Comment by Jenn

July 8, 2006 @ 2:50 pm

jlove -
Excellent questions! And ones that need to be answered. I’ll not claim to have the answers, but I do have a thought or two. Can I ask a question first, though? Could you tell me more about this:

If we say that the Bible is Infallible & Inerrant, does that mean it is to be taken literally?

I’m curious what you really mean by “literally.” I’m pretty sure that you aren’t meaning that we should hold to a “literal” interpretation of, say, Revelation, right? Then again, maybe I should just let you explain a little more and keep my assumptions to myself. (You know where that gets me…)

Comment by Reon

July 8, 2006 @ 6:49 pm

If I read you correctly, what I think you’re getting at is, “how do the worlds of exact interpretation, hyperbole, allegory/metaphor and cultural relevance congeal to form the “infallable and inerrant” word of God?” At what point do we say that a passage of scripture should be taken exactly as it reads, and at what point can we make a disclaimer as to its relevance in our current lives? Also, at what point do you say, “oh, He’s just exaggerating! His POINT is…”

Most churches I’ve (we’ve) attended practice the belief that women shouldn’t teach (or preach) from the pulpit, but almost every church would be willing for me to go to a foreign country and share the Good News. I am even able to publicly speak to the congregation about what God has done in my life. I can also teach Sunday School and lead (hmmm…co-lead) the high school youth group. Do any of these examples equate to “having authority over a man”?

I don’t know, jlove. I start to think of an answer, but end up coming to the end of it going, “Nope, that can’t be right.” I’ll have to ponder this one for a while.

Comment by jlove

July 9, 2006 @ 5:30 pm

Hey Jenn…your assumption is correct. Hopefully my revised post will help clarify the real questions I was trying to get at and what I meant by ‘literally’.

To Reon…I’ll address more of those topics later. I appreciate you keeping me on point and helping me (being patient with me) as I try to communicate in writing all these thoughts/questions in my head. I love you!

Comment by ilona

July 11, 2006 @ 2:03 am

You realize of course that this post is right up my alley- I’ve been looking at some of the same thoughts and questions.

Reon:
“women shouldn’t teach (or preach) from the pulpit, but almost every church would be willing for me to go to a foreign country and share the Good News”

this is exactly the sort of contradiction that I think we have to sort out. If we can’t answer these things for ourselves how do we serve in giving answers to the world out there?

great posts, thougths and discussion!

Comment by Brian

July 12, 2006 @ 5:04 pm

Ok, I’ll try to stick to the specified “part 1″ stuff.

If we say that the Bible is Infallible & Inerrant, does that mean it is to be taken literally?

What I’ve always thought is that we should understand scripture taking the account the literal style it was written in. So that we read Proverbs differently than we read Galatians. Each is conveying truth, but in not exactly the same way.

So, even if we just say that ‘It is without Error’, what does that imply?

Ain’t that the question. What I’ve been thinking about more lately is what are the scriptures trying to communicate. If the primary objective is to point to Jesus as the perfect fulfillment of God’s plan then the science of when the earth began just doesn’t pop out as a really important detail - if it’s even there at all.

Oh, and I’m not sure either when the language of “infallible & inerrant” came into use. What I wonder if it was assumed and only spelled out because some heresy had to be refuted. Much like the trinity or something like that. I guess I need to read the stuff that Jenn linked to.