JehovahsWitness wrote:Colloquially when people say “the bible” they are not refering to “translations” or copies, they are refering to the Word of God made available to mankind in written form. I would disagree that they are not referring to translations. When the everyday person is talking about the Bible, it would refer to something that they can hold …
I’ll summarize my arguments… I argue it is not necessary for the Bible to be inerrant and still be authoritative. The layperson view of inerrancy is the Bible is without any errors. They typically mean a Bible translation and are not thinking of the autographs. However, this is not how it is defined. The Chicago statement on …
2 Peter 1:21 is another proof text for the doctrine of inerrancy. The term inspiration explains the process by which God communicated His message through human beings into the written words found in the Bible without any error. How could imperfect men be expected to produce a perfect Bible? skeptics often ask. Peter answers that …
JehovahsWitness wrote:To claim the bible contains fabricated narratives and manmade doctrine undermines its truthfulness and reliability regardless of claims such fabrications are “unimportant” or “irrelevant to salvation”. I’ve made no claim either way. I’ve claimed it is not necessary to believe in inerrancy to be a Christian and to accept the Bible as authoritative. Even if the Bible …
N.T. Wright is considered one of the world’s leading Biblical scholars. He has does not subscribe to inerrancy. My book on scripture’s authority, Scripture and the Authority of God, makes clear where I stand. I take the whole of scripture utterly seriously, and I regret that many who call themselves “inerrantistsâ€� manage to avoid the …
I’ve argued that inerrancy is not necessary to adhere to. One can still have a high view of the Bible and consider it authoritative and not be an inerrantist. I’ll even go further. I believe it is a divisive and potentially damaging doctrine. Even though it’s not a necessary belief, well respected people have been …
Fuller Theological Seminary has a fairly balanced view on inerrancy from an evangelical point of view. This doctrinal commitment is built on a submission to the authority of Scripture, which must stand as teacher and judge of all that we think and do. It both inspires and corrects our doctrine and our conduct. It must …
otseng wrote:We can also ask if the belief in inerrancy is necessary for salvation. One of the most respected apologists, William Lane Craig, says belief in inerrancy is not necessary for salvation. If people have to jump through the hoops of biblical inerrancy in order to become a Christian, you will actually prevent people from coming …
myth-one.com wrote:All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (II Timothy 3:16) Let’s look at the primary proof text for the doctrine of inerrancy. The phrase “is given by inspiration of God” in the Greek is theopneustos https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2ti … nc_1128016 Literally, theopneustos means …
JehovahsWitness wrote: otseng wrote:My main point is arguing it is not necessary to believe the Bible is inerrant. Necessary for what ? To be authorative in what this forum? A person’s life ? For salvation? In this debate, is inerrancy necessary to believe the Bible is authoritative? We can also ask if the belief in inerrancy is …