One reason we were cautious regarding the claim of the inerrant Bible was the eventual exclusion of the Apocrypha in the 19th century, and we concluded that either one version, or the other was inerrant, but not both Biblical versions could be inerrant.
We now concede our previous error and understand that both versions can be inerrant Scripture. We offer the following:
total inerrancy minus a partial inerrancy equals a partial inerrancy.
From the preceding, we can conclude that both the Old Testament and the New Testament can be inerrant individually, and these two testaments can be combined to create the inerrant Bible. Therefore, all individual books of the Bible must also be inerrant.
Although we now concede the inerrancy of Scripture, we, by necessity, encounter an issue that is not academic, but practical: the correct understanding of the text. Fortunately, the correct understanding is readily available to the majority of readers, since the reading difficulty of the King James version is written at the reading level of the average sixth grade student. For the modern reader, there is a version in simplified English.
Regretfully, the issue is not reading comprehension, but application of the meaning of the text. The correct application of the text requires either human reasoning or, more likely since our topic is inerrant Scripture, divine revelation. Without divine aid, most readers must rely on their individual reasoning ability. We caution the Gentle Reader that while all reasoning is created equal, some reasoning is more equal than others.
Although we now accept the Old Testament as inerrant, and this acceptance necessarily includes the 613 laws, must inquire:
Is the Jewish law and Levitical law applicable only to the tribes of Israel and to the tribe of Levi, or should it apply to Gentiles?
If not, why not?
If the laws were applicable to Gentiles, are they still to be followed?
If not, why not?
Does the incarnation of Christ mean that Gentiles are no longer under the law?
If not, why not?
As we stated, these are not merely academic concerns or intellectual exercises, but practical concerns, as various protestant denominations have reached varying and contradictory conclusions on these vital concerns- immortal souls are in need of eternal salvation- and difficult questions- proper actions need to be distinguished from improper behavior.
Without divine aid, people will apply different standards to the text. As there are over 40,000 protestant denominations in existence, we have considerable evidence that the application of inerrant Scripture results neither in a single coherent church, nor in a handful of similar churches, but a plethora of reasoned opinions expressed as thousands of churches.
Since we readily acknowledge that we have not been privileged with divine assistance regarding the correct interpretation of Scripture, we cannot declare whether it is, or is not, God's intention that there should be one church.
We understand that the concept of one unchanging standard is appealing and a source of comfort to many people. While we now accept the premise of inerrant Scriptures, Yours Truly is now in the uneasy position of discerning the correct application of this divine revelation. I fear that since greater minds than myself have not been capable of the task, as demonstrated by various and contradictory conclusions as expressed by different churches, then I now know that I would not be capable of success.
Therefore, to prevent incorrect interpretations of Scripture and involuntarily leading others into error, due entirely to my ignorance, the most reasonable course of action to follow is for the Bible to remain in my library and never read it.
What a surprise!
Who could foresee I'd come to feel about the the Bible as most Americans feel about it?