From: Robert Schneider (rjschn39@bellsouth.net)
Date: Sun Jun 15 2003 - 13:53:41 EDT
Nowhere do I find in the Bible itself any claim of inerrancy. The book
referred to in Rev. 22:18-19 must be The Revelation itself and not the Bible
entirely. That should be clear from the text. It may be an attempt by the
author to discourage any tampering with his text by means of scribal
interpolation or deletion. I believe there are apocalyptic works (e.g., I
Enoch?) that have been so revised.
Historically speaking, The Revelation barely made it into the New Testament.
It was one of the disputed works as late as 325, according to Bishop
Eusebius of Caesarea in his notes on the canon, having been treated with
suspicion in many Christian circles. It is not listed in the canon of
Cyril, Bp. of Jerusalem (c. 350), nor in the canon of the Synod of Laodicea
(c. 363), nor in the canon of Gregory of Nazianzus (dates: 329-389); the
latter was ratified by the Synod of Trullis in 692. In the canon of
Amphilochius of Iconium (d. after 394), this is said of The Revelation: "And
again the Revelation of John, some approve, but the most say it is
spurious." The earliest inclusion of The Revelation is in the canon of
Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 367). In the Armenian Church, the Revelation
to John was not received as Holy Scripture until so declared by a 12th
century synod. (source: Bruce Metzger, _The Canon of the New Testament_.)
I agree with Howard, Paul, and others that biblical inerrancy is a human not
a divine declaration.
Bob Schneider
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexanian, Moorad" <alexanian@uncw.edu>
To: "Walter Hicks" <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>; "Howard J. Van Till"
<hvantill@chartermi.net>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 10:40 AM
Subject: RE: The forgotten verses
> It seems to me that the following verses would make no sense whatsoever if
the Bible did not claim inerrancy. Of course, the verses that follow do deal
with the Book of Revelations only and so consistency between this book and
the rest of the Bible has to be verified. Perhaps someone can find more
all-encompassing verses.
>
> ”I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book:
if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in
this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the
holy city, which are written in this book..” Rev. 22:18-19.
>
> Moorad
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Walter Hicks [mailto:wallyshoes@mindspring.com]
> Sent: Mon 6/16/2003 9:57 AM
> To: Howard J. Van Till
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: The forgotten verses
>
>
>
>
> Is there anywhere in the Bible where it claims it's own inerrancy? I know,
for
> example, that RC Pope has declared himself to be infallible wrt matters of
faith
> and morals. But, I have never heard of any clear cut claim of inerrancy
> specifically made in the Bible. All that seems to be based upon inference
and
> "logic".
>
>
> Walt
>
>
> "Howard J. Van Till" wrote:
>
> > >From: Walter Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
> >
> > >
> > > Has anyone advanced the notion that the Bible may be wrong in some
places?
> > >
> >
> > Yes, that idea has occurred to many people. In major portions of the
> > Christian community, however, that would be considered heresy of the
highest
> > order. For such folk, protecting the Bible from this form of critical
> > examination is given top priority. Recall a suggestion I have made here
> > before -- look at the 'statement of faith' portion of creationist or
other
> > conservative Christian web sites and note how often the very first
statement
> > is a declaration about biblical inerrancy, followed later in the list by
> > statements about God and Jesus. Priorities are interesting things.
> >
> > Howard Van Till
>
> --
> ===================================
> Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
>
> In any consistent theory, there must
> exist true but not provable statements.
> (Godel's Theorem)
>
> You can only find the truth with logic
> If you have already found the truth
> without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
> ===================================
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 16 2003 - 13:54:18 EDT