Another reason ultraconservatives use these arguments is that they wish to claim

literal biblical support for the positions they espouse. They also wish to main
tain that all other positions are unbiblical and undermine the authority of Scri
pture. This shows clearly in the reasons given for the publication of Affirm. In
opposing the ordination of women, Affirm contends that if women are ordained, a
nd the argument for doing so is based to some degree on cultural differences, th
e decision would also undermine the Adventist doctrines of "creation, Sabbathkee
ping, clean and unclean meats, footwashing, tithing, etc. The authority of Scrip
ture as a whole would thus be undermined and discredited."53 This indiscriminate
attack on the higher critical method was an attempt to safeguard the reactionar
y conclusions espoused by this group of theologians.
James Smart argues that the inerrant view claims the "divine validation of a sys
tem of doctrine and practice."54 In this way, the infallibility they claim for S
cripture becomes transferred directly to the doctrines and practices they espous
e. Smart sets forth the ultimate case against inerrancy:
The theory of literal infallibility, far from being an expression of genuine res
pect for Scripture, is open to the accusation of being the means whereby, subtly
, under a semblance of extreme respect, an established order of religion makes u
se of Scripture for its own purposes and subordinates it to itself, thereby remo
ving from God's word in Scripture its power to revolutionize the existing order.
55
This view of inspiration controls, subordinates, and imprisons God and Scripture
to itself.
Another reason for the above strategy is that this argument is one that church a
dministrators can readily agree to. Since the majority of laypersons have a stro
ng conservative leaning, administrators can readily support the Adventist Theolo
gical Society since it claims to be strongly "supportive" of the Bible, the spir
it of prophecy, and traditional Adventist beliefs, even though the society is ex
clusive and divisive and, in fact, is not truly traditional.
fusnota
In James Smart's, The Interpretation of Scripture, Philadelphia, Westminster Pre
ss, 1961, pp. 182-183, he argues that this is the "method of interpretation that
robbed the revelation of Scripture of its freedom. God was no longer free to co
ntradict the established religious order. The doctrine of the infallible inspira
tion of Scripture had the same effect later in Roman Catholicism, making the Scr
ipture the bastion of an infallible church and denying any possibility that the
word of Scripture might seriously sit in question on the order of the church. So
also in scholastic Protestantism it was used to validate the established Protes
tant doctrine and order and claim for it an infallibility similar to that claime
d by the Roman church. Doctrines and practices soundly based on an infallible Sc
ripture could not be subject to any essential change. There could be no error in
them. Thus has man in different ages used Scripture to establish his own or his
own human church's authority over men.