Howard wrote,
<< From: Peter Ruest <pruest@pop.mysunrise.ch>
> Perhaps we should reconsider what divine inspiration really
> means.
That would be an interesting thing to do. Vastly differing theories
regarding the character and appropriate use of the biblical text lurk
beneath the surface of many of the disagreements on this list. >>
Yes. Both concordists and creation science followers, as well as most
Evangelical para-church organizations, and, of course, a multitude of
"conservative" Churchs are committed to the doctrine that the International
Council on Biblical Inerrancy set forth in the 80's (though not new with
them). This includes Article XII:
"We affirm that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all
falsehood, fraud, or deceit. We deny that Biblical infallibility and
inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes,
exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny
that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to
overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood."
This is the heart of the Hydra.
Where does the Bible teach that divine inspiration guarantees the inerrancy
of bibical history and science? I say it is a human tradition, not a biblical
teaching. Let whoever will, show us from Scripture that this doctrine is
really biblical.
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 00:41:49 EST