Scriptural inerrancy and literalism - is it true?

[polonius]

http://www.gty.org/resources/questions/ ... red-by-god

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

“Theologians speak of inspiration as the mysterious process by which God worked through the authors of Scripture to produce inerrant and divinely authoritative writings. Inspiration is a mystery because Scripture doesn't explain specifically how it occurred�.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran1.htm

Absolute inerrancy: If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.

Limited inerrancy: the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events.

No inerrancy: They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism

The term "biblical literalism" is often used as a pejorative to describe or ridicule the interpretative approaches of fundamentalist or evangelical Christians. A 2011 Gallup survey reports, "Three in 10 Americans interpret the Bible literally, saying it is the actual word of God."

[Elijah John]

The Bible contains more than a few contradictions, and certainly scientific errors...

Inspired is one thing, inerrant is quite another. I believe the Bible is the former, a source of Spiritual inspiration. To go beyond this is to deny it's obvious imperfections, it seems to me.

The verse from Timothy you quoted as an example raises an interesting question that seems to be glossed over by many.

I doubt Paul was speaking of his own writings as "Scripture", inspired or not. To Paul, inspired Scripture was probably only the Hebrew Bible, "Old" Testament.

Ironically, many of Paul's modern day disciples often use that verse to bolster claims of New Testament inerrancy and perfection.

[catnip]

http://www.gty.org/resources/questions/ ... red-by-god

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

“Theologians speak of inspiration as the mysterious process by which God worked through the authors of Scripture to produce inerrant and divinely authoritative writings. Inspiration is a mystery because Scripture doesn't explain specifically how it occurred�.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/inerran1.htm

Absolute inerrancy: If God controlled the writers' words directly or indirectly, then he would not have led them into error. Deceit and error are not normally attributes expected of God.

Limited inerrancy: the Bible is without error in certain matters such as faith, morals and the criteria for salvation. However, the Bible contains errors when describing other matters, such as scientific observations and historical events.

No inerrancy: They interpret it as containing much legend, myth, historical and scientific inaccuracies, religious propaganda, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism

The term "biblical literalism" is often used as a pejorative to describe or ridicule the interpretative approaches of fundamentalist or evangelical Christians. A 2011 Gallup survey reports, "Three in 10 Americans interpret the Bible literally, saying it is the actual word of God."

No inerrancy sounds dangerously low, but the truth is probably closer to this for several reasons.

1) Scripture is inspired and reading it prayerfully leads one to be inspired. In the early church, the Christians read the scriptures in the same basic way as the Jews themselves had read it and recognized levels of scriptural interpretation, the most basic being literal. The Jews call this PaRdeS and spell out each of these levels.

2) Holy scripture was not written to be a history or a science text--it was written to express the inexpressible, to describe that which is indescribable, to relate spiritual truths in human language. We have no other means of communication than human language but it has its limitations. For anyone who has struggled with expressing a spiritual experience, this becomes abundantly clear.

3) Each author expressed it as best he could. He used his own symbols to make the comparisons, to describe the reality. Take the use of the symbol of yeast--it could be used to be bad or good--it merely a tool of communication. So, there are basic differences in inspiration and the importance of some things because all of these things are effected by the receptivity of the individual author.

Note that the quote from Timothy does not say scripture alone. The scriptures always encourage people in prayer and thanksgiving and belief in the Holy Spirit and the grace of God.

[bjs]

Inerrancy and literalism are different things.

Literalism in this context means that Bible should be interpreted…. well, literally. It means that the accurate interpretation is that the universe was created in seven days, Job was a historical person whom God allowed Satan to torture and who held conversations in poetic verse, etc.

Inerrancy means that the Bible is without error, but not necessarily literal. The Bible can be inerrant and still include parables, metaphors, symbolic language, etc.

The quote from the Gallup survey reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of theology in general and Christianity in particular. It said, "Three in 10 Americans interpret the Bible literally, saying it is the actual word of God." However, someone can say that the Bible is the actual word of God and not mean that it should be interpreted literally.




Side note: Literal is a literary word. It refers to how a text was written. A written document can be literal but not inerrant. That is, it could record the event as literal but be inaccurate about the events. It can also be inerrant but not literal. That is, it could record a metaphor that conveys truth even though it is not a literal description of events.

[polonius]

The Bible contains more than a few contradictions, and certainly scientific errors...

Inspired is one thing, inerrant is quite another. I believe the Bible is the former, a source of Spiritual inspiration. To go beyond this is to deny it's obvious imperfections, it seems to me.

Question: If you believe that the Bible is not inerrant, how can it be divinely inspired without God being responsible for such errors?

The verse from Timothy you quoted as an example raises an interesting question that seems to be glossed over by many.

RESPONSE: Yes. Please see question above.

I doubt Paul was speaking of his own writings as "Scripture", inspired or not. To Paul, inspired Scripture was probably only the Hebrew Bible, "Old" Testament.

Ironically, many of Paul's modern day disciples often use that verse to bolster claims of New Testament inerrancy and perfection.

RESPONSE: Actually, Paul didn't write Timothy. So that was the first error!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Epistle_to_Timothy

“Although the Pastorals are written under Paul's name, they are different from his other epistles, and since the 1700s scholars have increasingly seen them as the work of an unknown student of Paul's doctrine.[2] They are speculated to have been written between 90 and 140.[2] They don't address Paul's common themes, such as the believers' unity with Christ,[1] and they reflect a church hierarchy that is more organized and defined that the church was in Paul's time.[2]Scholars refer to the anonymous author as "the Pastor"

I would start my epistle thus: 2 Epistle of Polonius, “All scripture is God breathed, but unfortunately God made a number of errors.�

[polonius]

Inerrancy and literalism are different things.

