Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Alter: title, isbn, template type. Added publisher. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Abductive | Category:Articles with limited geographic scope from June 2024 | #UCB_Category 46/52 |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 6:
'''Biblical inerrancy''' is the [[belief]] that the [[Bible]] "is without error or fault in all its teaching";<ref>Geisler, NL. and Roach, B., ''Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy of Scripture for a New Generation, Baker Books, 2012.</ref> or, at least, that "Scripture in the original [[manuscript]]s does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact".<ref name="Grudem90">{{Cite book |first=Wayne A. |last=Grudem |author-link=Wayne Grudem |title=Systematic theology: an introduction to biblical doctrine |publisher=[[Inter-Varsity Press]] |location=[[Leicester]]|year=1994|page=90 |isbn=978-0-85110-652-6 |oclc=29952151}}</ref> Some equate inerrancy with [[biblical infallibility]]; others do not.<ref name="McKim, DK 1996">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's 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>
The belief in Biblical inerrancy is of particular significance within parts of [[evangelicalism]], where it is formulated in the "[[Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy]]". Inerrancy has been much more of an issue in [[Evangelicalism in the United States|American evangelicalism]] than in [[Evangelicalism#Great Britain|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]] |access-date=18 April 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160328014642/https://fullermag.fuller.edu/british-perspective-evangelicalism/ |archive-date=2016-03-28 |url-status=dead}}</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 |isbn=9781139827508 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vlmXBe0RPxYC&pg=PA254 |access-date=18 April 2016}}</ref>{{Globalize inline|date=June 2024}}
The [[Catholic Church]] also holds belief in biblical inerrancy. The "doctrine of the inerrancy of scripture",<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.scotthahn.com/download/attachment/2516|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120508175506/http://www.scotthahn.com/download/attachment/2516|url-status= dead|title=Cardinal Augustin Bea, "Vatican II and the Truth of Sacred Scripture"|archivedate=May 8, 2012}}</ref>
== Terms and positions ==
Line 247:
=====Michael Licona=====
In 2010, [[Michael Licona]] published a book defending the resurrection of Jesus called, ''The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach''. In one part of the book, Licona raised questions about the literal interpretation of the resurrection of the saints in Matthew 27:51-53. He suggests the passage of scripture is an apocalyptic genre.<ref name=licona>Licona, Michael. ''The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach'', Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010. 34.</ref> Scholars such as Norman Geisler accused Licona of denying the full inerrancy of the Bible in general and the Gospel narratives in particular.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Christopher |title=Mike Licona on Inerrancy:
== Modern Catholic discussion ==
=== Before Vatican II ===
[[St. John Henry Newman]], writing in 1884, acknowledged the "human side" of biblical inspiration which "manifests itself in language, style, tone of thought, character, intellectual peculiarities, and such infirmities, not sinful, as belong to our nature, and which in unimportant matters may issue in what in doctrinal definitions is called an obiter dictum (said in passing).” In this view, the Bible contains many statements of a historical nature that have no salvific content in themselves and so need not be inerrant.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://wherepeteris.com/biblical-inerrancy-for-catholics-dei-verbum-chapter-3/|title=Biblical inerrancy for Catholics: Dei Verbum, chapter 3}}</ref> Often called the “absent father of Vatican II” (absent because he died 72 years before it began), the wording of [[Dei Verbum]] recalls Newman’s position. The theologians who wrote it knew and positively appreciated his views.<ref>Juan Velez Giraldo, “Newman’s Influence on Vatican II’s Constitution Dei Verbum,” Scripta Theologica 51 (2019): 711-40</ref>
Pope [[Leo XIII]], in his 1893 encyclical {{lang|la|[[Providentissimus Deus]]}}, addressed attacks on the inerrancy of the Bible regarding descriptions of physical phenomena.<ref name=":0" /> He explained that descriptions of physical events in the Bible are meant to manifest religious truths, and not to describe the physical events themselves.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Belmonte |first=Charles |url=https://fsubelmonte.weebly.com/uploads/1/9/7/1/19715887/fsu1.pdf |title=Faith Seeking Understanding |publisher=Studium Theologiae Foundation, Inc. |year=2006 |isbn=971-91060-4-2 |editor-last=Belmonte |editor-first=Charles |edition=2nd |volume=I |location=Mandaluyong, Metro Manila, Philippines |pages=122–123 |access-date=May 17, 2023}}</ref> He also explained that the inspiration that the Holy Spirit gave to the hagiographers did not extend to the explanations of natural phenomena; hence, the hagiographers wrote about natural phenomena as they were commonly observed and in terms of everyday language.<ref name=":0" /> He also explained that the hagiographers sometimes described natural phenomena using metaphors.<ref name=":0" /> He also explained that there could not be real conflict between biblical descriptions of natural phenomena and science, because the hagiographers did not intend to describe natural phenomena scientifically, and because God is the author of the Bible.<ref name=":0" />
Line 287 ⟶ 289:
These views are shared by many Church officials and as a result are taken for granted in some Church documents. For instance:
* An official report (1999) on theological conversations between the [[US Conference of Catholic Bishops]] and the [[Southern Baptist Convention]], to be found on the website of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops:<ref>{{Cite web |date=September 10, 1999 |title=Report on Sacred Scripture |url=https://www.usccb.org/resources/Report-on-Sacred-Scripture.pdf |website=United States Conference of Catholic Bishops}}</ref>{{pb}}{{blockquote|For Roman Catholics, inerrancy is understood as a consequence of biblical inspiration; it has to do more with the truth of the Bible as a whole than with any theory of verbal inerrancy. Vatican II says that "the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching firmly, faithfully, and without error that truth which God wanted put into the sacred writings for the sake of our salvation" (Dei verbum 11). What is important is the qualification of "that truth" with "for the sake of our salvation."}}
* A 2005 "teaching document" issued by the Bishops' Conferences of England and Wales, and of Scotland, entitled ''The Gift of Scripture'':<ref>{{Cite
* The {{lang|la|instrumentum laboris}} (working paper) for the 2008 Synod of Bishops on the Word of God:<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20080511_instrlabor-xii-assembly_en.html|title = The Word of God in the life and mission of the Church}}</ref>{{pb}}{{blockquote|15.{{nbsp}}[...] even though all parts of Sacred Scripture are divinely inspired, inerrancy applies only to 'that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation" (DV 11).{{efn|The English translation on the Vatican website has been corrected here to bring it in line with the official Latin text: {{lang|la|"quamvis omnes Sacrae Scripturae partes divinitus inspiratae sint, tamen eius inerrantia pertinet tantummodo ad «veritatem, quam Deus nostrae salutis causa Litteris Sacris consignari voluit»}} (DV 11)"}}}}
| |||