RE: [asa] Question on inerrancy

It relates because of issues in interpreting the Genesis creation story
as allegory, or if the Genesis creation account has to be inerrant.

The way I see it, if one believe the creation account is inerrant, there
are three ways to interpret day (with an inerrant viewpoint):

1. 24 hrs long
2. Day-age view
3. Framework view

If Genesis is not inerrant, then it opens another possible Christian
interpretation as 'divine myth'.

The science aspect should then be obvious, as it is dealing with
integrating evolution with Genesis.

...Bernie

________________________________

From: Gregory Arago [mailto:gregoryarago@yahoo.ca]
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 2:35 PM
To: Dehler, Bernie; AmericanScientificAffiliation Affiliation
Subject: Re: [asa] Question on inerrancy

This post seems to belong more on an evangelicalism/missions list than
on a list for science and religion dialogue. Sure, perhaps it could
overlap with philology or hermeneutic philosophy. Nevertheless, isn't
this a predominantly theological (or apologetic) question without any
scientific relevance?

G.A.

"Dehler, Bernie" <bernie.dehler@intel.com> wrote:

        I'm arguing with a Pastor friend who supports biblical
inerrancy. Here's a point I came up with- does it hold water?

        1. To be "Bible-based," we should teach what the Bible
teaches, but not go "beyond what is written."
        2. The Bible claims to be 'inspired' but not 'inerrant'
        3. 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
<http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=4&verse=6&versi
on=31&context=verse>
        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
<http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=62&chapter=3&verse=16&vers
ion=31&context=verse> (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.

________________________________

All new Yahoo! Mail - <http://ca.promos.yahoo.com/newmail/overview2/>
Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri May 9 17:47:40 2008