I saw two statements in another thread that piqued my interest regarding the degree of biblical inerrancy. One said:
"Biblical contradictions....threatens the doctrine of biblical inerrancy "
The other said:
"The only people on this forum that I have seen who claim that Christians believe in a totally inerrent bible, are..."
I think this would make an interesting poll. I've tried to spread the whole range over seven degrees. I don't expect any are an exact description of one's convictions. But I invite each participant to pick the one that's closest to where you draw the line on Biblical inerrancy:
P.S. Sorry, I got too wordy on "E" and I can't seem to get back in to fix it. Here's an abbreviated version:
E) It has many styles and sources, layered and re-layered, reflecting traditions and stories about the Hebrews and their God. Much of it imaginary. But, based on archeology and literary records, some of it true.
Where do you draw the line for biblical inerrancy? A poll.
Moderator: Moderators
-
Simon's Legacy
- Student
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:56 pm
Where do you draw the line for biblical inerrancy? A poll.
Post #1
Last edited by Simon's Legacy on Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
McCulloch
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24063
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
- Location: Toronto, ON, CA
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #2
One difficulty in this question is that is does not recognize that the Bible is not a book. The Bible is a collection of writings. Unless your answer is A, your viewpoint may be quite different on Judges, Job, Jonah, Jeremiah, John, James and 1,2,3 John.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
Post #3
McCulloch makes a good point. The Bible is a collection of many books, written for many different, if thematically related, purposes.
Considered as a collection, I am voting D, although I a probably really between D and E. Much of what is written (e.g. Kings, Chronicles, Samuel, some of the gospels, acts) are intended to be at least in part a historical narrative. They may or may not be totally accurate in all details, but I personally think the evidence indicates the basic thrust, at least of the non-supernatural events, is likely to be essentially true. Jesus did exist. The Hebrews existed including many of the individuals mentioned. There were wars roughly as described, etc.
Considered as a collection, I am voting D, although I a probably really between D and E. Much of what is written (e.g. Kings, Chronicles, Samuel, some of the gospels, acts) are intended to be at least in part a historical narrative. They may or may not be totally accurate in all details, but I personally think the evidence indicates the basic thrust, at least of the non-supernatural events, is likely to be essentially true. Jesus did exist. The Hebrews existed including many of the individuals mentioned. There were wars roughly as described, etc.
-
Simon's Legacy
- Student
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:56 pm
Post #4
Thanks for the comments. I agree. And, as I tried to indicate initially, I don't think anyone will say, 'that's exactly my position'. I was just trying, in an amateurish way, to pick a few evenly spaced points along the continuum with the understanding that one's choice would only be a rough and generalized indication.
And, of course the 66 'books' all have there own traits. BTW, many of those 'books' give very clear indications of being compilations of yet other separate works. In hindsight, I probably should have worded one of the points to allow that some sections are more 'inerrant' than others. I didn't mean to exclude that option.
And, of course the 66 'books' all have there own traits. BTW, many of those 'books' give very clear indications of being compilations of yet other separate works. In hindsight, I probably should have worded one of the points to allow that some sections are more 'inerrant' than others. I didn't mean to exclude that option.
-
achilles12604
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 3697
- Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 3:37 am
- Location: Colorado
Post #5
I find it interesting that I am running this same poll on my thread "Conspiracy theory" with far different results. Strange huh?
It is a first class human tragedy that people of the earth who claim to believe in the message of Jesus, whom they describe as the Prince of Peace, show little of that belief in actual practice.
-
Cathar1950
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10503
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 12:12 pm
- Location: Michigan(616)
- Been thanked: 2 times
Post #6
Not really it could be different people taking the poll.I find it interesting that I am running this same poll on my thread "Conspiracy theory" with far different results. Strange huh?
It is not a scientific poll that has been well controlled.
What would be more interesting is why you think it is interesting.
