Posted on 03/18/2016 9:19:10 AM PDT by Sam's Army
The Bible is the Word of God, which errs. From the advent of neoorthodox theology in the early twentieth century, this assertion has become a mantra among those who want to have a high view of Scripture while avoiding the academic liability of asserting biblical infallibility and inerrancy. But this statement represents the classic case of having ones cake and eating it too. It is the quintessential oxymoron.
Let us look again at this untenable theological formula. If we eliminate the first part, The Bible is, we get The Word of God, which errs. If we parse it further and scratch out the Word of and which, we reach the bottom line:
God errs.
The idea that God errs in any way, in any place, or in any endeavor is repugnant to the mind as well as the soul. Here, biblical criticism reaches the nadir of biblical vandalism.
How could any sentient creature conceive of a formula that speaks of the Word of God as errant? It would seem obvious that if a book is the Word of God, it does not (indeed, cannot) err. If it errs, then it is not (indeed, cannot be) the Word of God.
To attribute to God any errancy or fallibility is dialectical theology with a vengeance.
Tweet this
To attribute to God any errancy or fallibility is dialectical theology with a vengeance.
Perhaps we can resolve the antinomy by saying that the Bible originates with Gods divine revelation, which carries the mark of his infallible truth, but this revelation is mediated through human authors, who, by virtue of their humanity, taint and corrupt that original revelation by their penchant for error. Errare humanum est (To err is human), cried Karl Barth, insisting that by denying error, one is left with a docetic Biblea Bible that merely seems to be human, but is in reality only a product of a phantom humanity.
Who would argue against the human proclivity for error? Indeed, that proclivity is the reason for the biblical concepts of inspiration and divine superintendence of Scripture. Classic orthodox theology has always maintained that the Holy Spirit overcomes human error in producing the biblical text.
Barth said the Bible is the Word (verbum) of God, but not the words (verba) of God. With this act of theological gymnastics, he hoped to solve the unsolvable dilemma of calling the Bible the Word of God, which errs. If the Bible is errant, then it is a book of human reflection on divine revelationjust another human volume of theology. It may have deep theological insight, but it is not the Word of God.
Critics of inerrancy argue that the doctrine is an invention of seventeenth-century Protestant scholasticism, where reason trumped revelationwhich would mean it was not the doctrine of the magisterial Reformers. For example, they note that Martin Luther never used the term inerrancy. Thats correct. What he said was that the Scriptures never err. Neither did John Calvin use the term. He said that the Bible should be received as if we heard its words audibly from the mouth of God. The Reformers, though, not using the term inerrancy, clearly articulated the concept.
Irenaeus lived long before the seventeenth century, as did Augustine, Paul the apostle, and Jesus. These all, among others, clearly taught the absolute truthfulness of Scripture.
The churchs defense of inerrancy rests upon the churchs confidence in the view of Scripture held and taught by Jesus himself. We wish to have a view of Scripture that is neither higher nor lower than his view.
The full trustworthiness of sacred Scripture must be defended in every generation, against every criticism. That is the genius of The Inerrant Word: Biblical, Historical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspectives. We need to listen closely to this recent defense.
1) James is not contradictory with Paul....if read in context. You need to understand who the audiences are to which James and Paul are writing.
2) I am not aware of any contradictions in Paul's writings. Again, you have to keep it in context. That may be where your concern is originating.
3) If you're really concerned with an accurate translation, get a copy of the Bible either in the original Greek, or use an interlinear or use the NASB translation.
4) I am not aware of anyone who worships the Bible. The Bible is the Word of God so we should study it to learn from it what God's will is.
5) Suggest you read up on the OT and NT canon formation. I would recommend a book by F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture.
I hope this helps somewhat.
What is baseless or charade about what I posted? Matthew and Luke are obviously two different genealogies. One goes off from David’s son Solomon and the other from David’s son Nathan. Not the same line.
Inspired by the Holy Spirit?
The Holy Spirit does not err.
Different points of view, but the same story.
Thanks. Well advanced . I am open minded. I will consider. GB!!
Did you know you cant inherit from your step father?
If you are adopted you can. Just like Christians are adopdted into the family of God.
We have no clue what happened to him.
And your point is?
He wasnt even at the crucifixion.
And your point is?
No I’m talking Joseph was NOT the father of Jesus— not what idiots thought!
**not what idiots thought!**
I have a feeling that if you and I were there, and were not disciples of the Lord, we’d have probably thought just like they did. Chill FRiend.
ok
I’m trying to understand what your point is here. Do you deny that the Bible is Divinely inspired Scripture and is given to us by God, preserved by Him, so that we can know the truths He has revealed for our faith? I do not worship the Bible - I honor and cherish it like the love letter it is to us from our Father in heaven. Without it we would only have oral history and traditions passed down by others with no way of verifying if what they say is so. Paul praised the noble Bereans because they studied the Scriptures to see if what he was telling them about Jesus was true. It was why, with the testimony of the Holy Spirit to their hearts, they believed.
The bible is a history book. Many history books are written hearsay. but the history is accurately reflected and comes out by the preponderance of the testimony. Jesus is real. Jesus saved us on the Cross if we believe he is the Son of God. The bible is a history book. It is full of human error and had become a false idol.
The Bible is an anthology of some 66 Divinely inspired books.
Some of them are indeed historical or the History.
Some are Poetry.
Some are the Law.
Some are Prophecy.
God the Holy Spirit so supernaturally directed the human writers of Scripture, that without waiving their human intelligence, vocabulary, individuality, literary style, personality, personal feelings, or any other human factor, His complete and coherent message to mankind was recorded with perfect accuracy in the original languages of Scripture, the very words bearing the authority of divine authorship. This is called verbal plenary inspiration of the Scripture.
Yes...the Bible never quibbles over the great many sins of man. It is one of the many reasons we know it comes to us from God. Were it left up to mere men’s memories, I highly doubt we’d know much of what we do. Mere history can’t help but embellish, you know. The victors write the history it is said.
The Bible, though is way more than just a history book. God reveals His plans and purposes through his prophets and he commanded them to write it down. Jesus said heaven and earth would pass away but his words will never pass away. The grass withers and the flower fades, but the word of our God endures forever.
You would help yourself by reading the link that was provided to you.
The article mentioned by Raycpa describes your error thusly:
“As is always the case, the charge of contradiction is premature and reflects an immature appraisal of the extant evidence. “
I would recommend you read “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” by McDowell for info on the accuracy of Scripture.
In your replies, I see you are willing to exercise due diligence with dedication in your studies, but you also need to avail yourself of the best study materials that have been produced by the scholars that teach innerancy.
No
(It's time to play, "Are YOU smarter than a skeptic?")
...
Huh. Suddenly the significance of errors has decreased greatly. /snark>
("What's the frequency Kenneth?")
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.