent the Scriptures as not merely containing here and there the record of revelations—“words of God,”—given by God, but as themselves, in all their extent, a revelation, an authoritative body of gracious instructions from God; or, since the alone, of all the revelations which God may have given, are extant—rather as the Revelation, the only “Word of God” accessible to men, in all their parts “law,” that is, authoritative instruction from God.” (4)
A Short Account of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy:
1. God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord, Redeemer and Judge. Holy Scripture is God’s witness to Himself.
2. Holy Scripture, being God’s own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God’s instruction, in all that it affirms: obeyed, as God’s command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God’s pledge, in all that it promises.
3. The Holy Spirit, Scripture’s divine Author, both authenticates it to us by His inward witness and opens our minds to understand its meaning.
4. Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God’s acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God’s saving grace in individual lives.
5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded, or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the Bible’s own; and such lapses bring serious loss to both the individual and the Church. (5)
For the complete statement of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, see ***
Sola Scriptura from the Belgic Confession 7:
Belgic Confession 7: The Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures to Be the Only Rule of Faith
We believe that those Holy Scriptures fully contain the will of God, and that whatsoever man ought to believe unto salvation is sufficiently taught therein. For, since the whole manner of worship which God requires of us is written in them at large, it is unlawful for any one, though an apostle, to teach otherwise than we are now taught in the Holy Scriptures; nay, though it were an angel from heaven, as the apostle Paul saith. For, since it is forbidden to add unto or take away any thing from the Word of God, it doth thereby evidently appear that the doctrine thereof is most perfect and complete in all respects.
Neither do we consider of equal value any writing of men, however holy these men may have been, with those divine Scriptures, nor ought we to consider custom, or the great multitude, or antiquity, or succession of times and persons, or councils, decrees, or statutes, as of equal value with the truth of God, for the truth is above all; for all men are of themselves liars and more vain than vanity itself. Therefore we reject with all our hearts whatsoever doth not agree with this infallible rule, which the apostles have taught us, saying, Try the spirits whether they are of God. Likewise, if there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house.
IS THE BIBLE INERRANT? Prof. John M. Frame:
Quite a few people have suggested that “inerrant” is not a good word to use in describing Scripture. This article is designed to respond to that objection. Before we take up the specific term “inerrant,” however, it will be well for us to remind ourselves, in more general terms, of what the Reformed faith and the Bible itself teach us about Scripture.
First, Scripture is the covenant constitution of the people of God.1 The first written Word of God, the first Bible, was the Ten Commandments, written by the very finger of God on tables of stone (Ex. 24:12, 31:18, 32:15f, 34:1). In it, God speaks as the author of the document: “I am the Lord your God.” That written Word was put in the holiest place in Israel, beside the Ark of the Covenant, where it was to stand as God’s witness against Israel (Deut. 31:26).2 As such, the written Word was to govern every aspect of the lives of God’s people (Deut. 4:1-14, 5:32-6:25).3 Nearly every chapter in Deuteronomy urges the people to obey all the laws, testimonies, statutes, commandments, and words… (such eloquent redundancy!) Of God’s written Word. Nearly every verse of Psalm 119 calls God’s people back to these statutes; revival in Israel is always a revival of obedience to (sometimes rediscovery of) the law.
Beyond the Decalogue, God gave other Words to his people. The song of Moses in Deut. 32 (see 31:19) is such a Word. Words of Joshua were later added (Josh. 24:25f). And God sent prophets; the very definition of a prophet was that he proclaimed God’s Word, not words of his own devising (Deut. 18:18-20). Many of these prophecies were written down. Jesus regarded the whole Old Testament as God’s written Word (Matt. 5:17-19, John 5:45, 10:33-36), as did the apostles (Rom. 15:4, II Tim. 3:16, II Pet. 1:21, Jas. 4:5, 11).
The New Testament is a New Covenant, and thus it involves the giving of divine Words (Matt. 7:24-27, Mark 8:38, John 6:68f, 12:47ff, 14:15, 21, 23f, 15:7, 10, 14, 17:6, 17, I John 2:3-5, 3:22, 5:2f, II John 6, I Tim. 6:3, Rev. 12:17, 14:12). Jesus himself wrote no books, but he provided for his apostles to speak and write for God (John 14:26, 15:26, 16:13, I Cor. 2:10-13, 4:1, 14:37, Gal. 1:1, 11f, 16, 2:2). By the Holy Spirit’s witness and the content of the books themselves, Christians recognize the New Testament, as they do the Old, as God’s book.
Thus the church has historically confessed that Scripture is the Word of God. It is God speaking to us. There are also human authors of Scripture, and the content of Scripture reflects their personalities, styles, and experiences. But the humanity of Scripture does not mean that Scripture has less authority than, say, the divine voice at Mount Sinai. The authority of Scripture is nothing less than the authority of God himself, as the passages cited earlier clearly demonstrate.
We have, therefore, no right to bring negative criticism against the Bible. As the Belgic Confession states, with the canonical books “there can be no quarrel at all,” (Article 4), “we believe without a doubt all things contained in them…” (Article 5), and “the teaching is perfect and complete in all respects” (Article 7). When God speaks to us, we dare not criticize what he says. Our only recourse is to believe and to obey.
