The Battle for Inerrancy at the Moody Bible Institute: A Recap

Do all the professors at the Moody Bible Institute (MBI) affirm biblical inerrancy?

This question has been hotly debated ever since I reported in January that one of several allegations against the previous administration was that it allowed professors who deny inerrancy to teach at the institute. Less than a week after that post, three of MBI’s top officers stepped down, though MBI leadership offered no specific reasons for the change other than the board decided it was “time for a new season of leadership” . . .

Read the rest of this article at  The Global Journal of Classical Theology.

Click on the banner the the right to read the entire issue in which this article appears:

Sign Up and Get Chapter 1 of
Redeeming the Feminine Soul

Keep in touch with Julie and get updates in your inbox!

One thought on “The Battle for Inerrancy at the Moody Bible Institute: A Recap

  1. Gum Boocho

    No matter what doctrinal statement an organization has, someone who wants to get or keep his job is likely to play mental tricks or define words so that he can bring himself to sign it. I think it is better to interview a person and ask him what HIS beliefs are on a subject; read his own self-generated doctrinal statement.

    BTW, I being a Bible-believing Christian who holds the fundamentals of the faith, have found that I cannot sign long-winded doctrinal statements without finding something here or there that I disagree with. When I got my position teaching at MBI, I found a short statement that I had no trouble signing, though now as I look at that old statement, I realize that it is defective on the Trinity — so they recently fixed it. There is one God & 3 persons. God is not one person but one being who has 3 egos. As much as we need doctrinal statements, it is really hard to write a long one without making errors.

    A good church doctrinal statement should have in it things that all Christians must believe, if we are to consider them Christians. And all voting members must understand it and sign it. But it should not be written so as to exclude real Christians who disagree with us on non-essential issues, such as the timing of the Rapture relative to other eschatological events.

    A Bible College may wish to restrict its faculty to some particular eschatology, however. How may points of the TULIP will you insist on for faculty? I would insist on total depravity and perseverance of the saints (2 Point Calvinism), but allow disagreement on the other 3.

    I anticipate that it will become impossible to maintain Regional Accreditation and hold to a strong doctrinal position in some areas, like women’s role and sodomy. I think we should be ready to go back to the old 3 year unaccredited Bible Institute format, with our own accrediting body which will not be deemed accreditation by the world. Am I correct that there no longer is a Bible College accrediting association? Hasn’t the American Association of Bible Colleges morphed away from the old paradigm with its name change?

Leave a Reply