Inerrancy: Did God Really Say…? (Panel V)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2024
- Al Mohler, John Piper, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever, Peter Williams, Simon Gathercole
If you were to ask a person whether the Bible was without error, how would they respond? The consistent development throughout history has been that the Bible is inerrant. However, the doubt of inerrancy often comes from a belief that the message of the Bible needs to change if Christianity is to survive. Where does your strength of belief in Christ come from?
Good conversation, but there is a problem with using Gen. 3:1 (“did God really say…”) as a rallying cry for biblical inspiration or inerrancy. It appears to be utilized this way because of a perceived parallel between the serpent’s questioning of God’s word and the modern unbeliever questioning whether Scripture is God’s word (or whether he has spoken at all).
The parallel dissolves in light of the direct objects of the two questions. For the serpent’s question, the direct object is a faulty quote (“you can’t eat from any tree in the garden”) whereas for the unbeliever, the direct object is Scripture itself. One is a twisted, inaccurate version of what God said, the other is God’s very speech. These should not be confused.
The problem ultimately is that the correct answer to each question is different. To answer the serpent correctly, one would say “no, God has not said that” whereas to the unbeliever you would answer “yes, God has indeed spoken through Scripture.”
one conservative rule of procedure is to avoid stressing things the bible doesn't stress. The bible does not stress the inerrancy of the NT, so one can be reasonable to regard inerrancy as of even less spiritual importance than eschatology. All these people are violate apostle Paul's prohibition on word-wrangling, 2nd Timothy 2:14.
The church believes this because all their parents did etc. Its not.based on Jesus words or anything. Just some madeup bs
There are more than 1 or 2 views of inerrancy. I'm disappointed to see such minimal substantive content. This was highly philosophical and did not address nuts and bolts at all. They wrote off any of the other PROMINENT views of inerrancy by combining them even though they have distinctive differences, that's why there are basically 5 and not 2 dominant positions..they are distinctively different. Also, they didn't have a single expert in History, linguistics, ancient history, exc on the pannel. Just a panel of yes men it seems. It's not impressive to get a few people to agree from the same background and pre-existing similar beliefs. If someone was to listen to Craig Evans, who works on the Dead Sea scrolls and the other manuscripts to help interpret the translations we read, they would be quick to pick up on the problems that exist in the oldest of manuscripts and inconsistencies. For example, read Matthew 5:3 and then Luke 6:20, they are the exact same instance but recorded very differently. It doesn't make any teaching of scripture or any theology less defense-able, it's just honest about the problems that exist. The reason panels like this are worthless is because we have google, and we can all find very clear and reasonable issues with the oldest manuscripts (misquotes, wrong dates, numerical inconsistencies) in about 5 seconds. I'm still a Christian, none of my theology has changed about God, and I still preach from the Bible every Sunday. Don't be so quick to dismiss everyone else as a heretic, there are many intelligent folks who just simply see things differently..and it and no result is apparent of apostasy. I am not unaware however, of extreme liberalism when it comes to the text, and that is also a big problem.
I think you are correct.
Excellent conversation.
Wow, I'm a Christian and definitely writing a book on this topic as the bible is not shown to be inerrant. I find objection with most of their claims but one in particular, he said, "if you look how Jesus talked about scripture, "scripture cannot be broken"" he took Jesus' words out of context so badly how can I trust not only his credibility but his honesty. Jesus wasn't agreeing that scripture cannot be broken, he was proposing an if/then statement, to use what the Jewish opposition believed against their own position to show thier world view inconsistent.
When you say you are a Christian what do you mean by that?
The Bible is inerrant, it's the interpretations which aren't.
These guys don't address any of the numerous problems with the bible.
What Problems?!
@@TheJclark2 wait, is that sarcasm?
Inerrancy of Scripture?? Is this thing called "Scripture" a tangible book or intangible? Where can I get a copy of this tangible "Scripture" that I can hold in my hands in read with my eyes, which these men in the video are discussing? I want the one that is inerrant. In other words, one with no mistakes in it, perfect and infallible!!!
Delia Rodriquez it is very easy, just purchase a book called "the Bible".
Which Bible? I want the Bible with no errors in it!! No mistakes!!!! Infallible!!!! Where cab I get copy?
Correction: Where can I get a copy??
you must be trolling or something. No translation is perfect. Only the word of God is perfect.
Articles of Affirmation and Denial
Article I.
WE AFFIRM that the Holy Scriptures are to be received as the authoritative Word of God.
WE DENY that the Scriptures receive their authority from the Church, tradition, or any other human source.
Article II.
WE AFFIRM that the Scriptures are the supreme written norm by which God binds the conscience, and that the authority of the Church is subordinate to that of Scripture.
