Fundamentalism and Inerrancy, are they so?

[polonius]

Frequently, I find a response merely quoting some scripture which the writer implies settles an argument.

Lets take a look at such a view.

Ihttp://defendinginerrancy.com/why-is-inerrancy-important/

Inerrancy: The Bible is without error. It’s a belief in the “total truthfulness and reliability of God’s words� (Grudem, Systematic Theology, Inter-Varsity, 2004, 90). Jesus said, “Your word is truth� (John 17:17). This inerrancy isn’t just in passages that speak about salvation, but also applies to all historical and scientific statements as well. It is not only accurate in matters related to faith and practice, but it is accurate and without error regarding any statement, period (John 3:12).

Inerrancy is based on the character of God who cannot lie (Heb. 6:18; Titus 1:2). God cannot lie intentionally because He is an absolute moral law-giver. He cannot err unintentionally because He is omniscient. And if the Bible is the written Word of God (and it is), then it is without error.

Thesis Statement: Philip Ayers
Scriptural inerrancy and Fundamentalism cannot be separated. Throughout history the inerrancy of Scripture has been the basic foundation of the Fundamental movement.

ttps://ariseministry.org/ariseministry/inerrancy__of_scripture___fundamentalism

[polonius]

Mark 16: 17-18 (NRSV)

17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: by using my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes in their hands,[e] and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.�


Do fundamentalist really believe that?

[Divine Insight]

If the Bible were truly divine commandments, instructions and directives to humans telling humans how they must behave in order to avoid eternal damnation it would indeed need to be perfectly clear and inerrant in it's instructions. Especially if we're going to hold that the God behind it is trustworthy, righteous, and benevolent.

Therefore in order for the Bible to truly be instructions from God it must indeed be perfect and inerrant.

As you point out in post #2 it's clearly neither.

Therefore there can only be one conclusion possible. The Bible cannot be the inerrant instructions from any trustworthy, righteous, and benevolent God.

So there we have it. An indisputable observation that the Bible cannot be the word of any trustworthy, righteous, and benevolent God.

We could try to get around this by suggesting that the God of the Bible is not trustworthy, righteous, and benevolent God. But that would clearly not be a very good argument for this theology.

Other arguments have been given that we're not being given instructions through the Bible, but rather we are supposed to be following the guidance of a "Holy Spirit". But that clearly fails as well, because if that were true, then there would be no need for an errant Bible in the first place.

So there's really no rational arguments left to support this theology.

We certainly can't be standing there holding up a Bible proclaiming that we are to be guided by a "Holy Spirit" because that would be an oxymoron to use the Bible as a symbol of authority to make such a proclamation. An errant Bible cannot be held up as a symbol of authority for anything.

So the fact that the Bible is errant proves that it's not the instructions from any trustworthy, righteous, and benevolent God.

Could it have something to do with an untrustworthy, unrighteous, and malevolent God? Sure. But I doubt that Biblical theists would want to make that argument.

[Elijah John]

Mark 16: 17-18 (NRSV)

17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: by using my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes in their hands,[e] and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.�


Do fundamentalist really believe that?

Many believe in casting out demons, exorcisms etc. Many believe in "speaking in tongues". Some even engage in snake handling. Drinking poison? I hope none try.

Then there's this. Allowing women to speak in church. Paul forbade it, many Evangelicals and Fundamentalists permit and encourage it with female pastors.

Divorce, Jesus forbade it under most circumstances. Many Evangelicals and Fundamentalists divorce and remarry.

The keeping and beating of slaves half to death. Moses permitted it, and considered such human beings "property". Do Fundamentalists agree with Moses? At least in theory?

Do Fundamentalists consider some human beings to be "property" subject to such abuse? The Bible tells them so.

Do some Fundamentalists want to re-institute slavery? After all, it seems Biblical, if one reads the Bible literally. Or considers ever single passage and verse infallible and "God breathed".

[showme]

Frequently, I find a response merely quoting some scripture which the writer implies settles an argument.

Lets take a look at such a view.

Ihttp://defendinginerrancy.com/why-is-inerrancy-important/

Inerrancy: The Bible is without error. It’s a belief in the “total truthfulness and reliability of God’s words� (Grudem, Systematic Theology, Inter-Varsity, 2004, 90). Jesus said, “Your word is truth� (John 17:17). This inerrancy isn’t just in passages that speak about salvation, but also applies to all historical and scientific statements as well. It is not only accurate in matters related to faith and practice, but it is accurate and without error regarding any statement, period (John 3:12).

Inerrancy is based on the character of God who cannot lie (Heb. 6:18; Titus 1:2). God cannot lie intentionally because He is an absolute moral law-giver. He cannot err unintentionally because He is omniscient. And if the Bible is the written Word of God (and it is), then it is without error.

