Content deleted Content added
Rescuing 2 sources and tagging 0 as dead. #IABot (v2.0beta8) |
|||
Line 168:
In addition, [[Michael T. Griffith]], the [[Mormon]] apologist, writes<blockquote>Nowhere within its pages does the Bible teach or logically imply the doctrine of scriptural inerrancy. [Concerning] 2 Timothy 3:16 ... this passage merely says that "all scripture" is profitable for doctrine, reproof, etc. It says nothing about scripture being "perfect," or "inerrant," or "infallible," or "all-sufficient." If anything, Paul's words constitute a refutation of the idea of scriptural inerrancy ... What it does say is that scripture is useful, profitable, for the needs Of the pastoral ministry. The only "holy scriptures" Timothy could have known from childhood were the Hebrew scriptures, the Old Testament. And yet, would any Christian assert that in Paul's view the Old Testament was the final and complete word of God to man? Of course not. In any event, verse 15 makes it clear that in speaking of "all scripture" Paul was referring to the Jewish scriptures and perhaps to some of his own epistles. The New Testament as we know it simply did not exist yet. Furthermore, it is fairly certain that Paul's canon included some Jewish scriptures which are no longer found in the Old Testament, such as the [[book of Enoch]].<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=qOR8QDixIjcC&pg=PA113&dq=2+timothy+3:16+critic&hl=en&sa=X&ei=inG2U4HpEoHqPIa_gJAJ&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=2%20timothy%203%3A16%20critic&f=false Griffith, MT, ''Refuting the Critics: Evidences of the Book of Mormon's Authenticity'', Cedar Fort, 1993, p. 129.]</ref></blockquote>
The Catholic [[New Jerusalem Bible]] also has a note that this passage refers only to the Old Testament writings understood to be scripture at the time it was written.<ref>New Jerusalem Bible, study edition, p. 1967, DLT 1994</ref> Furthermore, the Catholic Veritas Bible website notes that "Rather than characterizing the Old Testament scriptures as required reading, Paul is simply promoting them as something useful or advantageous to learn. ... it falls far short of a salvational requirement or theological system. Moreover, the four purposes (to teach, correct, etc.) for which scripture is declared to be "profitable" are solely the functions of the ministry. After all, Paul is addressing one of his new bishops (the "man of God"). Not a word addresses the use of scripture by the laity."<ref>
The view that biblical inerrancy can be justified by an appeal to [[prooftext]]s that refer to its divine inspiration has been criticized as [[circular reasoning]], because these statements are only considered to be true if the Bible is already thought to be inerrant.<ref>
Line 254:
'''Critical '''
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20061009225511/http://www.quodlibet.net/perry-inerrancy.shtml Dissolving the Inerrancy Debate (a postmodern view)]
* [http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1992/4/4evide92.html Bible Inerrancy: A Belief Without Evidence] [[Farrell Till]]'s rebuttal to Dave Miller's defense (see above)
* [http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/prism.php?id=73 Isaac Newton's Views on the Corruption of Scripture]
| |||