Literalism in this context means that Bible should be interpreted…. well, literally. It means that the accurate interpretation is that the universe was created in seven days, Job was a historical person whom God allowed Satan to torture and who held conversations in poetic verse, etc.

Inerrancy means that the Bible is without error, but not necessarily literal. The Bible can be inerrant and still include parables, metaphors, symbolic language, etc.

The quote from the Gallup survey reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of theology in general and Christianity in particular. It said, "Three in 10 Americans interpret the Bible literally, saying it is the actual word of God." However, someone can say that the Bible is the actual word of God and not mean that it should be interpreted literally.




Side note: Literal is a literary word. It refers to how a text was written. A written document can be literal but not inerrant. That is, it could record the event as literal but be inaccurate about the events. It can also be inerrant but not literal. That is, it could record a metaphor that conveys truth even though it is not a literal description of events.

QUESTION: So then the story of the Resurrection might be "literal" but inaccurate about the event actually happening?

[bjs]

QUESTION: So then the story of the Resurrection might be "literal" but inaccurate about the event actually happening?

Yes, that is a possibility. It is not what I think to be true, but it is logically possible.

[polonius]

PROVIDENTISSIMUS DEUS ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 1893

Inspiration Incompatible with Error
" For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true."

"Hence, because the Holy Ghost employed men as His instruments, we cannot therefore say that it was these inspired instruments who, perchance, have fallen into error, and not the primary author. For, by supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them to write-He was so present to them-that the things which He ordered, and those only, they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth.

Otherwise, it could not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture. Such has always been the persuasion of the Fathers."


And another writer tells us that:
"The Bible is none other than the voice of Him that sitteth upon the Throne! Every Book of it, every Chapter of it, every Verse of it, every word of it, every syllable of it, (where are we to stop?) every letter of it, is the direct utterance of the Most High! "(From Inspiration and Interpretation, 1861).

How many people really believe that statement?

Still:

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2004647

Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses take the number 144,000 mentioned in the book of Revelation literally and not symbolically?

The apostle John wrote: “I heard the number of those who were sealed, a hundred and forty-four thousand.� (Revelation 7:4) In the Bible, the phrase “those who were sealed� refers to a group of individuals who are chosen from among mankind to rule with Christ in heaven over the coming Paradise earth. (2 Corinthians 1:21, 22; Revelation 5:9, 10;20:6) Their number, 144,000, is understood literally for several reasons. One is found in the immediate context of Revelation 7:4.

QUESTION: But is any of Revelation to be taken literally? Or is it just a story?

[tam]

http://www.gty.org/resources/questions/ ... red-by-god

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

“Theologians speak of inspiration as the mysterious process by which God worked through the authors of Scripture to produce inerrant and divinely authoritative writings. Inspiration is a mystery because Scripture doesn't explain specifically how it occurred�.

Inspired... in spirit.


So the prophets who described either being in the spirit or having the Word of God come to them received what they were given to write: and so those writings are scripture/inspired. Revelation is also inspired (because John was in the spirit); the Psalms are inspired (and Christ - the Spirit - is often speaking through David.) Before He ascended, Christ spoke of scripture being Moses, the Prophets, the Psalms. (Revelation had not yet been given or written.) Then He opened the eyes of His apostles so that they could see what was written about Him. Yet they were to listen to HIM.


**

The Timothy quote also does not say that scripture is inerrant. But rather that it is useful (for the things listed). Jeremiah 8:8 - in scripture - states that the lying pen of the scribes has handled the law falsely. AND Christ said 'woe to you scribes (and teachers of the law)."


So it is not that God (or Christ) spoke in error - but that the scribes and copyists and teachers of the law have mishandled (some of) what is written, due to their own lack of understanding. (or agenda - and we can see what we want to see; or what our eyes have been trained to see, by those who do not see, themselves: blind leading the blind.)

And it can be something as simple as a word or two being translated or transcribed in error, in a particular account. For example: 3 (4?) different words are translated into the one word 'hell' - which one word 'hell' has been given an entire doctrine of being a place of eternal torment. Yet this is done without any understanding of what the words meant before the scribes mishandled them. The scribes (and teachers) also spread this error in their translation and interpretation of what is written. So that a false doctrine now has the appearance (to some) of being accurate. Unless one does some digging (and some testing against Christ, also against love, and against other things written as well).


So, the Bible itself does not claim to be inerrant... and the Word (who) God truly sent to us is Christ.


Peace to you!
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[polonius]

QUESTION: So then the story of the Resurrection might be "literal" but inaccurate about the event actually happening?

Yes, that is a possibility. It is not what I think to be true, but it is logically possible.

RESPONSE: Let's take a look at the events.

1. The date of the Resurrection is 30-33 AD.

2. The first written report is by Paul, a non-witness, writing to 500 Corinthians living 813 miles from Jerusalem. They produce no written report, nor do any of the thousands of others they would have told.

3. The next report we have is by Mark (a Syrian Christian?) writing about 40 years after fact, but producing an incomplete report eg. no ascension. and to which a longer ending was added early in the second century.

4. The next we hear are two reports from the 80's. These evidently use Mark as their source.

5. Finally we have a report from about 95 AD which conflicts in some measure from Matthew's and Luke's.

From an historical perspective would such an amazing event generate so few reports?
But a legend might.