inerrancy of the New Testament

Discussion in 'Sacred Scripture' started by apologetic, Feb 20, 2017.

  1. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    761
    Likes Received:
    953
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Thanks for that context of clarification LL. That is a view I would find far more consistent with the Thirty Nine than I imagined you were presenting - and was a bit shocked by. The sense in which Inerrancy and Infallibility have been pushed in the Australian Anglican scene removes all of the context that is embraced in this paragraph - and the paragraphs that surround it - and ends up in a trenchant legalism.

    Psalm 137 of course is a case in point. As a song of lament from a people in exile it makes a lot of sense, as a justification for the bombing of places it makes no sense (to me at least). Scripture does need to be understood in terms of Literary and Historical Context, Church and Tradition, and we need to ensure that no expounding of the text should be repugnant to another text.
     
    Aidan and Lowly Layman like this.
  2. Lowly Layman

    Lowly Layman Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    American Anglican
    A text outside of context is just a pretext. I believe Sacred Scripture is infallible but I make no guarranties about interpretation.
     
    Aidan, Botolph and Christina like this.
  3. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    761
    Likes Received:
    953
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I was always taught a text out of context is a con.
     
    Aidan, Lowly Layman and Madeline like this.
  4. Madeline

    Madeline Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    140
    Likes Received:
    257
    Country:
    Canada
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Although perhaps our church is not pan-Anglican, our humour is pun-Anglican.
     
    Lowly Layman likes this.
  5. Aidan

    Aidan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    953
    Likes Received:
    567
    Country:
    N Ireland
    Religion:
    Traditional RomanCatholic
    I knew you guys waxed lyrical, but I didn't realise you were such comedians. Virgin' on the ridiculous, like a nun riding a mule!!!!
     
    Madeline likes this.
  6. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    761
    Likes Received:
    953
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
  7. Shane R

    Shane R Active Member

    Posts:
    201
    Likes Received:
    196
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    A short quote from my Koine Greek Primer:

    We believe that just as Christ became fully physical in the person of Jesus, so the New Testament documents are a fully physical manifestation of the Spirit of Christ. Modern theological liberals believe that the connection between the spiritual and the documents themselves is purely accidental; that is, a man can just as easily come into contact with God by meditating upon the mantras of Shirley McClain or Karl Marx. Modern fundamentalists believe that the documents are so holy and “inspired” that they never really come into contact with any physical aspect of mere literature at all. Stripped of all physical landmarks, the ordinary propositional content of these documents is lost in a sea of conservative existentialism. And in both cases, the Liberal and the Fundamentalist - the Jesus which emerges has no contact with history, and looks very much like a folksy pre-suppositional projection which these interpretive communities have brought to these documents in the first place.

    If we believe these things, all the proficiency in Koine in all Christendom will not help us to understand what the men of the New Testament documents are saying. But if we become as ordinary children, that is, if we drop our super-sophisticated theories about how inspiration works and approach this Koine conversation by considering, in progressive order, the physical, literary processes by which it is constructed, we will, almost effortlessly - with the simplicity of a child - find ourselves in the very presence of the Jesus of history, the holy grail of modern biblical criticism. This is essential. We must first discover the physical literary forms - the physical words, the basics of epistemology and presuppositions, genre, authorship, sitz im leben, etc. And this we will do, if God permit.
    (The book was the professor's draft and has not hit the presses yet, but it will be released as The Koine Conversation by Can. Paul K. Hubbard, D. Th.)
     
    Tiffy and Botolph like this.
  8. BibleHoarder

    BibleHoarder Active Member

    Posts:
    346
    Likes Received:
    123
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    There is an apologist online whose blog I was reading, and I was startled when I read this:

    I don't see what is wrong with the bible's cosmology. I assume his view might have to do with misunderstanding something as simple as the idea of whether the bible teaches geocentricism (answer: it speaks phenomenologically. I find that answer reasonable enough) or whether the rabbit actually chews cud (rabbits do it in captivity when starving, which fits with the context of the verse where it's mentioned, that man does things he normally wouldn't during times of desperation. These things are not errors, yet I see some 'apologists' who are otherwise smart people throwing in the towel and saying they are in fact wrong because they don't care. One forum I went to was filled with fairly competent apologists who unfortunately were possessed with a spirit of humanist perversity. They always had to feel they could answer something on the fly due to a lack of humility to trust God 'as if all men were liars' when confronted with a situation where the face-value evidence seemed to be against the bible. They also held to other liberal perversities, although ironically not same-sex marriage or other controversies, but yet there was a very brooding and peculiar anti-God spirit amidst this facade of pious Christianity. Unfortunately, many emerging apologists are buying into it and promoting this trash, and I pray that God will continue to rebuke and correct them, and drive this wicked spirit out of the Christian world before it gets out of hand. Having something as precious as apologetics get perverted with arrogance and lack of trust in God needs to be dealt with through constant prayer. I was hurt very deeply by the attitude of the people on the forum, and I believed God answered my prayer when I told him to rebuke those who would listen and drive out those who resisted and continued to hurt seekers by a hateful kind of debating that had no love. You had to see it to really get a sense of the pride and hypocrisy of these 'Christians'. My prayer was answered when the site lost its entire records and backup history shortly after, and the community that was so toxic began to scatter. A former member told me the original owner left the site, giving it over to some friends, because they became even more perverse in their theology.

    As for this apologist, I have no hate for him because I felt he has some sincerity, but I have ignored him on Facebook (he was part of a group I was in) and avoid his material because I feel there is better, more faithful apologia out there for me to study, and I felt a really uncomfortable vibe coming from him reading his blog and profile.
     
  9. Lowly Layman

    Lowly Layman Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    American Anglican
    Scripture teaches God does not lie, indeed that is impossible for God to lie. Therefore the claim that God used lies and untruth as a "springboard to teach...theological truths about Himself" cannot be sound. Eating fruit from a poisonous tree is something man is prone to doing, not God, if you get my drift.
     
  10. Tiffy

    Tiffy Active Member

    Posts:
    273
    Likes Received:
    62
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    God has for nearly 2000 years used an 'imperfect and fallible church' to teach theological truths about himself. There can't therefore be anything very difficult or hampering for Almighty God in that, God is after all Omnipotent and therefore very capable. Can we therefore assume that it is not necessarily essential that the Bible be 'inerrant', 'perfect scientific truth' or 'completely without error or fault', for Almighty God to similarly, successfully, use it as "a springboard to teach . . . theological truths about Himself and what God, in Christ, has done for us?"

    Especially since The Bible does not anywhere declare itself 'infallible', 'inerrant' or 'perfect'. Those sort of descriptions in scripture are uniquely reserved for God, I believe. Scripture only says of itself that it is 'inspired'. All other claims are enthusiastically pious notions of reverent men, somewhat akin to Eve's addition to God's warning words, of "Neither shall you touch it", Gen.3:1-3; Gen.2:16-17. God never said that either.

    .
     
  11. anglican74

    anglican74 Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    927
    Likes Received:
    684
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican (ACNA)
    This is beautiful...
     
    Tiffy likes this.
  12. Tiffy

    Tiffy Active Member

    Posts:
    273
    Likes Received:
    62
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    The Bible contains everything necessary for the Salvation and Righteous Instruction of The Human Race. It is 'perfectly', 'infallibly' and 'inerrantly', adequate for whatever purposes God intended. God is infallible, and therefore can successfully employ fallible and even sinful entities, to achieve God's perfect will. Such was the case with Abram, Moses, All the Prophets, and Us.
     

Share This Page