Biblical Inerrancy- Your thoughts

Eager to see both sides on the issue of Biblical Inerrancy. I am trying to find audio of anyone who has taught on that subject so if you know of any please e-mail me! Thanks

You might want to check out an audio series by Steve Gregg called "Authority Of The Scriptures." This 16 part series can be found at www.thenarrowpath.com under the "Tape Download Page." Hope this helps. And - by the way - welcome to the forum.

Awesome! This was just what i was looking for and more! Thanks so much for your input and welcoming me! If anyone else has anything they think is worth sharing then go for it! God Bless!

Great to see this topic raised here. When you have listened, come back and we can talk! :-D This is probably a 'bit over the top' to where you are at in your thinking but others might like to read THE CHICAGO STATEMENT ON BIBLICAL INERRANCY

Dear Ron, this is a must read!Thank you so much, Oh there is much, much more to be said ;-)

Mikeymcdee,Great question! I would definately suggest the link to the The Chicago statement given by philologos previously. Also consider the fact that if all scripture is not God breathed then how do we know what is? To reject some of the Bible is to reject all of the Bible. If we pick and choose what parts to believe it becomes a work of man, not the Word of God. If the Bible were not God's word than I would have no reason to be a Christian because without the Bible there is no Christianity, just the traditions of men. Take any scripture out of the Bible and say it shouldn't be there and then suddenly there is no absolute truth and without truth we cannot have an accurate grasp of reality.

but nevertheless find Truth in the New Testament revelation of God's love for all through the teachings and sacrifice of Jesus Christ.Hi Jake,Pardon me if you have answered this before, but do you believe in the Great White Throne Judgment? If yes, do you believe that those whose name is not written in the Lambs Book of Life will be cast into the Lake of Fire?

Pick and choose?????!!!! Using the brains God gave us must be a sin, then.Yes it is, if you use them to defy what God has said. Your brain is not the ultimate judge, but must itself be judged by the ultimate Judge.

Eager to see both sides on the issue of Biblical Inerrancy.It's funny, but biblical infallibility and inerrancy are so foundational that even the "nuetral" wording of this question bothers me. It's like saying we want to consider both sides of the diety of Christ or the authenticity of His ressurection. I don't want to sound anti-intellectual but doubting the divine provision in scriptures is the proto-error for every form of apostasy ever concieved. (I'm not assuming that you are on this vector...just commenting on the nuetrality of your question.)If your research on this topic could benifit from some historical context you might look into the Downgrade Controversy that started in England during the 19th century. (...and never seems to have ended.)The history of this incident shows what happens when strong churches begin to allow biblical revelation and theology to be challenged by so-called empirical knowledge and natural theology. They "down-grade":)I like Spurgeon's perspective on the scientific skeptiscism that leaks into our churches. "...the new views are not the old truth in a better dress, but deadly errors with which we can have no fellowship. I regard full-grown 'modern thought' as a totally new cult ..." Here is an exerpt from a Shindler and Spurgeon article during the Downgrade Controversy."The first step astray is a want of adequate faith in the divine inspiration of the sacred Scriptures. All the while a man bows to the authority of God's Word, he will not entertain any sentiment contrary to its teaching. "To the law and to the testimony," is his appeal concerning every doctrine. He esteems that holy Book, concerning all things, to be right, and therefore he hates every false way. But let a man question, or entertain low views of the inspiration and authority of the Bible, and he is without chart to guide him, and without anchor to hold him.In looking carefully over the history of the times, and the movement of the times, of which we have written briefly, this fact is apparent: that where ministers and Christian churches have held fast to the truth that the Holy Scriptures have been given by God as an authoritative and infallible rule of faith and practice, they have never wandered very seriously out of the right way. But when, on the other hand, reason has been exalted above revelation, and made the exponent of revelation, all kinds of errors and mischiefs have been the result."Blessings,MC

When someone tells me the Grand Canyon was carved out after Noah's flood and not the Colorado river over millions of years, I know that I am not dealing with a reasonable person;I have seen the Grand Canyon from both north and south rim and wonder how the Colorado river could have even done such a thing. Why is not a canyon carved by the Mississippi or Missouri rivers? When people deny their reasoning ability and put literal interpretations of the Scriptures above clear scientific discovery and knowledge THAT is an insult to God.Scientist's change their opinions like socks. Darwin is the voice of ignorance and deception the likes of which have never been seen in human history. His falsehood has been a miasma of lies. The fossil record refutes his theory hands down. And natural selection could not possibly account for the infinite complexity of the creation. I have no confidence in a scientist who is willing to look at the evidence and still believe time + chance is the creator. The universe is winding down- not up. The time would fail me to level the doctrine of evolution into nothing. The only way to butruss it is in the courts. I suggest Behe's "Darwin's Black Box" for those who have not read it. It is a good introduction to these things.

