I used to own The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy by C. Dennis McKinsey. It's basically a book which brings together in once place a whole host of arguments against Biblical Inerrancy. I say I used to own it because I lent it to a Christian acquaintance of mine who won't give it back. I think the book disturbed him and he must have burnt it or something. From time to time I tease him about how the Bible says something about "Thou shalt not steal".
Anyway, the book tends to take a shotgun approach. What it achieves in terms of its comprehensiveness it loses in its poor use of logic. Some of the book's arguments are valid examples of contradictions or difficulties, but many are also easy to resolve. Still, the book has its interesting points, and if you want to study Christian-Muslim polemics its probably worth a gander.
Especially since I just found out that it is available free online:
Online Version of the Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy
Anyway, the book tends to take a shotgun approach. What it achieves in terms of its comprehensiveness it loses in its poor use of logic. Some of the book's arguments are valid examples of contradictions or difficulties, but many are also easy to resolve. Still, the book has its interesting points, and if you want to study Christian-Muslim polemics its probably worth a gander.
Especially since I just found out that it is available free online:
Online Version of the Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy
3 comments:
The letter killeth is the message again. It is the Spirit we care about.
Jesus never wrote a book.
I wonder whether the Koran has been subject to such a stringent textual criticism, as the Bible has since at least the eighteenth century?
When we put our trust in books we tend to go wrong again and again.
Do your own thinking. Search your own heart. Or be a free thinker as the site you point to says.
Cheers,
Bruce
The Bible is errant, and it provides a way to compensate for that fact.
The Bible twice declares that it is errant. The first declaration is Matthew 13:33 which reads, "Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened." The second declaration is Luke 13:21 which reads, "It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened."
The Bible trice mentions a way to compensate for the errancy. The first mention was at Deuteronomy 19:15 which reads, "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." The second was at Matthew 18:16 which reads, "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." The third mention was at 2 Corinthians 13:1 which reads, "This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." Their commonality, which is the way to remove the leaven, reads, "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established."
George, thanks for stopping by. I think that is an interesting way to look at the issue and a creative way to try to salvage the Bible. At the same time I wonder if there are limits to its practicality. For example, for controversial theological positions like the incarnation or the trinity I'm sure that each "side" could probably point to 3 or more verses to support their respective positions.
Although in a general sort of way I think I would agree loosely with what you seem to be saying. The Bible is a flawed book. But perhaps there is a core message which is prophetic and really is revelation. Where we probably disagree is: What criteria do you use to seperate the wheat from the chaff?
Post a Comment