Scot McKnight, C4SO, and the Authority of Scripture

Right at the start I should say I completely understand there are faithful, scholarly people who have a robust view on the authority of Scripture but who do not think “inerrancy” is the best way to describe the authority of Scripture.  I respect such people although I hold to inerrancy myself.

With that out of the way, I was annoyed, then disturbed when I read Canon (in the Diocese of Churches for the Sake of Others – C4SO) Scot McKnight’s post on inerrancy, really a smear of inerrancy.  His straw men and poor reasoning, such as conflating inerrancy with wooden literal interpretations of Scripture annoyed me.  Quibbling over inerrancy applying to the original texts also annoyed me.  He fusses about that, but nobody holds to the inerrancy of translators or of ancient copiers although we now know through the Dead Sea scrolls and more that we have remarkably reliable copies.  As for translations, I am only half-joking when I recommend NIV Bibles for doorstops.

Then he picked at some poor reasoning from the inerrancy camp.  To which I say, so what?  We hold to the inerrancy of Scripture, not the inerrancy of inerrancists. 

If the whole piece were only quibbling and straw men and the like, I would have just been annoyed, shook my head, then moved on.  As I said at the turn of the year, I have to be more selective in posting here.

But then came this:

I know some who think inerrant means Moses wrote the Pentateuch, theistic evolution is wrong, Isaiah wrote Isaiah, Jesus was denied by Peter six times (Lindsell), and that Paul wrote all the letters ascribed to him – and while we’re at it, so did Peter.

Back to authority. NT Wright said often that he believes not in the authority of Scripture but in the authority of God who speaks to us in Scripture (Surprised by Scripture). 

At this point, I got disturbed, agitated even.  I don’t care if St. N. T. Wright said that, that statement is the sort of swill I have heard from LibChurchers for years.  I still remember four decades ago a guest preacher at my evangelical Presbyterian Church, saying from the pulpit this or something very close: “We don’t believe the Bible but the Christ behind the Bible.” (Yes, I informed her after the service that we believe the Bible at that church.)  Such are old weasel words that claim to be faithful to the Lord while tossing his written word aside when it’s just too inconvenient. It’s a cowardly way of appearing to hold to the authority of Scripture without actually holding to the authority of Scripture.

Well, clergy cannot get away with that.  Or at least they shouldn’t get away with that.  If you believe God, you believe his word.  You don’t get to sit as a judge over his word; his word judges you.

Or was Jesus mistaken when he said:

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.  Matt. 5:18

“Oh we believe Jesus, but we know so much more about Scripture than he did.”*

Yeah, try telling that to his face in the Judgement.

McKnight gives a big hint in how far gone he is in denying the authority of Scripture when comes right to the edge of denying “Isaiah wrote Isaiah, . . . Paul wrote all the letters ascribed to him – and while we’re at it, so did Peter.”  He even seems to ridicule those views by lumping them together with a strange interpretation that has Peter denying Christ six times.

Now if he has elsewhere clearly denied or questioned the authorship of Isaiah or of Peter's and Paul’s letters, I am not aware.  But if not, then his bishop should flat out ask him if he believes the Bible when it says “Isaiah wrote Isaiah, . . . Paul wrote all the letters ascribed to him – and while we’re at it, so did Peter.”  If McKnight cannot answer in the affirmative, he should be dismissed as Canon with further discipline under consideration.  After all, ACNA is supposed to be an orthodox Anglican church, not a liberal seminary.

Oh.  Right.  His bishop is Todd Hunter of the Diocese of Churches for the Sake of Others. 

Yes, holding to the authority of Scripture may eventually call for discipline in the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) beyond just dealing with Scot McKnight.

----

*No that is not a direct quote of any Libchurcher.  It’s a translation.