Most inerrantists also believe in a pseudoscientific theory called ``creationism'' to explain the existence of life in the universe, arguing that ``evolution'' cannot be possible because it is extremely unlikely for life to come into being from non-life. While this shows that the creationist doesn't really understand just what evolution is about, a similar approach will show that the probability of the bible being inerrant is so low that it should also be discarded. However, if the inerrantists accept the probability argument when they apply it to evolution, they must accept it when it is applied to the inerrancy doctrine or risk being accused of having a double standard.
Many errantists propose problems in the bible, and various inerrantists ``resolve'' or ``harmonize'' these problems. How likely is it that each harmonization is correct? Instead of making a claim about how many proposed problems there are and how likely each answer is to be correct, I've assembled a table with various figures for each, and calculated the resulting probabilty for biblical inerrancy:
1 100 1000 2000 0.999 1 in 1.001E0 1 in 1.11E0 1 in 2.72E0 1 in 7.40E0 0.990 1 in 1.01E0 1 in 2.73E0 1 in 2.32E4 1 in 5.37E8 0.900 1 in 1.11E0 1 in 3.76E4 1 in 5.72E45 1 in 3.27E91 0.750 1 in 1.33E0 1 in 3.12E12 1 in 8.68E124 1 in 7.54E249 0.500 1 in 2.00E0 1 in 1.27E30 1 in 1.07E301 1 in 1.15E602 0.250 1 in 4.00E0 1 in 1.61E60 1 in 1.15E602 1 in 1.32E1204
Going from left to right, the number of biblical difficulties is varied from 1 to 2000, and going from top to bottom the odds of any particular resolution being correct is varied from 99.9% (.999 out of 1) to 25% (.250 out of 1). The notation ``x.yyEzz'' means ``x.yy with the decimal place shifted right zz times'' and is called scientific notation. ``3.76E4'' for example means ``37600''. So if there are only 100 biblical difficulties and their resolutions are 90% sure to be true, the odds are 1 in 37600 that the bible is inerrant.
As you can see, if there are 2000 biblical difficulties alleged by errantists, even if the response is 99% percent sure to be correct the odds are about 1 in 537 million that the bible is actually correct. Even if all of the resolutions are 99.9% sure to be correct, the odds are nearly 7 in 8 that the inerrantist position is wrong.
The above figures assume that all biblical harmonizations have the same probability. If some have a high probability and some have a low probability, then calculating the total probability of inerrancy is slightly more complicated. For instance, if 100 problems are 99% sure to be correctly resolved and 100 problems are 50% sure to be resolved, the resultant probability is 1 in (3.76E4 * 1.27E30) = 1 in 4.78E34. Note that this is a different figure than you would get for 200 problems at (.99+.50)/2=.745 probability of correct harmonization.
Of course, on many occasions more than one incompatible explanation is given for resolving a particular difficulty. For instance, consider the difficulty of the last words of Jesus found in John 19 and Luke 23. Two possible harmonizations would be that Jesus said ``It is finished'' (John 19:30) with his last exhalation of breath (Luke 23:46). Thus, ``It is finished'' would have been Jesus' last words. Alternately, perhaps when Jesus inclined his head (John 19:30) he simultaneouly said ``Father, into your hands I commit my spirit'', making those words his final utterance before dying on the cross. Ignoring the possibility that neither of the utterances recorded in Luke or John is Jesus' last, I'll be kind and allow that one or the other is right, with equal probability. If 100 similar difficulties have two answers that sound ``equally good'', then our Christian friends are back to odds of 1 in 1.27E30 that their faith is not in vain, or 1 in 8.50E30 if there are also 1900 other difficulties that they're still 99.9% sure of. (1900 errors at 99.9% ``explanation rate'' gives a 1 in 6.69 chance that inerrancy is correct, and 1.27E30*6.69 is 8.50E30)
I shy away from illustrations of ``how improbable'' a certain probability is, but I think I should at least attempt to put this final figure into perspective. Let's give the Christians 8.5 times better odds and make work with the round figure of 1 in 1E30. Imagine a huge cube, 1 mile on each side. The volume of the inside of the cube is going to be 147 billion cubic feet, or 1.47E11---So just picking a particular 1'x1'x1' cube out of this 1 cubic mile thing is far more likely than the inerrantist position being true. A 1''x1''x1'' cube would give odds of 1 in 254 trillion, 2.54E13, still far short. In fact, you'd have to pick out a cube that is .00000063 inches on a side. This is a volume far smaller than that of the smallest cells of a human body, an order of magnitude smaller than a complex biological molecule such as clorophyll at about .000004 inches. Looking at it another way, imagine a pool filled with about 8000 gallons of water, enough to fill a circular swimming pool 5 feet deep and 16 feet across, more or less. Now, pick out one particular water molecule. The odds of you picking the right molecule are just about the same odds that biblical inerrancy is correct.
As you can see, the odds show that the inerrantist position is so improbable that it's hardly worth considering.
It should be noted that I certainly don't place much stock in the argument against evolution from probability (more properly, I think it is an argument against abiogenesis from probability), so I should probably explain what the difference is when applying the argument from probability to biblical inerrancy. Simply put, it is very possible that life-from-lifelessness is extremely rare. I am sure that any real scientist admits that. However, on earth alone millions of years and trillions of chemical reactions each year took place before the first self-reproducing molecule was formed--one hundred million times ten trillion already gives 1E21 reactions, any one of which might produce ``life''. Multiply this by any signifigant fraction of the stars in the known universe (say that 1/3 of stars have one planet which could support life), and even the most unlikely event will have a respectable probability now. However, with the bible, we're looking at a single event and applying an argument from probability. There aren't another trillion bibles that could perhaps be inerrant, waiting if this one fails. It's just like the situation with a lottery: The chances that any particular lottery ticket will be a winner is tiny, but the chances that someone will win grow very close to 1 when a large number of tickets are sold. Life-from-nonlife is a situation where a trillion trillion or more tickets have been sold, but in the bible lottery only one ticket has been bought.