> Being fairly new to this list, I was wondering if this very issue had
> ever been discussed. I have always wondered how theistic evolutionists
> address this very pertinent scriptural and doctrinal issue. Thanks to
> Steve Larsen for bringing it up.
>
> I was wondering how TE's view scripture (not doctrinal confessions) as
> this is very pertinent to their explanation regarding origins. Is the
> Bible God's inerrant and inspired written message/revelation to mankind?
>
> In TE an assumption is made that the God of the Bible exists, and this
> assumption necessarily comes from revelation in scripture. But, if TE
> asserts that scripture can be in error in part, then it may be in error
> as a whole, and the assumption of the God of the Bible logically
> becomes fundamentally flawed. If the existence of God is therefore
> suspect, does it not follow that theistic evolution is also?
>
> However, if scripture is always inerrant in part, then it is inerrant
> as a whole, and the God of the Bible is real. Since the existence of
> God is then not suspect, and scripture is not suspect, then by reason
> the Biblical references to God's acts of creation are valid and true.
>
> One's perspective on the reality, inerrancy, and inspiration of
> scripture results in a different set of assumptions regarding origins.
> In addition to this, as Steve mentioned, there flows a whole new
> theology regarding mankind's destiny and salvation if the Bible is not
> the true inspired Word of God in its totality.
>
Hi Paul,
Enjoyed your post. It carries two important tenets:
1) a hermeneutic for Gen 1-11
2) a view of theopneumaticity
Can you expand and justify each of these?
Regards,
Denis