Zondervan Publishers presents: Peter Enns: Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy

[St. SteVen]

Interesting to see this from Zondervan.
A short, 1:44 minutes video message from Peter Enns about...

... the inerrancy of the Bible as an often contentious topic among evangelicals that needs to be revisited.
Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy represents a timely contribution by showcasing the spectrum of evangelical positions
on inerrancy, facilitating understanding of these perspectives, particularly where and why they diverge.
Contributors include Al Mohler, Kevin Vanhoozer, Michael Bird, Peter Enns, and John Franke.

 

[St. SteVen]

Another one. Gives a counterpoint argument.

 

[GISMYS_7]

Satan lovesto plant seeds of doubt ===do not doubt the eternal living Word of God!!

 

[Mikey-for-sure]

A self proclaimed agnostic Christian. Really?

Proverbs 12:23 A prudent man concealeth knowledge: but the heart of fools proclaimeth foolishness.

 

[St. SteVen]

A self proclaimed agnostic Christian. Really?

Proverbs 12:23 A prudent man concealeth knowledge: but the heart of fools proclaimeth foolishness.

So, you don't question anything in the Bible?

 

[Mikey-for-sure]

So, you don't question anything in the Bible?

None, really. Just my own interpretations of the scriptures. but my worldview has not really changed for 50 years. My world view is constructed out of my spiritual beliefs so there are no tensions between my external and internal interactions.

 

[Mr E]

Another one. Gives a counterpoint argument.

Great conversation and an important dialogue for Christians to participate in. A great many Christians-- I would say MOST Christians are taught the idea of biblical inerrancy by preachers and teachers who themselves were taught the concept as unchallengeable...

The thinking goes-- it must be true because we say it's true and we say it's true because we've been taught it's true. In fact to be considered an orthodox evangelical Christian pastor you would have to hold to these views in their entirety-- as Al Mohler points out in his remarks above. You too would have to hold to all of the points of the Chicago Statement. If your pastor was trained and graduated from the Dallas Theological Seminary-- he would have had to sign on to this statement. Most Christians have never read it.

https://library.dts.edu/Pages/TL/Special/ICBI_1.pdf

 

[Mikey-for-sure]

This is a spiritual war, take heed brethren. Sounds official, eh

The two witnesses. With the spiritual sword, will you defend or stab them
2 John 1
7For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 8Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. 9Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. 10If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

The hypocrites come from Christians. No OSAS please.
1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Now a body of politicians from LBGTq and Plato-R-US decide what is the acceptable concept.
2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

 

[Wrangler]

Nice thesis statement!

Rasha has a good vid on this topic also. In short, those in the dark attempt to use a false scientific or semantic standard to conclude error.

There are ‘errors’ in the Bible IF you want to interpret it incorrectly.

 

[RLT63]

Nice thesis statement!

Rasha has a good vid on this topic also. In short, those in the dark attempt to use a false scientific or semantic standard to conclude error.

There are ‘errors’ in the Bible IF you want to interpret it incorrectly.

There are copyist’s errors

 

[Wrangler]

There are copyist’s errors

You think that is what I was referring?

 

[RLT63]

You think that is what I was referring?

Just stating a fact

 

[St. SteVen]

This old topic surfaced in a search.

The video in the intro is 1:44 minutes in length. (post #1)
Very telling that Zondervan would publish this author. (who I appreciate)

Certainly continues to be a hot topic.

Plenty of new information out there to address this claim of biblical inerrancy.
Which Evangelicalism still holds; but with a loosening grip.

Christians are spending more time learning about where our Bible actually came from.
And why inerrancy is such a troublesome concept.

The video in post #2 is 3:16 minutes in length, and gives a quick comparison
for the support of Classic Inerrancy and also reasons why that doesn't work ultimately.

Biblical inerrancy is a gatekeeper doctrine developed in the 1970s.
Which attempts to guard biblical authority by suppressing honest questions.

I'll add another short video here. 2:45 minutes.
Stephen Garrett, co-editor of the Counterpoints volume Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy,
explains the importance of the book in light of the discussions surrounding this often contentious subject.
Contributors include John Franke, Michael F. Bird, R. Albert Mohler, Peter Enns, and Kevin VanHoozer.
Edited by James R. A. Merrick and Stephen M. Garrett

/

 

[St. SteVen]

Another short video.
James Merrick, co-editor of the Counterpoints volume Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy, explains the
importance of the book in light of the discussions surrounding this often contentious subject.

Another author speaks about his view on the topic and contribution to the book.
Michael F. Bird, Lecturer in theology at Ridley Melbourne College of Mission and Ministry,
and co-author of Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy, discusses the difference between the North American
and international views on this hot-button topic.

Another author weighs in.
Professor John Franke, co-author of Five Views on Biblical Inerrancy, explains that if Scripture is
truth written and inerrant, and if Scripture contains plurality, then truth must be a plural matter.

/

 

[Mr E]

That's the Devil's Ministry, among others.
Also noted are the deceivers who are doing that work for Him, on "christian" Forums.
As you know... @St. SteVen

That seems a cheap shot. You don’t comment on what he posted at all and instead in an accusatory manner you imply a fellow member here is some sort of deceiver. Rather shameful.

At one time, ‘the Church’ was pretty much all of what was considered to be Christianity and at times it wasn’t very “Christian” at all. One of their tenants was something called “Papal Inerrancy” which was nothing but a cover and a sham. Most people apart from a few faithful Catholics reject the premise entirely today and those few that still hold to the notion, qualify it in such a way that they make it mean something entirely different than it’s original assertion. It gets really quite silly… and sad.

I thin that’s a similar point to what @St. SteVen is referencing here. That folks no longer cling to provably false notions without fully considering them. You should try it.

 

[Behold]

That seems a cheap shot.

Its never a "cheap shot" to point out so called "christians" who purposefully desire to cast doubt on the word of God.

The first (non-christian) who ever did this was SATAN, in the Garden of Eden, when he said to EVE...= regarding God's word..."has God said"?

See that? That is casting doubt on the word of God. And so, this is still his method.
What He does now, is use people to do it, under the guise of "a better Translation" or.."lets discuss the bible", and the discussion is.."errors" or "can we trust it'.

So, no matter the method, the evil that is the DEED is still the same... @Mr E .

Believe it.

 

[St. SteVen]

I found a video by the remaining author of this book that I couldn't find earlier.
Kevin Vanhoozer is speaking about inerrancy, but from another book he wrote.

Kevin Vanhoozer Inerrancy after Babel Part 1​

/

 

[St. SteVen]

A great many Christians-- I would say MOST Christians are taught the idea of biblical inerrancy by preachers and teachers who themselves were taught the concept as unchallengeable...

I suppose that would make Inerrancy inerrant. - LOL
A self-qualifying doctrine.

/