[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: inerrancy vs. infallibility (no otr)

On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, J. Marie Hall wrote:

> > > . . . as for me and my house :), i'm goin' with infallibility even
> > > if i can't quite stand on inerrancy.
> >
> > Um, what's the distinction?
>
> let this be prefaced first with my soon-apparent lack of prime-time
> scholarly references.  :)

Okay.  :)

> okay, it has to do with the basis of our criteria.  according to our
> expectations of linear time and space (which i believe to be part of our
> limits etc.) and if/then requirements regarding morality, the christian
> bible may contain some "errors."  even those making cases that it never
> violates the law of non-contradiction would probably still render it
> possible that some "facts" are vague or incomplete given the
> expectations of our human understanding and logic.

Well, I happen to think the Bible *does* violate the law of
non-contradiction on occasion (e.g. the Synoptic gospels say Jesus was
crucified the day *after* Passover, and John says he was crucified the day
*of* Passover), so I'm happy to say that it contains some "errors".

> however, i still believe it is the _perfect_ word of god--that it's
> infallible.  though it may not fit into my understanding, the holy
> spirit confirms it.

But this just begs the question, *especially* if these terms are supposed
to be different from inerrancy -- what *is* perfection? what *is*
infallibility?

> it's even worse when it's just me and god regarding this question and
> the surrouding issues of just who's ultimately in charge.

Well, I think it's clear that God is ultimately in charge -- the question
is, Is the Bible a conduit for this control of his, and if so, how?

> and consider how it has made it to the present--all those who've died or
> been tortured to preserve it as well.  i think it's a miracle that we
> have it at all.

Given the sheer number of manuscripts out there, I find the existence of
the Bible less miraculous than the existence of, oh, the Annals of
Tacitus.  :)  And given the many variations -- most little, but a few
large -- between the biblical manuscripts, I'm not sure how "miraculous"
it really is that the Bible has come down to us.  We know that some
stories were either added to or subtracted from the books of the Bible
after they were written (otherwise, why would the passage we now know as
John 7:53-8:11 float around between four different places in the
manuscripts of Luke and John, assuming it appears *at all*?) -- so it
stands to reason that other bits may have been added or subtracted.  Was
the Holy Spirit "confirming" the "infallibility" of these passages, and if
so, how?  My point here is not to pick individual passages apart -- my
point is simply to underscore the fact that the Bible is not inherently
different from any other text when it comes to textual transmission.

--- Peter T. Chattaway --------------------------- peter at chattaway_com ---
 "I detected one misprint, but to torture you I will not tell you where."
      Winston Churchill to T.E. Lawrence, re Seven Pillars of Wisdom

---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/OtR/
References: