On Inerrancy
I respond to some discussion of the doctrine of biblical inerrancy on my Participatory Bible Study blog.
I respond to some discussion of the doctrine of biblical inerrancy on my Participatory Bible Study blog.
. . . at Thinking Christian.
. . . in which I respond to chapter 3. This response will be brief. This chapter is excellent. If you’re a Bible student of any variety, buy Misquoting Jesus and make sure to read chapter 3. While I have read many of the things presented here before in more technical works, this chapter is…
My sister e-mail me a link to this article on to me via e-mail. Pope Benedict XVI said the debate raging in some countries — particularly the United States and his native Germany — between creationism and evolution was an “absurdity,” saying that evolution can coexist with faith. The pontiff, speaking as he was concluding…
I’ve just run through another commentary on Daniel, in this case the Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 7, section on Daniel, by Gleason Archer. (See my notes on this commentary.) You can review my more detailed view in those notes, but I would simply state that this is one of two carefully conservative, scholarly commentaries on…
We like meaning and connections, and we’ll sometimes find them even when they’re not there. People who understand this can deceive you. The Improbability Principle from Neuroblogica is a very good summary of this.
The major complaint that I have about the treatment of the Bible in The God Delusion is that it is somewhat superficial. Particularly in the section on the Old Testament, Dawkins merely points out problems that we should recognize as real with scriptures. (For another approach see Who’s Afraid of the Old Testament God?.) I…