Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Yet Again on the Meaning of Inerrancy

    John Hobbins is again correcting the rest of us regarding the meaning of the word inerrancy. The interesting thing here is that I can affirm everything he says about inspiration in his post.

    He writes in opposition to the approach taken by by Michael Heiser and C. Michael Patton, each of whom have written posts regarding how to deal with errors in the Bible.

    Now I’m going to be brief (don’t laugh!). Michael Heiser and C. Michael Patton aren’t idiots. I don’t mean here to imply that John Hobbins says they are. But a point I have made previously about inerrancy in response to John is that the common usage of the word “inerrancy” does not agree with the way John uses it.

    That doesn’t make Heiser and Patton more right about the inerrancy of scripture, but my observation is that their view accords with the more common understanding of what inerrancy means. Maybe people ought to mean something different, but they don’t. But I’m of the school of thought that suggests the meaning of words is to be determined by their usage, and by that standard, calling Hobbins’ view “inerrancy” is misleading. Most readers, at least non-academic readers, will understanding him to believe something different than he does.

    People in the pews tend to believe someone who claims to accept biblical inerrancy would be concerned with discussing whether Jacob bought or conquered Shechem (as Heiser does), or the details of gospel stories (as Patton does).

    But Hobbins says:

    Now, if you believe that it is part of the Holy Spirit’s teaching office to reveal to us that Jesus (say) healed two blind men at Jericho, not one; that Jacob (say) bought Shechem and then conquered it at a later time, you are claiming that the Holy Spirit speaks, not through Scripture, but through harmonizing exegetes. I oppose such outlandish claims.

    But if I ignore the vocabulary, I find I can affirm, indeed that I really like many of the phrases that Hobbins uses in regard to scripture and inspiration. I like to say that when we discover the message God has for us in scripture (always through the power of the Spirit), it is always true. Recently I have had to add the affirmation that we can discover that message. We have no need to walk in darkness.

    So why not use another term, such as simply stating that one has a high view of scripture?

  • The Biblioblog Top 50 for June

    . . . finds me at #27, which is actually surprisingly good considering that I only wrote one blog post during June. My excuse is that I was working on half a dozen book releases for my company, two of which will actually take place in July.

    As for the great controversy about the library, I would note that if one puts complete posts in one’s RSS feed, as I do, one must expect to lose some page views. You can follow my blog via Good Reader and never actually look over here at all. At the same time, I’m glad the discussion resulted in direct links to posts, which is a requirement for collating content.

     

  • Early Internet (or not) Experiences

    Ed Brayton brought back memories talking about how he first got online. I first encountered Ed on the Compuserve Religion Forum, and since then I have enjoyed reading his blog, Dispatches from the Culture Wars and The Panda’s Thumb, of which he was a founder. We have another connection, in that he is co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science, and I’m a founding member and board member of Florida Citizens for Science.

    I first got online using a Sharp PC-1500 with a Radio shack RS232 port attached, and I believe it was at 150 bpsbaud, though I don’t remember very clearly. That was in the early 80s. The experience was not all that exciting except for the fact that I did get logged in. I went on to get involved just a bit with FidoNet, and operated The Wind Dragon Inn in Bellevue, NE. I had a 20 MB hard drive, a 1200 baudbps modem and I thought I was pretty wonderful.

    It was a few years before I expanded to the Religion Forum which was where I first encountered Ed. But I think I’m dating myself. (Also corrected my misuse of baud and bps.)

    Enhanced by Zemanta
  • Losing the War on Drugs

    Various prescription and street drugs may caus...
    Image via Wikipedia

    There’s a stereotype of opponents of our current drug laws that suggests such people just want to light up a joint – legally. That’s not very accurate. I personally don’t even use alcohol, and I rarely use over-the-counter, completely non-addictive pain killers. I’m leery about legalization, but I certainly think we need substantial reforms in the direction of education and rehabilitation as opposed to the current criminal penalties, especially for use and for non-violent offenders.

    I’ve been sitting on this article by Jimmy Carter for some time. He comments on the Global Commission on Drug Policy, which itself includes some notable people. These aren’t folks who want to use drugs legally, and thus want to remove inconvenient laws. They are people who recognize the damage inflicted on people by the drug war itself.

    I have not studied this issue enough myself to make specific recommendations. I believe I have followed it enough to realize that we are not making real progress.

    When what we’re already doing isn’t working, it’s time to get serious about finding the alternatives. Aiming at reducing the demand seems a sensible general approach.

