Reply to Irving, “One Word, many wordings”

Abstract

Alex Irving has written a considered and informed response, from the perspective of a systematic theologian, to my own initial article which challenged several British evangelical organisations to specify exactly which books and wordings are the products of divine inspiration. Irving’s response consists of two key arguments. Firstly, he argues that the theory of revelation which I think is held by evangelicals is flawed. However, as I think that my understanding of Evangelicalism’s view of the relationship between the Bible and revelation is correct, it seems to me that Irving is actually critiquing the movement he theoretically represents. Secondly, Irving argues for a ‘personalist’ theory of the relationship between the Bible and revelation. His theory parallels twentieth-century neo-orthodoxy in that it views the Bible as a witness to revelation and a vehicle through which the Holy Spirit reveals Jesus Christ; which stands in contrast to the evangelical belief that the Bible is itself revelation. Thus, whilst his own theory may be very good, it is decidedly not ‘evangelical’ and therefore misses the point of my initial article, i.e., it does not justify how the evangelical doctrine of scripture can be maintained in light of the challenges I raised.