Thesis Statement: Philip Ayers
Scriptural inerrancy and Fundamentalism cannot be separated. Throughout history the inerrancy of Scripture has been the basic foundation of the Fundamental movement.

ttps://ariseministry.org/ariseministry/inerrancy__of_scripture___fundamentalism

The inerrancy of the present NT canon, tabulated in 367 AD, relies on the false belief that the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and her leadership is holy. That is a non starter for anyone not a Roman Catholic, and of probably the majority of Catholics for many reason.

[Tcg]

Many believe in casting out demons, exorcisms etc. Many believe in "speaking in tongues". Some even engage in snake handling. Drinking poison? I hope none try.

Some do, not as often as they handle snakes perhaps, but on occasion strychnine is swallowed:

"Cody Coots looks comfortable, standing in the spot where his father was killed. Behind him sits a guitar, before him a glass of strychnine poison. To his right there’s a drum set, to his left a few venomous snakes. He’s at a lectern in a large room in an old house on a back street in Middlesboro, Kentucky, deep in rural Appalachia."

Later in the article:

"At one point, a young church member, a mountain of a man who just a few weeks ago preached against the theory of evolution — “I ain’t come from no monkey,� he said — reaches for the jar of strychnine. He takes a sip. Then he lifts it again for another. Finally he takes a third sip — a gulp, really — before he returns the poison to the lectern and takes his seat in the pews."

https://www.theringer.com/features/2017 ... cody-coots

[Elijah John]

Many believe in casting out demons, exorcisms etc. Many believe in "speaking in tongues". Some even engage in snake handling. Drinking poison? I hope none try.

Some do, not as often as they handle snakes perhaps, but on occasion strychnine is swallowed:

"Cody Coots looks comfortable, standing in the spot where his father was killed. Behind him sits a guitar, before him a glass of strychnine poison. To his right there’s a drum set, to his left a few venomous snakes. He’s at a lectern in a large room in an old house on a back street in Middlesboro, Kentucky, deep in rural Appalachia."

Later in the article:

"At one point, a young church member, a mountain of a man who just a few weeks ago preached against the theory of evolution — “I ain’t come from no monkey,� he said — reaches for the jar of strychnine. He takes a sip. Then he lifts it again for another. Finally he takes a third sip — a gulp, really — before he returns the poison to the lectern and takes his seat in the pews."

https://www.theringer.com/features/2017 ... cody-coots

Somtimes the snakes in question already have heve their venom milked out of them. Then the display of "faith" is nothing but a sham. It occured to me those that pretend to drink strychnine could well be drinking only water. If that is the case, they are perpetuating an extremely dangerous sham. If other's imitate these snakes, who call themselves people of faith, the consequences could be deady. I hope they are held accountable, in this world and the next.

The perils of stupidity and literalism.

[Tcg]

Many believe in casting out demons, exorcisms etc. Many believe in "speaking in tongues". Some even engage in snake handling. Drinking poison? I hope none try.

Some do, not as often as they handle snakes perhaps, but on occasion strychnine is swallowed:

"Cody Coots looks comfortable, standing in the spot where his father was killed. Behind him sits a guitar, before him a glass of strychnine poison. To his right there’s a drum set, to his left a few venomous snakes. He’s at a lectern in a large room in an old house on a back street in Middlesboro, Kentucky, deep in rural Appalachia."

Later in the article:

"At one point, a young church member, a mountain of a man who just a few weeks ago preached against the theory of evolution — “I ain’t come from no monkey,� he said — reaches for the jar of strychnine. He takes a sip. Then he lifts it again for another. Finally he takes a third sip — a gulp, really — before he returns the poison to the lectern and takes his seat in the pews."

https://www.theringer.com/features/2017 ... cody-coots

Somtimes the snakes in question already have heve their venom milked out of them. Then the display of "faith" is nothing but a sham.

Cody Coots is the pastor now because his father died from a snake bite. He is not alone in facing this fate. These are real snakes with their venom intact.

It occured to me those that pretend to drink strychnine could well be drinking only water. If that is the case, they are perpetuating an extremely dangerous sham.

The church member who drank the strychnine eventually became violently ill and was taken to the hospital in an ambulance. Water usually doesn't cause that reaction.

The perils of stupidity and literalism.

The perils of taking the Bible seriously.

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 8 by Tcg]

For those interested in seeing the depth of faith that can lead to death, here is a video from ABC News that documents the death of Jamie Coots, the father of Cody Coots who is the pastor mentioned in the article I listed previously:



As I mentioned earlier, these are real snakes whose venom can and at times do cause death. There is no scam involved in these ceremonies.

It is easy to question the wisdom of this display of faith, but the faith these folks place in God is hard to top. Very few truly risk their lives for their faith. These faithful Christians do so on a regular basis.

[Elijah John]

The perils of taking the Bible seriously.

The vast majority of those who take the Bible seriously but not literally do not handle snakes nor do they deliberately drink poison.

Even the snake handlers are a distinct minority within the population of Fundamentalist Christians.