This is a very strong stance and I have a question. When we have numerical references, as in Gideon going from 33,000 soldiers to 10,000 and down to 3,000 for example, are those numbers to be taken as fully accurate exact counts, or are they approximations? It sounds like you are making the case that the entire Bible in inerrant in all respects in every way. That would imply that every number given is an exact number and not an approximation. Or do you have an interpretation system that allows you to read some numbers as exact and others as approximations? I don't think this is an important as a matter of faith, but you said that the entire Bible has to be inerrant or it won't have authority.
My view on inerrancy allows for approximations. I would agree with the framers of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy when they wrote, "So history must be treated as history, poetry as poetry, hyperbole and metaphor as hyperbole and metaphor, generalization and approximation as what they are, and so forth."
I assume you were quoting Numbers 23:19, "God is not a man, that he should lie; Neither the son of man, that he should repent...". But the Bible also explicitly describes God as repenting (Genesis 6:6) *and* lying (1 Kings 22:22-23) (unless you think there is a meaningful difference between God lying commanding an agent to lie on his behalf).
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Inerrancy is a bedrock issue. If inerrancy is not true, our house is built on sand.
This is a very strong stance and I have a question.
When we have numerical references, as in Gideon going from 33,000 soldiers to 10,000 and down to 3,000 for example, are those numbers to be taken as fully accurate exact counts, or are they approximations? It sounds like you are making the case that the entire Bible in inerrant in all respects in every way. That would imply that every number given is an exact number and not an approximation. Or do you have an interpretation system that allows you to read some numbers as exact and others as approximations?
I don't think this is an important as a matter of faith, but you said that the entire Bible has to be inerrant or it won't have authority.
My view on inerrancy allows for approximations. I would agree with the framers of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy when they wrote, "So history must be treated as history, poetry as poetry, hyperbole and metaphor as hyperbole and metaphor, generalization and approximation as what they are, and so forth."
How is this anything besides a lengthy appeal to consequences?
I assume you were quoting Numbers 23:19, "God is not a man, that he should lie; Neither the son of man, that he should repent...". But the Bible also explicitly describes God as repenting (Genesis 6:6) *and* lying (1 Kings 22:22-23) (unless you think there is a meaningful difference between God lying commanding an agent to lie on his behalf).