I’m arguing with a
Pastor friend who supports biblical
inerrancy. Here’s a point I came up with- does it hold water?
- To be “Bible-based,” we
should teach what the Bible teaches, but not go “beyond what is
written.”
- The Bible claims to be
‘inspired’ but not ‘inerrant’
- Therefore, the popular
Evangelical claim that “the Bible is inerrant” is to go “beyond what is
written” and is not a Bible-based concept
Therefore, for someone
who wants to teach the Bible in all
sincerity and truthfulness, should not claim more for the Bible than it
claims
for itself. This is ironic, because this statement says the more the
one
takes the Bible seriously, the less they should claim it is inerrant.
Back-up:
For
point 1:
1 Corinthians 4:6
Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for
your
benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do
not
go beyond what is written." Then you will not take pride in one man
over
against another.
For
point 2:
2 Timothy 3:16
(NIV)
All Scripture is God-breathed
and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in
righteousness,
--
and ---
2
Timothy 3:16
(KJV)
All scripture is given by inspiration
of God, and is profitable
for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness
For
point 3:
National Assoc. of
Evangelicals:
http://www.nae.net/index.cfm?FUSEACTION=nae.statement_of_faith
We believe the Bible to be the inspired, the only infallible,
authoritative
Word of God.
Comments?
Please keep comments
short, as this post is.