Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
Line 1:
{{About|the Christian doctrinal position|Jewish doctrinal positions|Rabbinic literature}}
{{distinguish|Biblical infallibility|Biblical literalism}}
{{Bible related}}
Line 9:
</ref>
Some equate ''inerrancy'' with ''[[biblical infallibility|infallibility]]''; others do not.<ref>McKim, DK, ''Westminster dictionary of theological terms'', Westminster John Knox Press, 1996.</ref><ref>Geisler, N. L. (ed), ''Inerrancy'', Zondervan, 1980, p. 22. "The trouble is that such a distinction is nowhere to be found in Jesus' own teaching, and seems to be precluded by His testimony both to the unqualified historical accuracy and the inspiration of the Old Testament ... The attempt to discriminate ... seems to be a product of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries".</ref>
Inerrancy has been much more of an issue in American evangelicalism than in British [[evangelicalism]].<ref>{{cite web|last1=Crisp|first1=Oliver D.|title=A British Perspective on Evangelicalism|url=https://fullermag.fuller.edu/british-perspective-evangelicalism/|website=Fuller Magazine|publisher=[[Fuller Theological Seminary]]|accessdate=18 April 2016}}</ref> According to Stephen R. Holmes, it "plays almost no role in British evangelical life".<ref>{{cite book|last1=Holmes|first1=Stephen R.|title=The Cambridge Companion to Evangelical Theology|chapter=British (and European) Evangelical Theologies|date=2007|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|page=254|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vlmXBe0RPxYC&pg=PA254|accessdate=18 April 2016}}</ref>
| |||