User:AKjeldsen/Handling Inerrancy
From RationalWiki
(My notes on dealing with the Biblical Inerrancy stuff, stored here for convenience. Feel free to comment if you wish, but probably better ignored for the moment.)
Contents |
[edit] Programme
- Reduce focus on the Bible itself: Only serves to bog down the discussion in peripheral detail issues.
- Focus instead on investigating the primary subject, the inerrantist "movement" (assuming such a thing exists and can be identified) and the way it argues/supports its viewpoints.
- Research quotes and examples that show the inerrantist approach. Good places to start:
- Answers in Genesis
- Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy
- Same, with comments by Norman Geisler
- Gary Habermas
- Differences among denominations
- Refutations based on science, history, theology, etc.
[edit] Further Details
- Important to distinguish between Biblical inerrancy, infallibility and literalism. Connected and overlapping, but separate concepts.
[edit] The Bible as a Source
- No such thing as an uncomplicated historical source - Bible more complex than most
- No such thing as a source at all until questions are asked.
- Widespread problem with anti-inerrancy, e.g. Sceptic's Annotated Bible, attacks the source material itself, lowers to same level as those who exploit it, impose own/modern standards on the source.
- Fairness doctrine in history. A historian should not be a judge, cf. Marc Bloch.
- Brief introduction to the Bible.
- Structure
- Content
- Origins - the Documentary Hypothesis, e.g. R. E. Friedmann
- Use by later historical periods
- Early Christianity: Apostolic writings, canon
- Middle Ages: Auctoritas
- Early Modern: Beginnings of critical biblical scholarship
- Modern:
- Contemporary:
[edit] Bibliography
Friedman, Richard Eliott: Who Wrote the Bible? (Harper: San Francisco, 1987) ISBN 0-06-063035-3
