Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!olivea!apple!sun-barr!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: randy@uutopia.dell.com (Randy Price) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Bible the word of God? Message-ID: Date: 9 Nov 90 05:48:19 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Lines: 50 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu [Stanley Silver comments that "it can be showed the the Bible was not literally written on dictated by the Almighty", and says that controversy over this belief is destroying the Southern Baptist Convention. crf@tomato.princeton.edu (Charles Ferenbaugh) writes: |> I'm a bit uncomfortable with the paragraph above, for the following reason: |> it seems that different people mean different things when they talk about |> "inerrancy." Of course one common meaning is what you've described: the |> idea that God directly created the Bible (often accompanied by a belief |> that such-and-such pastor or church understands it completely so that |> nothing they say is ever wrong). IF that's what you think when you hear |> "inerrancy" then I agree with your comments. -clh] I am more than a bit uncomforable with the above paragraph. It has been attempted to "show conclusively" that the Bible is not inerrant, with little success. The criticism of Biblical inspiration is much like evolution, where the theory must be revised to fit new information. The principle in Biblical inerrancy is the inerrancy of the autograph, which we do not have. Corruption of the text is possible, but the multiplicity of sources limits this as well. We have three thousand years text of Isaiah that do not differ from the texts from which modern translation are derived. The idea of dictation of the Bible is a theory held only by a small sect of churches, and then usually only pertaining to certain books. When examining the criticism of any Biblical scholar investigate his theology. If his axe to grind is liberal or social theology, onn of the linchpin of that theology is the Bible cannot be correct. The truth cannot be compromised, so the truth must be questioned. There is a tendency to assume that any "new discovery" or theory is somehow more correct that older information. In the case of Biblical criticism this is dangerous, because much of the new criticism follows the money -> liberal theology. Realize also, that much of this scholarship is based on different interpretation of the same material. Before anyone decide that Biblical inerrancy is for backwoods buffoons, read a thorough study from the inerrancy viewpoint. A good testbook quality volume is by Geisler and Nix. There are others. Randy ________________________________________________________ Randy Price randy@uutopia.dell.com The opinions are my own, not my employers, cognito. "Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" Thomas Jefferson