Content deleted Content added
added a bit - citation to follow |
added citations |
||
Line 11:
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> Biblical inerrancy should not be confused with [[biblical literalism]].
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>
There are a minority of biblical inerrantists who go further than the "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy", arguing that the original text has been perfectly preserved and passed down through time. This is sometimes called [[Textus Receptus]] Onlyism, as it is believed the Greek text by this name (Latin for received text) is a perfect and inspired copy of the original and supersedes earlier manuscript copies. This position is based on the idea that only the original language God spoke in is inspired, and that God was pleased to preserve that text throughout history by the hands of various scribes and copyists. There are others who not only believe the original text has been supernaturally preserved without error in its copies, but that the English translation made from that supposed perfect manuscript was also supernaturally composed. This position is known by its opponents as [[King James Only movement|King James Onlyism]] or KJV Onlyism. One of its most vocal, prominent and thorough proponents is [[Peter Ruckman]]. His followers are generally known as Ruckmanites. He is generally considered by many to hold the most extreme form of this position. Ultimately both positions suffer from the same historical and textual problems, but KJV Onlyism adds another layer of difficulty to overcome.
| |||