So, how is "the totality of scripture as a whole" inspired without "all scripture" being inspired?
Who argued that? I don't think inspiration was in question, but rather literal truth. It seems to me that it is entirely possible for certain discrete statements in the Bible to not be "literally true" and yet for the Bible to still be inspired and true. Consider this example.
And both sides set their armies in array one against the other seven days, and on the seventh day the battle was fought: and the children of Israel slew of the Syrians a hundred thousand footmen in one day. And they that remained fled to Aphec, into the city: and the wall fell upon seven and twenty thousand men, that were left. And Benadad fleeing went into the city, into a chamber that was within a chamber. 3 Kings 20.29-30
Now, is all of this "literally true?" I don't know. Did Israel slay exactly 100,000 footmen in one day? It couldn't have been 98,158? That isn't what the bible literally says though, and if every statement is literally true we have to believe that exactly 100,000 Syrian footmen died that day, and not one more or less.
Personally, I consider the entire Bible inspired, but I don't know if that inspiration means that every number in every instance is identical exactly to the literal truth. I can tell you that it would be strange indeed if reality always happened in neat rounded numbers. That doesn't reflect my experience of literal truth. Therefore, my understanding of inerrant and inspired would likely be somewhat different than yours.
Yes, but Fundamentalists accept hyperbole and "literary genres" (ie, the Psalms, the Song of Solomon) and Catholics know this. All this hoo-haw about "mechanical inspiration" is a tirade against the historical facticity of Genesis 1-11. Everyone on this thread knows that's what this is actually about, however much Catholics split hairs about "the cattle on a thousand hills."
Why are Catholic FReepers reluctant to admit this? They usually celebrate their evolutionism/higher crticism.
Personally, I consider the entire Bible inspired, but I don't know if that inspiration means that every number in every instance is identical exactly to the literal truth. I can tell you that it would be strange indeed if reality always happened in neat rounded numbers. That doesn't reflect my experience of literal truth. Therefore, my understanding of inerrant and inspired would likely be somewhat different than yours.
Why does a Catholic even have a "personal opinion" on this issue? Aren't you supposed to agree to Catholic dogma?
My "experience" is that an omnipotent being by definition is quite capable of creating a fully functional world in a few days a few thousand years ago, and that G-d does not lie. I will be glad to listen to whatever "experience" of yours goes contrary to this.