Inerrant and Infallible

Inerrant and Infallible?

I know these words are fraught with all sorts of meaning (and baggage) for a certain subset of evangelical Christians.  “Inerrancy” in particular has become a litmus test for evangelicals.  It is part of the statement of faith that I sign each year.  And though I don’t claim to know all the nuances and implications that are fervently debated by those passionate about such matters, I’m pretty sure that I came off the rigid rails of evangelical "inerrancy" quite a while back.

Twenty years ago I went through a phase where I read everything I could get my hands on that was written by C.S. Lewis.  I found his writings to be insightful, witty, and engaging and I’m sure I secretly felt some pride in my “scholarly” reading.  But thinking back, I now see that I was also attracted to his willingness to approach Christianity with temperance and reason rather than dogma and absolutes.  And now as I am trying to figure out what the Bible is, I have come to find that Lewis once again offers me his wisdom.

CS Lewis said that the Bible contains “sacred myth and sacred fiction as well as sacred history”.  The word myth is not a term used in evangelical circles when talking about the Bible.  It made my wife cringe when I mentioned it.  However, the concept of sacred myth is intriguing to me.  And the modifier “sacred” is as important to the phrase “sacred myth” as the word “Holy” is to the phrase “The Holy Book”.  Lewis admits the Bible contains myths, but that they are sacred myths.  The Bible is not just a book, but a holy book.  Lewis says that a sacred myth is “at its best, a real though unfocused gleam of divine truth falling on human.”

Since I was in high school I recognized that the Bible contained different literary genres such as poetry, historical narrative, wisdom sayings, prophecy, etc.  But what if the genres include myth?  What if they include historical fiction?  Will I allow the Bible to contain those genres as well?  If I did, it would certainly relieve the tremendous pressure that is building in me to simply reject the Bible as plainly wrong (for I see that if the Bible is taken literally as historical narrative, it contains much that is plainly wrong).  Is a myth wrong or is it just a myth?  Our school library is filled with Christian historical fiction.  Are those books “wrong” or are they just historical fiction?  Maybe the pressure comes from my trying to make the Bible something it wasn’t ever meant to be.  Maybe the Bible can still be holy and sacred even if it doesn’t fit my western, linear, fact-based, face-value, black and white mindset.  Maybe parts of the Bible are more nuanced, relational, blended and filled with stories, ancient tales, and myths, in addition to the poetry, prophecy, personal letters, and historic narrative.  What if the Bible is wrong (to my western mind) in some places because it was never meant to be “right”?  What if the value of the Bible doesn’t come from it being “inerrant”, but rather from it being “sacred”?