Re: [asa] Question on inerrancy

D.F. Simmons,

You must be reading the WC quite differently. I see no place where it limits
the scope of biblical infallibility. Of course, scripture says very little
about science, and not a great deal about history or archeology, but the WC
does not teach that scripture, when it deviates from soteriology, is no
longer inerrant. Perhaps you could point out where the divines stated that
scripture is possibly unreliable when it describes science or history.

And this has nothing to do with Henry Morris, I'm sure that everyone here
understands that inerrancy is not synonymous with literality. I am not a YEC
but I affirm the inerrancy of scripture.

You wrote that you accept the purpose of 2 Tim 3:16 without reservation.
Why? Why is the purpose spelled out in 2 Tim 3:16 one of the parts of
scripture whose reliability is beyond dispute? If scripture contains error,
why do you trust that particular snippet?

George,

> It strikes me that much of what is said about biblical inerrancy is of a
> piece with the hankering for a golden age that I spoke of in another
> thread. People insist that God had to inspire a book that meets their
> standard of perfection, just as they think that God had to create a world
> that measures up to their ideas of what a good world would be.
>

I don't think I actually understand what that paragraph means. I think you
are just giving you personal opinion.

So do you think all the signatories of the Chicago Statement on Biblical
Inerrancy were just hankering for some Golden Age? People like Packer,
Nicole, Boice, Schaffer, Sproul, Gersnter?

> Most seriously though, the insistence on biblical inerrancy on all
> matters, including astronomy, geography, history &c, even more than belief
> in a golden age, pays no attention to the character of the God revealed in
> Jesus Christ, a God who is willing to limit himself to the human condition
> in order to accomplish his purposes.
>

But that's just another assertion. You have not provided one micron of
support. I could just as easily reply with an equally unsupported assertion
such as "Those who jettison inerrancy make a liar out of God." That's your
opinion, which is fine, but you've offered nothing to back it up.

Again, is it your position that the men I mentioned above "pay no attention
to the character of God revealed in Jesus Christ?"

And your standard proof texts are not proof texts at all—so listing them as
such s a strawman argument. Since 2 Tim 3:16 is not immune from suspicion
if scripture contains errors, it surely cannot be a proof text for
inerrancy.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat May 10 15:05:55 2008