BioLogos and Inerrancy?

Have read it now, and by and large jolly good too. It goes a long way to show why so much heat is generated in science-faith in US Evangelicalism. Probably explains some misunderstandings when us non-Americans defend inerrancy - we just haven’t been exposed to institutionalised grammatical-historical literalism so much (did I spell that right?).

The Chicago Statement (particulary the hermeneutic one Richard quoted) seems to have been an open invitation to throw babies out with bathwater.:unamused:

1 Like

Jay, where do you look for substantiation for the claim the Scriptures are God-breathed? Why, to the Scriptures themselves of course! I consider the Scriptures valuable, but I use a different source of affirmation: How well do the Scriptural lessons work for me when I put them into practice? That’s why I do not judge a Biblical verse by: Is it true or false? But rather, how well does it work for me in my life today?
Al Leo

Jay,

Yes, I was mistaken in my previous post. The statements were formed by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy and that was what disbanded in 1986 (or so). The Evangelical Theological Society uses the CSBI as it’s guiding definition of inerrancy and it must be affirmed for membership, as is stated in my paper. Thanks for alerting me to that error.

I am sure that you have read the “God made Eve from Adam’s side to be beside him…” Which is sort of cutesy, but probably not what you are looking for. It is interesting as a physician how often I get asked if women have one more rib than men because of those verses. People are often disappointed to hear that there is no difference!
Regarding misogyny, I am also sort of amused by how the verse describing man’s dominion over woman is ignored as being part of the curse of sin by many…

Dante led everyone astray on that point

But so few people try them out that we have little evidence of their effectiveness! (Only sort of joking.)

Chesterton’s famous quote: ‘The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.’

Yes, thanks for the more direct link. And in case you didn’t see my latest response to Jay, I was mistaken about who disbanded after the last statement was finished. It was the umbrella group of scholars which formulated the statements, the International Conference on Biblical Inerrancy, and not the Evangelical Theological Society.

Pragmatism, then.

Of course. To validate my highest authority through the use of any lesser authority would be to make my highest authority lesser. The Scriptures alone prove the Scriptures, because only Scripture is God speaking to us.

Your are pulling my leg of course. (?) (?)
Al Leo

1 Like

In general it is forced labor/involuntary servitude. There are different degrees of it.

Ok, so which passages in the Law of Moses say you’re allowed to take people and force them into servitude against their will?

It sure seems to me like the prisoners of war were taken against their will and made slaves and were not entitled to the same rights as Hebrews.

2 Likes

Cities were placed under vassalage. not private slavery. As the source you cited says, “it has been contended that no prisoners of war were ever taken into private slavery”. Israel simply did not have the capacity to make private slaves of all the people it conquered; the Hebrews were outnumbered massively by the people of the land. Neither of the passages cited in the article about prisoners of war, actually mention anything about slavery; they don’t even use the Hebrew words for servants and slaves.

2 Likes

Hello ALl,

I would like to remind people of the original point of the dialogue, the critical importance of this point, and the fact that this blog post is watched closely by others.

Does BioLogos take a position on Inerrancy?

No, BioLogos does not take a position, and there are theistic evolutionists that affirm inerrancy.

Regardless what your position on this is, please be sensitive to the large number of Christians that cannot accept evolution if it means they must reject inerrancy. Evolution itself does not require rejection of inerrancy, and insisting otherwise places a stumbling block in front of others.

To this end, please try and explain our personal opinions in a way that acknowledges that BioLogos is a “big tent” here.

8 Likes

Seconded. :clap:

Why would I pull your leg? What I said is rather common sensical.

Leviticus 25:44-46New International Version (NIV)
44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

I’m not seeing the part which days you can take people and force them into slavery against their will. The Law of Moses expressly says the penalty for capturing people and selling them into slavery is death.

1 Like

Are you saying these verses reference volunteer workers? Keep In mind what a slave actually is.