I've re-evaluated my position on politics, on homosexuality,
on biblical inerrancy, on religious pluralism, and on church.
Establishment evangelicalism was reinforced by the Billy Graham Center's location at Wheaton College, by Christianity Today's removal from Washington, D.C., to Chicago suburbs where evangelical independency has deep roots, and by formation of the International Council
on Biblical Inerrancy.
From Enns: «As a biblical scholar who deals with the messy parts of the Bible (i.e., the Old Testament), I came away with one recurring impression, a confirmation of my experience in these matters: mainstream American evangelicalism, as codified in the Chicago Statement
on Biblical Inerrancy, doesn't really know what to do with the Bible as a historical text.»
I've been playing around with a new view
on Biblical inerrancy this past month.
Not exact matches
Missouri Synod theologians had traditionally affirmed the
inerrancy of the Bible, and, although such a term can mean many things, in practice it meant certain rather specific things: harmonizing of the various
biblical narratives; a somewhat ahistorical reading of the Bible in which there was little room for growth or development of theological understanding; a tendency to hold that God would not have used within the Bible literary forms such as myth, legend, or saga; an unwillingness to reckon with possible creativity
on the part of the evangelists who tell the story of Jesus in the Gospels or to consider what it might mean that they write that story from a post-Easter perspective; a general reluctance to consider that the canons of historical exactitude which we take as givens might have been different for the
biblical authors.
As we learned in the discussion
on Inerrancy, the process of copying the Greek and Hebrew texts caused errors to creep into the
biblical manuscripts over time.
Historic fundamentalists would find them compromising, adapting, walking center lines and warning
on one of the two main marks — the other being
biblical inerrancy — of fundamentalism.
Yet they largely agreed with the fundamentalists
on such questions as
biblical inerrancy, the Virgin birth and the physical resurrection of Jesus.
Much emphasis was placed
on the importance of building a strong foundation, which usually involved employing materials like the «concrete» of absolute truth, the «joists» of
biblical inerrancy, and the «bearing walls» of Christian doctrine.
SBC conservatives have much history
on their side when they argue for a robust Baptist confessionalism, but they depart from the historic Baptist pattern when they restrict their doctrinal concern to the single issue of
biblical inerrancy.
But he focuses
on that particular, identifiable strain of evangelical Christianity that is persistently revivalistic, emphasizes dispensationalist premillennialism and
biblical inerrancy, militantly opposes theological modernism and cultural secularity and feels a strong sense of «trusteeship» for American culture.
In his earlier writing, Pinnock's Biblically derived qualifications concerning
inerrancy were based
on the facts that modern historiography was unknown in
Biblical times, that writers use the language of simple observation (e. g., the sunrise), that figurative and mythological language is used (Isa.
Some of my smartest friends have given up
on Christianity altogether because they were under the impression (from both secular critics and advocates of
biblical inerrancy) that the Bible must be without conflict or inconsistency or error in order to be relevant.
- I do not expect any return to the strict
inerrancy assumption
on the part of informed
biblical scholarship.»
However to say that without faith in
Biblical inerrancy everything is «standing
on top of shifting sand» isn't necessarily accurate.
A few years ago, in a moment of lonely desperation, I googled something having to do with «Christians against
biblical inerrancy» (for some reason you were
on the first or second page of search results...) because I was trying to find out if there was anyone else who was thinking about the Scriptures in a different way from what I had encountered.
The vocal insistence of the religious right
on biblical «creationism» and such doctrines as the
inerrancy of the Bible is likely to create a one - sided impression of the Christian faith and to turn away people who are not aware of other Christian views.
Fundamentalism has been characterized by (1) vigorous resistance to developments in the world of science that appeared to contradict the
Biblical text; (2)
Biblical literalism; (3) individualism; (4) moralism; and (5) insistence
on belief in certain «fundamentals» such as the
inerrancy of the Scriptures, the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, and his second coming.
The foundation of Christianity doesn't rest
on the doctrine of
biblical inerrancy.