Browsing the archives for the inerrancy category

It Doesn’t Matter if Noah’s Ark Existed

In my previous post, I ranted about those who feel the need to call the Bible 100% accurate about historical facts. The Bible is not about historical facts. Indeed, I imagine there are very few historical facts in the Bible that might actually make any difference in anyone’s life. At the moment, I can think [...]

22 Comments

The Bible Is Not a History Textbook

I know that some people feel that they have to use the word “inerrancy” to describe the Bible in order to be part of their community of faith (generally, more conservative evangelical or even fundamentalist groups). I have friends who are graduate students in biblical studies and are in this boat. They are pushing the [...]

11 Comments

Dallas Seminary students speak out: "It's not so bad."

On my last post, I responded to Dan Wallace’s provocative entry on the Parchment and Pen blog. I admitted that I do indeed have this impression of Dallas Seminary that they are prohibited from engaging fully in honest academic inquiry because they are not allowed to “offend” the school’s doctrinal base with their research. I [...]

13 Comments

I Confess. I'm Biased Against Dallas Seminary.

But I’m open to being surprised! I am responding here to Dan Wallace and his challenge that the academy of biblical scholars are hostile towards his kind. That is, the conservative evangelical kind as represented at Dallas Seminary.
A few years ago, I went to a session at SBL which reviewed the inner workings of a [...]

26 Comments

Questioning Bart Ehrman's (Un)Faith?

It’s often stated that Bart Ehrman lost his faith because of his revelations in scholarship, particularly text critical work. For example, take a look at the quote from Daniel Wallace that I earlier referenced on this blog and to Craig Evans new book Fabricating Jesus (see pp. 25-31). In a recent interview with Biblical Archeology [...]

2 Comments

Pinnock on inerrancy: it's not biblical…

I was on a search for good quotes about inerrancy recently (something I’m trying to collect for this blog) and I came across a webpage claiming that the Evangelical Theological Society is in error for allowing Clark Pinnock to remain a member even though his writings showed that he does not hold up inerrancy. He [...]

2 Comments

Inerrancy is the slippery slope…

Daniel B. Wallace on inerrancy:
What I tell my students every year is that it is imperative that they pursue truth rather than protect their presuppositions. And they need to have a doctrinal taxonomy that distinguishes core beliefs from peripheral beliefs. When they place more peripheral doctrines such as inerrancy and verbal inspiration at the core, [...]

6 Comments