Saturday, August 19, 2006

Dan Wallace on Inerrancy

For a good read about inerrancy and evangelicals see Daniel Wallace's on-line essay. Dan is apparently responding to some vitriolic ("Reformed" always with the Reformed!) critics. He also presents a good case for an inductive approach to bibliology and notes that one does not have to believe in inerrancy to be a Christian!

HT: Michael Pahl

5 comments:

Joel Willitts said...

Michael:

the link is not working for some reason. You might want to check it out.

Dan was my primary mentor at DTS. He had a big influence on my approach to NT scholarship.

Michael Westmoreland-White said...

One doesn't have to be an inerrantist to be a Christian? WHEW! I'm so relieved, 'cause I was worried about all those Christians who lived before 17th C. Protestant scholasticism or 19th C. "Princeton Theology," etc. :-)

And, gee, that means there's even hope for folk like me with Barthian views of Scripture?

Okay. Sarcasm over. It sounds like an interesting article and I'll check it out when the link works.

Ian Myles Slater said...

The problem with the link is a doubling of http://; deleting one occurence in the address bar corrects the problem.

C. Stirling Bartholomew said...

"... notes that one does not have to believe in inerrancy to be a Christian!"

This is real good news for the people at Fuller.

Celucien joseph said...

The statement troubles me much, "..that one does not have to believe in inerrancy to be a Christian!"

How does the above statement account for the trustworthiness of God's revealed Word?
Folks, please read Dallace's article so not to take him out of context.

Just a side note- The men who wrote the Scriptures were divinely inspired (yes I still believe in the divine inspiration; I don't think one should separate innerancy from inspiration).