I posted the following in response to a discussion thread on the inerrancy of the Bible. I have cleaned up a few typos. Also, thinking about it, I don't know that I would have included the phrase "in all its translations".
I believe that the Bible is inerrant in all of its translations. However, my definition of inerrancy is different from that of many others.
I consider the Bible inerrant in that it was inspired by God, and became exactly what he desired it to be in order to speak his message and truth. However, I don't believe that it is primarily a history book, nor that God would have it read so.
For example, if God wanted to mathematically describe the creation of the universe, I assume that he could have given Moses holy tablets with the proper equations.
Of course, such a record would rid us of all need for faith, and all choice in any matter.
A complete, historical and technical record was clearly not God's intent.
The Bible explains man's relationship to the Creator, and tells us that He loves us passionately. He has reached down to us while we were in sin, and freely given us mercy, love and grace. That is the purpose of the Bible, and it delivers on that purpose, without error. What more would we expect?
Concerns beyond that are empty debate, perpetuated by the insecurities of followers and the belligerence of critics.
Sorry for a very long post.
1 comment:
John, does this mean you do not believe in a 6 day creation?
I do, otherwise a 7th day rest would loose all(well,most of it's) meaning.
archaeologists use it's history to find where to dig in vast deserts, - even in the History Moses wrote about.
Just wondering.
Peaceinternally from the oaktree
Post a Comment