God gave us reasoning ability and we should use it. When people deny their reasoning ability and put literal interpretations of the Scriptures above clear scientific discovery and knowledge THAT is an insult to God. When someone tells me the Grand Canyon was carved out after Noah's flood and not the Colorado river over millions of years, I know that I am not dealing with a reasonable person; I'm dealing with someone completely deluded. SOmeone deceiving themselves and others.When people, professing to be spiritual, put their own reason ahead of the revelation of the word of God, that is an insult to God. When someone tells me that his own inner light is more reliable than the testimony of God in the scripture, I know that I am not dealing with a man of faith. I am dealing with someone who is totally earth-bound. Someone who has deluded himself and now wants to delude others.You don't have to change many words to see why you and I will never have any agreement.

One curiousity though. The vast majority of the scientific community including physicians believe in the workings of evolution. This same scientific community produces our medicines, space flight, hubble telescope, and in general has established a base line of information for understanding of our world and universe. We trust these scientists to get things right and, in general, they do. Why is evolution the only theory you contend with?This question shows how thoroughly you misunderstand the scientific process and method. All the other 'theories' are demonstrably true. By definition, it is impossible to prove that 'darwinian evolution is true'. It is not possible to subject the hypothesis to any scientific test. That is why consistent scientists admit that it is a hypothesis.

Why is evolution the only theory you contend with? YOu don't dispute gravity or the speed of light or the revolution of the planets around the sun or the mechanics of our physiology or the basis of biology. Why dispute this one particular thing? Because it collides with your interpretation of the Bible.Evolution is the preferred religious philosophy of the public school system that reigns unthwarted. It is the reference point from which scientific determinations are made. If the reference point is off- the whole structure will be off. Behe uses the analogy of a mousetrap to prove his point. He shows that a mousetrap has a certain number of components that must exist or the trap cannot function. Take away ANY of the basic components and the machine breaks down. Cells also have a certain number of components that MUST be in place or the machine breaks down. Unless ALL of these components leap into existence at once their is no possibility of life to exist. This is known as irreducable complexity. When the machine is reduced past a certain number of necessary components- it ceases to function. Case in point- if you go out to your car tonight and pull out the ignition system it will not start (unless it is a diesel engine). So in order for your engine to work it must have 3 things:1) Fuel2) Compression3) IgnitionIf any of these are missing or somehow impared you will not start the engine. Now imagine how complex the human body is. It staggers the mind just to try to think about it. What about trees? What about flowers? And a host of millions of other living organisms that have unique characteristics. every one of them has irreducable complexity. even systems within the body are irreducably complex. Take away one component from your blood stream and your blood will not clot and you will bleed to death. Many other like things far too numerous to mention.

Life evolving on earth was rigged by God from the beginning. Thousands of comets, which are made of ice and dust, deposited water on earth during the bombardment. The other basic constitutents of living things -- complex carbon molecules -- arrived on the tails of these comets. Add lightening as a catalyst and there you go.Far from being improbable, the evolution of life on earth was a foregone conclusion.Where are the transitional forms? If this is true they would be in as great of abundance as any other common fossil. Yet, Stephen J. Gould admitted that they were not there and made up the theory punctuated equilibria. His theory states that forms went through RADICAL transitions in one generation or so. Personally, I don't have enough faith to believe those theories.

Life evolving on earth was rigged by God from the beginning.Now, Jake, you are either a Darwinian evolutionist or you are not, but you can't have random mutations and the survival of the fittest and an 'earth rigged by God from the beginning'. Time to make your mind up? You can't put 'random mutations' and 'rigged by God into the same sentence'.