From: dlhpfm!dlh@ncoast.org (daniel lance herrick)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Inerrancy _ Jere 36
Date: 18 Aug 92 05:47:08 GMT
Reply-To: ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com
Organization: dlh Performance Marketing


 REXLEX@linac.fnal.gov

>In article <Aug.10.05.03.59.1992.16773@dartagnan.rutgers.edu>

[Many words debating inerrancy]

> Thus, Rexlex relies on the canons of archeology to buttress his
> apologetic for inerrancy. We have no reason to believe, though, that
> the knowledgeable moderator will be convinced by such data.

> Moreover, the definition of inerrancy employed by Rexlex is quite
> novel. It bespeaks an Enlightenment-induced understanding of truth.
> To subject God and his revelation to modern "scientific" standards
> of accuracy is like examining the sun with a candle. We do not
> defend the Scripture because it seems to conform to a scientific
> understanding of accuracy. The Bible is impeccably accurate because
> it is divinely inspired; it is not divinely inspired because it is
> accurate. The Scripures must be defended on the grounds that they
> are God's impeccable propositional revelation which sinful man
> rejects in his rebellion.

clh> I don't find discussions useful because I don't see anything on which
clh> to base them.  The arguments seem to me to be materializing rabbits
clh> out of thin air on every side.  

This somewhat betrays the whole problem behind modern Christian understanding
of Scripture and authority.  People are forced to defend Scripture on the basis
of archaeology, hermeneutics, textual criticism, etc.

The fact is, there is only one reason that Scripture is inerrant.

The Church declared it the inerrant and inspired written Word of God around 425
A.D.  The inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture is not based on the fact that
it's "inspirational", or because "it says it's inspired" (because while it may
say that Scripture is inspired, it does not reveal what books comprise
Scripture, and you can't accept that Scripture is inspired by the testimony of
scripture until deterimine that Scripture is accurate testimony), or for any of
those various reasons.  The truth of the inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture
is based on the authority of the Church to declare them as such.  Without such
an external authority, there is no way to validate the authority of Scripture.
How do we trust the authority of the Church? Because Christ founded it and gave
it the authority to make such decisions.  Jude 3 says that the faith was "once
for all entrusted to the saints", that is, the Church.

For me, there the argument ends.  Anything else, as clh says, is pulling
rabbits out of thin air.

Eric
--
/=============================================================================\
| Eric Ewanco - Software Engineer     For the rash and outrageous opinions ex-|
| Digital Equipment Corp, Maynard MA  pressed herein I alone am responsible;  |
| ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com          they do not belong to DIGITAL(TM).      |
\==============================- 2 Th 2:15 -==================================/
    "...[T]he greatest and most ancient Church known to all, founded and
    organized at Rome by [] Peter and Paul, [is] that Church which has the
    tradition and faith which comes down to us after having been announced
    to men by the Apostles.  For with this Church, because of its superior
    origin, all Churches must agree ...  and it is in her that the
    faithful everywhere have maintained the Apostolic tradition."
       -- St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, c. 180 A.D., 3,3,3.


[I'd be interested in more information on this decision in 425.  My
best information is that the critical decisions were made by 382.
However I think you need to be a careful the way you describe these
decisions, or you're going to play into the hands of the folks who say
that Biblical authority is completely arbitrary, because it was just a
few people at a meeting deciding by majority vote.  I'm quite sure
that anyone involved in such meetings would have said that they were
simply endorsing ideas that were already accepted by the church as a
whole.  Thus they were recognizing the authority of the Bible, not
creating it.  You can find the critical parts of Scripture being
quoted as authoritative as far back as we can go in church history.
I'd also be surprised to find any votes in either 382 or 425 on
inerrancy as the issue is currently formulated.  --clh]