Even Christianity Today, Henry thought, had squandered an opportune moment by moving from Washington to the evangelical hinterland near Wheaton, by becoming a populist organ rather than challenging the cognitive frontiers of the era, and by becoming obsessed (for a while) with the intra-evangelical debate
over biblical inerrancy.
Not exact matches
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.
During the debate
over «
biblical inerrancy» that raged among evangelicalism for several years in the late 1970s, I remember someone observing that Harold Lindsell's 1976 book, The Battle for the Bible, which pretty much got that debate going, was more a theory of institutional change than it was about theology as such.
The author looks at why we can not simply assert the truth of the Bible
over our modern common sense and shows that
Biblical literalism /
inerrancy is an approach to the Scriptures that is unacceptable both to our reason and to our faith.
For example, they escape for the most part the dispiriting disputes
over evolution and
biblical inerrancy.