What Does Scripture Affirm? And Who Says for the Global Methodist Church?

General Conference is upon us. Very soon delegates from around the world will gather in Johannesburg as the only body that speaks for the Global Methodist Church. And this General Conference will be consequential. In some ways, it has potential to shape the kind of Church we become. One of those is the doctrinal and theological character of the denomination. Delegates will be considering the proposed Articles of Faith, a successor document to our previous doctrinal standards—the twenty-five Articles of Religion inherited from the Church of England and Confession of Faith received from the Evangelical United Brethren. This is no small thing.

Within the proposed Articles of Faith, the article on Scripture has raised several very good questions, especially around the language that “Scripture is without error in all it affirms.” What does it mean to say that Scripture is without error? How do we know what Scripture affirms? I have endeavored to answer those questions as clearly as I can in a series of articles in recent weeks. This will be the final essay in that series, and it is focused on two remaining questions that have been raised in the conversation leading up to General Conference?

First, what exactly does Scripture affirm? Second, who gets to say what Scripture affirms?

Read the Series

Part 1: What goes into a doctrine of Scripture?

Part 2: What does “in all it affirms” mean?

Part 3: What “Without Error” DOES NOT Mean for the Global Methodist Church

These questions are important for multiple reasons. One reason is the possible fear that someone might attempt to impose their own idiosyncratic and overly literalistic interpretation on others (or the denomination) as the only interpretation that is without error. These are the kinds of things I've heard. If I don’t affirm young earth creationism or if I think Revelation is largely symbolic, is someone going to file a complaint against me? The fear is fear over what we might call an inerrancy “witch hunt.”

And the fear is not unjustified. That sort of thing happens at times. People sometimes wrongly confuse the inerrancy of their own interpretation with the trustworthiness of Scripture and go looking for people who disagree with them. To illustrate, I was once told that “women in ministry” was a litmus text for whether a person believes the Bible is true. But that is a false move. And you can imagine my frustration at the very suggestion of such nonsense. As many readers of Theology Project will know, I’ve expended considerable effort over the years arguing that Scripture affirms the full participation of women in leadership at every level of the Church. I am egalitarian precisely because of the Bible, not despite it. There is a difference between the text of Scripture and our interpretation of Scripture. And things never go well when we conflate the two.

So, the fear is not unjustified. The question is whether we in the Global Methodist Church have any protection from the folly of those who might attempt to impose some sort of litmus test on any of us.

Propose a Question Now

Presently, the proposed Articles of Faith say that “Scripture is without error in all it affirms.” And we are right to ask if that language is affirmed by General Conference: What does the Global Methodist Church say about what Scripture affirms? And who says what the Global Methodist Church says about what Scripture affirms?

I think this is actually quite straightforward when you are talking about what Scripture affirms in the context of a single denomination. I also think this is one of the functions of our doctrinal standards.

In the Global Methodist Church, our doctrinal standards function as the only authoritative declaration of what Scripture affirms.

Right now, that authoritative interpretation comes in the Twenty-Five Articles of Religion and the Confession of Faith. If the proposed Articles of Faith are adopted at General Conference, that doctrinal standard will become the authoritative interpretation articulating what we believe Scripture affirms. If it is not adopted, then we’ll continue with the Articles of Religion and the Confession of Faith. Either way, our doctrinal standards represent a consensus statement for the whole denomination of what Scripture affirms. And when it comes to matters that are not addressed in our doctrinal standards, we are free to disagree with one another in charity on how Scripture is best interpreted. Our denominational doctrines tell us what Scripture affirms.

Again, I think this is straightforward when we’re talking about shared denominational life. If our doctrinal statements define what Scripture affirms for Global Methodists, then the General Conference is the only body that says what Scripture affirms for Global Methodists. That authority or prerogative does not fall with any individual, whether a lay person, clergy, or even our bishops. The General Conference is the only body that speaks for the Global Methodist Church. Therefore, the General Conference is the only body that speaks for the Global Methodist Church on the question of what Scripture affirms. And the General Conference speaks to that question by adopting the doctrinal standards that articulate what Scripture affirms for Global Methodists.

I discussed this very question with Dr. Joel Chopp on a recent episode of Theology Project. If you’re interested, it’s queued up so you can watch it here.

Here’s the thing. The point of language like “Scripture is without error in all it affirms” is not to control every last interpretive question that might be raised. It’s not about instilling fear. The point is to embrace robust language about the truthfulness of Scripture that aligns the Global Methodist Church with historic Christianity and the world-wide church. Many Global Methodists have just come out of a denomination at great cost precisely because we are committed to the authority of Scripture. It is good and right for us to articulate our commitment to authority of Scripture in our doctrinal standards. The thing to remember is that Scripture’s authority depends on its truthfulness. If Scripture isn’t true, then neither is it authoritative. A robust statement on Scripture will affirm the inspiration, authority, trustworthiness, and effectiveness of the Bible. There is nothing to fear—and much to gain—with a strong statement on what we believe about Scripture.

The point is to embrace robust language about the truthfulness of Scripture that aligns the Global Methodist Church with historic Christianity and the world-wide church.