Content deleted Content added
→Theological criticism: Add Griffith. |
|||
Line 194:
''Theological criticism'' refers to criticisms which are that the Bible does not teach, or require, its own inerrancy.
Proponents of biblical inerrancy often prefer the translations of {{bibleverse|2|Timothy|3:16|9}} that render it as "all scripture is given by inspiration of God", and they interpret this to mean that the whole Bible is inerrant. However, critics of this doctrine think that the Bible makes no direct claim to be inerrant or infallible. [[C. H. Dodd]] argues the same sentence can also be translated "Every inspired scripture is also useful..." nor does the verse define the [[Biblical canon]].<ref>Dodd, C. H. ''The Authority of the Bible'', London, 1960. p. 25.</ref>
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>[Griffith, MT, ''Refuting the Critics: Evidences of the Book of Mormon's Authenticity'', Cedar Fort, 1993, p. 129. http://books.google.co.uk/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]</ref></blockquote>
So 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, page 1967, DLT 1994</ref>
However, there are indications that Paul's writings were being considered, at least by the author of the [[Second Epistle of Peter]], {{Bibleref2c|2Peter|3:16|9|2 Pet 3:16}} as comparable to the Old Testament.<ref>New Jerusalem Bible, page 2010, footnote (i) DLT 1985</ref>
The idea that the Bible contains no mistakes is mainly justified by appeal to [[prooftext]]s that refer to its divine inspiration. However, this argument has been criticized as [[circular reasoning]], because these statements only have to be accepted as true if the Bible is already thought to be inerrant. None of these texts say that because a text is inspired, it is therefore always correct in its historical statements.<ref>
| |||