Content deleted Content added
Theogogian (talk | contribs) |
Theogogian (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 77:
The [[Christian humanism|Christian humanist]] and one of the leading scholars of the [[northern Renaissance]], [[Erasmus]] (1466–1536), was also unconcerned with minor errors not impacting theology, and at one point, thought that Matthew mistook one word for another. In a letter to [[Johannes Eck]], Erasmus wrote that "Nor, in my view, would the authority of the whole of Scripture be instantly imperiled, as you suggest, if an evangelist by a slip of memory did put one name for another, Isaiah for instance instead of Jeremiah, for this is not a point on which anything turns."<ref name="wood" />
The same point of view held true for [[John Calvin]] (1509–1564), who wrote that "It is well known that the Evangelists were not very concerned with observing the time sequences."<ref name="hendel" /> However, Calvin also said that Scripture is the "certain and unerring rule."<ref name=Geisler>Geisler, Norman L. ''Decide for Yourself: How History Views the Bible'', Zondervan 1982, 45-48. </ref> Calvin scholars are divided on whether Calvin actually held to inerrancy or not. Some scholars such as [[Jack
The doctrine of inerrancy, however, began to develop as a response to these Protestant attitudes. Whereas the [[Council of Trent]] only held that the Bible's authority was "in matters of faith and morales", [[Jesuit]] [[Cardinal (Catholic Church)|cardinal]] [[Robert Bellarmine]] (1542–1621) argued in his 1586 {{lang|la|De verbo Dei}}, the first volume of his multi-volume {{lang|la|Disputationes de controversiis christianae fidei adversus hujus temporis haereticos}} that "There can be no error in Scripture, whether it deals with faith or whether it deals with morals/mores, or whether it states something general and common to the whole Church, or something particular and pertaining to only one person." Bellarmine's views were extremely important in his condemnation of Galileo and in Catholic–Protestant debate, as the Protestant response was to also affirm his heightened understanding of inerrancy.<ref name="hendel" />
| |||