Monday, June 12, 2006

Books on Scripture

Over at Reformation 21 D.A. Carson has a reviews on three books about Scripture by Tom Wright, John Webster, and Peter Enns.

I should also plug HTC's college Principal, Andrew McGowan, who has a volume on Scripture coming out some time next year with IVP. It is one that promises to set forth a European, as opposed to a North American view, of inerrancy and inspiration.

13 comments:

C G said...

What's the difference between European inerrancy and American inerrancy?

Nick Nowalk said...

I believe that it is we Americans are inherently born more "spiritual" than our European counterparts:) For proof, just look at the war in Iraq

David Shedden said...

I thought Howard Marshall had championed a European view of inspiration - and isn't Webster the new evangelical hero anyway? He gets to speak at loads of big conferences.

J. B. Hood said...

I'm going to take a stab and say that a European view on this would be less "hard-core" than an American view. Words like chastised, humble, softer, etc. come to view. Not because Europeans (or EuroEvangelicals) lack courage or anything, simply because they have to work/live more broadly.

Regardless, everyone should agree that the US's performance against the Czechs was complete crap--highly errant...

C G said...

But surely inerrancy is inerrancy, no matter whether it's 'humbler' (shades of GWB's promise of a humbler foreign policy, perhaps?) or associated with comedy footballers?

Michael F. Bird said...

CG, perhaps the difference between Evangelical-European and North American Evangelical ideas of inerrancy can best be described with a quote from the Princess Bride: "You keep using that word, but I do not think it means what you think it means".

Corn on the Robb said...

That was a fantastic review by Carson. His respect for Wright comes through even when he pins him. Thanks for the link!

dan said...

"even when he pins him. "

Yes, Corn on the Robb, Carson well and truly pins Wright for being wht he is... a COE Bishop. Wright may well put ecclesiology over bibliogy, but why would one expect him to do otherwise-- particularly since, as Wright says in the preface and Catson ignores, much of what Wright has in this book is an adaptation of the parts of the Windsor report he wrote that were addressed to the authority of the Bible in the Anglican Communion. Once again, Wright's critics have bashed him for the book he didn't write.

Nick Nowalk said...

And once again, perhaps, Wright's admirers have explained away another possible critique, so that no valid ones exist? :) We should be over the false extremes by now, I thought. No, he isn't Satan; many things he says are great and worthy of inspection. But he isn't the next Martin Luther or Calvin, either, and plenty of distorted perspectives are found in his work (like virtually everyone else's!) Grace and peace.

TheBlueRaja said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TheBlueRaja said...

My site has a two part review interacting with Carson and Helm's critiques, if you're interested.

C. Stirling Bartholomew said...

CG asked:

"What's the difference between European inerrancy and American inerrancy?"

American inerrancy was encoded a few decades ago in the "Chicago Statement". I suspect that not too many bible scholars in Europe or the North America would be willing to sign this document. I haven't read it for ages and wasn't terribly interested in it when it was being written. I studied theology during that period at a school where the president was one of the shakers and movers on the committee. No I will not tell you the name of the school. Want to protect the reputation of the school and my own :-)

Jon said...

American inerrancy is universal throughout America.... Whether or not it exists is a different matter...

European inerrancy is never apparent... People are always saying sorry for the mistakes they make...