Now, what of inerrancy? Well, the inerrancy of Scripture is certainly implied in what I have said already, if we are permitted to take “inerrancy” in its normal, dictionary meaning. “Inerrant” simply means “without error,” or “true” in the sense that we normally speak of true sentences, true doctrines, true accounts, true principles. Were God to speak to us in person, “directly,” none of us would dare to charge him with error. Errors arise from ignorance or deceit; and our God is neither ignorant, nor is he a deceiver. Similarly, we dare not charge his written Word with error.
This is not a mere “modern” position. As we have seen, it is the position of Scripture itself. Augustine in the fifth century declared, “None of these (scriptural) authors has erred in any respect of writing.” Infallibility4 is affirmed in the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 1 and in the Belgic Confession, Article 7.
Shall we speak today of biblical “inerrancy?” The term does, to be sure, produce confusion in some circles. Some theologians have gone far astray from the dictionary meaning of “inerrant.” James Orr, for example, defined “inerrant” as “hard and fast literality in minute matters of historical, geographical, and scientific detail.”5 Well, if “inerrancy” requires literalism, then we should renounce inerrancy; for the Bible is not always to be interpreted literally. Certainly there are important questions of Bible interpretation that one bypasses if he accepts biblical inerrancy in this sense.
But we should remember that Orr’s use of the term, and the similar uses of contemporary theologians, are distortions of its meaning. Perhaps those distortions have become so frequent today as to inhibit the usefulness of the term. For the time being, however, I would like to keep the term, and explain to people who question me that I am not using it in Orr’s sense, but rather to confess the historic faith of the church.
We do have a problem here: Other things being equal, I would prefer to drop all extra-scriptural terms including “infallible” and “inerrant” and simply speak, as Scripture does, of God’s Word being true. That’s all we mean, after all, when we say Scripture is inerrant. But modern theologians won’t let me do that. They redefine “truth so that it refers to some big theological notion6 , and they will not permit me to use it as meaning “correctness” or “accuracy” or “reliability.” So I try the word “infallible,” a historical expression that, as I indicated in a footnote above, is actually a stronger term than “inerrancy.” But again, modern theologians7 insist on redefining that word also, so that it actually says less than “inerrancy.”
Now what is our alternative? Even “accuracy” and “reliability” have been distorted by theological pre-emption. “Correctness” seems too trivial to express what we want to say. So, although the term is overly technical and subject to some misunderstanding, I intend to keep the word “inerrant” as a description of God’s Word, and I hope that my readers will do the same. The idea, of course, is more important than the word. If I can find better language that expresses the biblical doctrine to modern hearers, I will be happy to use that and drop “inerrancy.” But at this moment, “inerrancy” has no adequate replacement. To drop the term in the present situation, then, can involve compromising the doctrine, and that we dare not do. God will not accept or tolerate negative human judgments concerning his holy Word. So I conclude: yes, the Bible is inerrant.
John Frame’s Foot Notes:
1. Some will be pleased to see that I am not arguing as a “fundamentalist” ala the fundamentalist movement of the early 20th century, but very much in the Reformed tradition, expounding the implications of God’s covenant with us. Others will not.
2. It is not men’s witness to God, as theologians often suggest, but God’s witness against men.
3. For more on the concept of Scripture as covenant constitution, see M. G. Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972). This is a very important, though much neglected study.
4. If we are permitted, again, to use the dictionary — and why shouldn’t theologians use the dictionary!? — “infallible” is a stronger term than “inerrant.” “Inerrant” means there are no errors; “infallible” means there can be no errors.
5. Orr, “Revelation and Inspiration,” in Millard Erickson, ed., The Living God (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973), p. 245.
6. Emil Brunner’s “Truth as Encounter.”
7. e.g. J. Rogers and D. McKim, in The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1979). (6)
1. Gordon H. Clark, The Pastoral Epistles 1 and 2 Timothy, (Jefferson, Maryland, The Trinity Foundation), p. 183-184.
2. John Yeo, Assistant Professor of Old Testament at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, The Inerrancy and Historicity of Genesis 1-3, Part 1 https://theologicalmatters.com/…/the-inerrancy-and-histori…/
3. Jack Kettler, The Religion that Started in a Hat, adapted from Chapter 1, “Sola Scriptura,” (Maitland, Florida, MCP Books), pp. 10, 11, 37.
4. Benjamin B. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, (Phillipsburg, New Jersey, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company), pp. 72, 101.
5. Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy with Exposition http: //www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html
6. John Frame, IIIM Magazine Online, Volume 4, Number 19, May 13 to May 20, 2002
“To God, only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.” (Romans 16:27) and “heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:28, 29)
Mr. Kettler has previously published articles in the Chalcedon Report and Contra Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is the author of the book defending the Reformed Faith against attacks, titled: The Religion That Started in a Hat. Available at: www.TheReligionThatStartedInAHat.com
For more study:
* CARM Theological Dictionary: https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/ctd.html
The Inerrancy of the Bible by Gordon H. Clark http://gordonhclark.reformed.info/…/AudioTranscript33.TheIn…
The Inerrancy of the Autographa by Greg L. Bahnsen https://www.cmfnow.com/articles/pt042.htm
The Case For Inerrancy: A Methodological Analysis by R. C. Sproul http://www.ccel.us/godsinerrantword.ch11.html
The Protestant Doctrine of Scripture by Cornelius Van Til https://presupp101.files.wordpress.com/…/van-til-the-protes…
*** Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy with Exposition http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html