Errancy as the Gateway Heresy

By | October 26, 2009

Throughout my life the Lord has led me places where at the time I had no idea of just how significant it would be in preparing me for the future.  It’s astonishing to me how many of these there are and how clueless I have been along the way.  One example is that in my final semester of college I chose 1) to write a paper and 2) the subject was the inerrancy of the Bible.  I approached it with an open mind, read lots of material on both sides, and came to a firm conclusion.  I have been thankful for that time and again.

I read a paper tonight which isn’t the first and last word on the subject by any means, but I found that it had a number of good points that I had not considered recently or at all.  I recommend it to you. 

I ‘ll cite two paragraphs to spark your interest.

Denison either misunderstands or misconstrues the concept of the “slippery slope.” Personally, rather than using the phrase “slippery slope,” I prefer to speak of the denial of biblical inerrancy as a “gateway heresy,” deliberately drawing from the characterization of marijuana as a “gateway drug.” Those who argue that marijuana is a “gateway drug” are not claiming that every person who smokes marijuana must necessarily move on to heroin. Neither are they claiming that every heroin addict also is a marijuana user. Rather, they are attempting to demonstrate that marijuana use leads to the use of other drugs often enough to be statistically significant.

Likewise, history demonstrates a clear statistical pattern of people who first reject biblical inerrancy and then reject other important Christian doctrines. One could cite individual anecdotes such as Southern Seminary Professor Crawford Howell Toy, who abandoned biblical inerrancy and eventually left orthodox Christianity. Another approach would be to analyze such groups as the homosexuality-affirming Alliance of Baptists and compare the percentage of their membership affirming inerrancy with the percentage of Southern Baptists affirming inerrancy. In doing this, the objective would not be to demonstrate that no exceptions exist, but simply to show that most who become heretics deny inerrancy first, and that the denial of inerrancy strongly predisposes one to deny other important Christian doctrines as well. One can agree with Denison that it is possible for a person to deny biblical inerrancy and yet cling to some of the Bible’s important teachings, yet we can also say that however possible this state may be, it often does not endure over the span of generations in the majority of those who deny the inerrancy of the Bible. The well-beaten path, trodden by Mainline denominations and institutions all around us, is from the denial of inerrancy to the denial of other vital Christian doctrines.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *