Content deleted Content added
→Theological criticism: Not a definition of Theological criticism. Clarify. |
→Theological criticism: Clarify ce. |
||
Line 192:
=== Theological criticism ===
Proponents of biblical inerrancy often cite {{bibleverse|2|Timothy|3:16|9}} as evidence that
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>[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 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, page 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>[http://www.veritasbible.com/resources/sacred_scripture_shortcuts/categories/Scripture+%26+Tradition/Sacred+Tradition#906-profitable--i-e---ot-is-useful-- ''Veritas Bible'' Sacred
The
▲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>
Holman Bible Editorial, ''If God Made the Universe, Who Made God?: 130 Arguments for Christian Faith'', B&H Publishing Group, 2012, p. 51.</ref>
| |||