Quote:
Originally Posted by awareness
Then why this thread?
|
The inerrancy debate is not about whether the Bible is the word of God. It is about what the Bible actually claims about itself and about what we accept as being a metaphorical telling of certain things that would truly require a textbook to tell in accurate detail.
The Bible is the revelation of God. Whether it is textbook accurate on how creation occurred does not really reveal anything about God other than his desire to communicate about himself (and not about the details of creation). We learn about God as it is told. We are saved from the distraction of all the details. It is clear that it all fits together well. Describing how DNA makes it happen and even allows for ongoing slight changes is just TMI. Especially for a nomadic race of people who don't understand most of what we know as physics and biology.
And since God is living outside of our physical limitations, some of the descriptions can only be "like" something else that we kind of understand, so the metaphor is commonly used.
But when people start harping over the precise translation of a certain Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic word, they are missing the point. And when they think that slight variations in the manuscripts that have survived means we don't know which is right and which is wrong, they again are missing the point. When they translate the whole that is there, is there really any notable difference in the picture painted? Only if you are so focused on the slight variation in color at the microscopic level while you miss that the picture of the whole tree, or rather the whole forest is essentially unaffected.
As someone mentioned (and quoted) there is the reference to those who are busy haggling over words rather than the Bible. They would rather waste their resources saying things like "there can only be one life-giving spirit." But that is so stupid. Jesus gives life and he is spirit. How do we know this? Because God is spirit. Therefore Jesus is (now) spirit. And of course the Spirit is spirit. The difference is that the mention of "spirit" in 1 Cor 15 is not a mention of "Spirit" but of "spirit." There is only one Spirit. But all three of the Godhead are "spirit." But a guy haggling over words would argue differently. And in today's discussion would insist that it must be that way due to "inerrancy."
Inerrancy is a human concept that sounds both viable and necessary. But it is not. The Bible stands as the accurate and true word of God without achieving the level of "inerrancy" that those who use the word mean (and want).
So that is why this thread exists. But it exists without debating the very concept that the scripture is the word of God. Of course, to those who argue for inerrancy, they believe that failing to be inerrant is to fail to be the word of God. Their faith is built on something less than Jesus blood and righteousness.