WE DENY that Church creeds, councils, or declarations have authority greater than or equal to the authority of the Bible.
Article III.
WE AFFIRM that the written Word in its entirety is revelation given by God.
WE DENY that the Bible is merely a witness to revelation, or only becomes revelation in encounter, or depends on the responses of men for its validity.
Article IV.
WE AFFIRM that God who made mankind in His image has used language as a means of revelation.
WE DENY that human language is so limited by our creatureliness that it is rendered inadequate as a vehicle for divine revelation. We further deny that the corruption of human culture and language through sin has thwarted God's work of inspiration.
Article V.
WE AFFIRM that God's revelation within the Holy Scriptures was progressive.
WE DENY that later revelation, which may fulfill earlier revelation, ever corrects or contradicts it. We further deny that any normative revelation has been given since the completion of the New Testament writings.
Article VI.
WE AFFIRM that the whole of Scripture and all its parts, down to the very words of the original, were given by divine inspiration.
WE DENY that the inspiration of Scripture can rightly be affirmed of the whole without the parts, or of some parts but not the whole.
Article VII.
WE AFFIRM that inspiration was the work in which God by His Spirit, through human writers, gave us His Word. The origin of Scripture is divine. The mode of divine inspiration remains largely a mystery to us.
WE DENY that inspiration can be reduced to human insight, or to heightened states of consciousness of any kind.
Article VIII.
WE AFFIRM that God in His work of inspiration utilized the distinctive personalities and literary styles of the writers whom He had chosen and prepared.
WE DENY that God, in causing these writers to use the very words that He chose, overrode their personalities.
Article IX.
WE AFFIRM that inspiration, though not conferring omniscience, guaranteed true and trustworthy utterance on all matters of which the Biblical authors were moved to speak and write.
WE DENY that the finitude or fallenness of these writers, by necessity or otherwise, introduced distortion or falsehood into God's Word.
Article X.
WE AFFIRM that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy. We further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original.
WE DENY that any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of the autographs. We further deny that this absence renders the assertion of Biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant.
Article XI.
WE AFFIRM that Scripture, having been given by divine inspiration, is infallible, so that, far from misleading us, it is true and reliable in all the matters it addresses.
WE DENY that it is possible for the Bible to be at the same time infallible and errant in its assertions. Infallibility and inerrancy may be distinguished, but not separated.
Article XII.
WE AFFIRM that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.
WE DENY that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood.
Article XIII.
WE AFFIRM the propriety of using inerrancy as a theological term with reference to the complete truthfulness of Scripture.
WE DENY that it is proper to evaluate Scripture according to standards of truth and error that are alien to its usage or purpose. We further deny that inerrancy is negated by Biblical phenomena such as a lack of modern technical precision, irregularities of grammar or spelling, observational descriptions of nature, the reporting of falsehoods, the use of hyperbole and round numbers, the topical arrangement of material, variant selections of material in parallel accounts, or the use of free citations.
Article XIV.
WE AFFIRM the unity and internal consistency of Scripture.
WE DENY that alleged errors and discrepancies that have not yet been resolved vitiate the truth claims of the Bible.
Article XV.
WE AFFIRM that the doctrine of inerrancy is grounded in the teaching of the Bible about inspiration.
WE DENY that Jesus' teaching about Scripture may be dismissed by appeals to accommodation or to any natural limitation of His humanity.
Article XVI.
WE AFFIRM that the doctrine of inerrancy has been integral to the Church's faith throughout its history.
WE DENY that inerrancy is a doctrine invented by scholastic Protestantism, or is a reactionary position postulated in response to negative higher criticism.
Article XVII.
WE AFFIRM that the Holy Spirit bears witness to the Scriptures, assuring believers of the truthfulness of God's written Word.
WE DENY that this witness of the Holy Spirit operates in isolation from or against Scripture.
Article XVIII.
WE AFFIRM that the text of Scripture is to be interpreted by grammatico-historical exegesis, taking account of its literary forms and devices, and that Scripture is to interpret Scripture.
WE DENY the legitimacy of any treatment of the text or quest for sources lying behind it that leads to relativizing, dehistoricizing, or discounting its teaching, or rejecting its claims to authorship.
Article XIX.
WE AFFIRM that a confession of the full authority, infallibility, and inerrancy of Scripture is vital to a sound understanding of the whole of the Christian faith. We further affirm that such confession should lead to increasing conformity to the image of Christ.
WE DENY that such confession is necessary for salvation. However, we further deny that inerrancy can be rejected without grave consequences, both to the individual and to the Church.
"Only the word of God is perfect"
bible if rife with contradictions.