Answer: It depends on which type of Christian you ask.

Theological Traditions Included: Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Non-Calvinist Protestant, Calvinist Protestant, Progressive

All traditions affirm the divine inspiration and authority of the Bible, but differ in their understanding of the nature and extent of this inspiration.
Calvinist Protestants strongly affirm biblical inerrancy, while non-Calvinist Protestants may have a more nuanced view.
Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions do not subscribe to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as understood by some Protestant groups, acknowledging the possibility of historical or scientific inaccuracies while maintaining the Bible's infallibility in matters of faith and morals.
Progressive Christians are more open to the idea that the Bible may contain errors, contradictions, or culturally-bound perspectives.
The role of tradition and interpretive authority varies among the traditions, with Catholic and Eastern Orthodox placing a strong emphasis on Sacred Tradition and the teachings of the Church, while Protestant traditions generally emphasize sola scriptura.

This was no small question. For me, there were a lot of implications each way. Really ponder this issue, as the sort of Christian you become is significantly dependent on it.

Justin Bailey – Creator of ChristianAnswers.ai

Quick Comparison

Tradition	Biblical Inspiration	Biblical Inerrancy	Role of Tradition
Calvinist Protestant	Verbal Plenary Inspiration	Affirms Inerrancy in All Matters	Sola Scriptura
Catholic	Inspired Word of God	Infallible in Faith and Morals	Sacred Tradition and Magisterium
Non-Calvinist Protestant	Inspired Word of God	Infallible in Faith and Doctrine	Sola Scriptura with Interpretive Nuance
Eastern Orthodox	Inspired Word of God	Infallible in Faith and Doctrine	Holy Tradition and Church Fathers
Progressive	Inspired Human Writings	Open to Possibility of Errors	Reason, Experience, and Scholarship

Hear from Each Perspective

Caleb / Non-Calvinist Protestant

The Bible is divinely inspired and authoritative, but I may have a more nuanced view of inerrancy compared to Calvinist Protestants. I believe that the Bible is infallible in matters of faith and doctrine but may contain minor errors or discrepancies in peripheral matters such as history or science. Scripture should be interpreted in its proper context and its teachings applied to contemporary life, while allowing for the possibility of human limitations in the transmission and interpretation of the text. The goal is to remain faithful to the core message of the Bible while engaging with it in a thoughtful and nuanced manner.

John / Catholic

The Bible is the inspired word of God and is without error in matters of faith and morals. However, we do not subscribe to the idea of literal, scientific, or historical inerrancy. The human authors of the Bible were influenced by their cultural and historical contexts, and some passages may reflect the limitations of human understanding at the time. Scripture must be interpreted in light of Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium, which provide authoritative guidance for understanding and applying biblical teachings. This approach ensures that our understanding of the Bible remains faithful to the ongoing experience and wisdom of the Church.

Anthony / Eastern Orthodox

The Bible is held in high regard as the inspired word of God, but we do not subscribe to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as understood by some Protestant traditions. We believe that the Bible is infallible in matters of faith and doctrine but may contain historical or scientific inaccuracies. Scripture must be interpreted within the context of Holy Tradition, which includes the teachings of the Church Fathers, the liturgy, and the decisions of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. This approach allows us to understand the Bible in a way that is faithful to the ongoing experience and witness of the Church throughout history.

Hannah / Progressive

The Bible is a collection of human writings inspired by God, but not necessarily inerrant or infallible. It's essential to understand the historical, cultural, and literary contexts in which the biblical texts were written. The Bible's primary purpose is to convey spiritual truths rather than scientific or historical facts. While it serves as an authoritative guide for faith and practice, I am open to the possibility of errors, contradictions, or culturally-bound perspectives within its pages. Our understanding of the Bible should be informed by reason, experience, and contemporary scholarship, as we seek to apply its teachings to our lives and the world around us.

Nathan / Calvinist Protestant

I firmly believe in the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. The Bible, in its original manuscripts, is without error in all that it affirms, including matters of history, science, and geography. The divine inspiration and authority of Scripture make it the ultimate standard for Christian faith and practice. While there may be apparent discrepancies or contradictions in the Bible, these can be harmonized through careful study and interpretation. The doctrine of inerrancy is essential for maintaining a high view of Scripture and ensuring that our faith is grounded in the trustworthy and authoritative word of God.

The Key Differences

1. View of Biblical Inspiration and Authority

All five Christian traditions affirm the divine inspiration and authority of the Bible, believing that it is the word of God and a crucial source for understanding God's revelation to humanity. However, there are some differences in how each tradition understands the nature and extent of this inspiration.

Calvinist Protestants and many conservative Protestant groups hold to the doctrine of verbal plenary inspiration, which maintains that every word of the Bible is divinely inspired and without error. The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions, while affirming the Bible's inspiration, do not subscribe to this specific understanding of inerrancy. They recognize the role of human authors and the influence of historical and cultural contexts in shaping the biblical text.

Progressive Christians, while affirming the Bible's inspiration, tend to emphasize its human dimensions and the need to interpret it in light of modern scholarship and contemporary ethical concerns.

2. Understanding Biblical Inerrancy

The question of biblical inerrancy is a key point of divergence among the five traditions. Calvinist Protestants strongly affirm the doctrine of biblical inerrancy, believing that the Bible is without error in all that it affirms, including matters of history and science. Non-Calvinist Protestants may have a more nuanced view, affirming inerrancy in matters of faith and doctrine but allowing for the possibility of minor errors in peripheral matters.

The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions do not subscribe to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as understood by some Protestant groups. They acknowledge the possibility of historical or scientific inaccuracies in the Bible while maintaining its infallibility in matters of faith and morals.

Progressive Christians are more open to the idea that the Bible may contain errors, contradictions, or culturally-bound perspectives, emphasizing the need to interpret it in light of modern scholarship and ethical considerations.

3. Role of Tradition and Interpretation

Another key point of comparison is the role of tradition and interpretive authority in understanding the Bible. The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions place a strong emphasis on the importance of Sacred Tradition and the teachings of the Church in guiding biblical interpretation. For Catholics, the Magisterium serves as the authoritative interpreter of Scripture, while Eastern Orthodox Christians look to the consensus of the Church Fathers and the decisions of the Seven Ecumenical Councils.

Protestant traditions, including Calvinist and non-Calvinist groups, generally emphasize the principle of sola scriptura, which holds that the Bible alone is the ultimate authority for Christian faith and practice. However, they still recognize the importance of tradition and the need for careful interpretation in light of historical and literary context.

Progressive Christians tend to place a greater emphasis on the role of reason, experience, and contemporary scholarship in interpreting the Bible, while still affirming its importance as a source of spiritual guidance and moral teaching.

Does the Bible have any errors?