    Enhanced by Zemanta
  • Addicted to Arguing?

    Yes, that might be me! Peter Laarman at RD Magazine says many in American protestantism are addicted to arguing, and need to learn that arguments don’t win people over–contact with people and sharing of stories does it. He titles his piece Why Liberal Religious Arguments Fail, but while I’m well aware of many liberal examples, I think there are plenty on the conservative side of he spectrum as well.

    I must temper my support for his position by noting that I recall quite a number of my own positions that I changed due to listening to arguments against the position I held before. People differ from one another on this as well.

     

  • Error Overload

    Ken Schenck has published another find the errors audio. This is really an amazing piece of interpretation and is well worth listening to, just because you might not believe anyone would do it if you don’t hear it for yourself.

    It needs no comment beyond what Ken already posted. Note that errors can be committed more than once …

  • On Camping: Do Errors Result from Lack of Theological Education?

    Dr. W. Robert Godfrey, president of Westminster Seminary California, says that it does, according to the Christian Post. Dr. Godfrey, who was in the youth group taught by Camping at Alameda Christian Reformed Church, says that Camping reads the Bible like an engineer, lacks knowledge of the original languages, and doesn’t know how to read literature, especially ancient literature.

    I would have to disagree–with the conclusion, not the facts. Indeed Camping does not read Greek and Hebrew, lacks formal training and theology, and to some extent reads the Bible like an engineer. On the last point it seems to me that a competent engineer should be able to discern when he is not reading an engineering text, i.e., the pieces just don’t fit together as and engineer would expect them to. There’s something else going on that causes him to force the Bible to fit a certain mold.

    I’d suggest it’s a combination of a belief in inspiration–a high view of scripture, in fact–combined with a 20th century modernism in which scientific, mathematically precise knowledge is the best kind of knowledge there is. The Bible is the best book, so it must produce the best kind of knowledge. With that mindset carried to its extreme, the Bible must produce the kind of information Camping extracts from it. If it didn’t, it couldn’t be inspired, an unthinkable result.

    As I noted earlier with regard to time setting, though Camping carries this to extremes, other interpreters are guilty of similar errors, such as trying to force biblical texts to produce advanced scientific knowledge they were never intended to convey. Dissatisfied with the spiritual message of the Bible–challenging enough in itself!–they search for “better” knowledge.

    But are Camping’s errors the result of a lack of formal education? Certainly he makes calculations that seem nonsensical to those who read the Bible in its original languages with knowledge of its historical and literary context. So yes, there are errors that result from a lack of knowledge. But one can find plenty of errors committed by people with doctoral degrees as well. Different errors, yes, but still errors.

    I think the headline (both mine and the one at the Christian Post) does a disservice to what Dr. Godfrey said. He comments later in the article that Camping “refused to learn from Bible scholars” and adopted a “proud individualism.” I’d say that a refusal to learn from others, not just from Bible scholars, would be the most basic problem.

    There are plenty of sources from which one can get historical and literary information about the Bible. Doubtless such information was available to Camping. Yet he did not submit his work to testing and critique by others and listen to what they had to say.

    In the participatory study method (described in my book Learning and Living Scripture, co-authored with Geoffrey Lentz), the final step in Bible study is sharing. By sharing, Geoffrey and I do not mean going out and letting everyone know what brilliant insights you have gained from your study. Rather,

    You do this both to give others the benefit of what you have learned and to benefit from their comments and perhaps corrections.

    As you study and question, find something to share. Remember that sharing can be in the form of a question. For example, one might ask others how they understand a particular word, such as “incarnation,” “poverty,” or “atonement.” Take notes on their answers, and bring that information back to your study.

    Then ask yourself what your neighbors will hear when you make particular statements, such as “I must be bold for Jesus!” or “Jesus is the only way to receive atonement.” Do those statements mean something to them? Do they mean the same thing to them as they do to you?

    This is part of contemplatio, as you try to be and do the text. We often think of sharing primarily as telling someone things that we have learned. But if what you learned is that God loves prisoners, for example, you might find that the best way of sharing that lesson is to become active in prison ministry.

    Sharing demonstrates that you don’t believe the text is your private possession. It is God’s gift to the Christian community (p. 14, emphasis added).

    Whether you lack a high school diploma or have multiple PhDs, humility, and teachability, is your best protection from getting stuck in error(s).

     

    Enhanced by Zemanta