MSH | July 23, 2008
In the previous two posts I’ve laid out my thoughts on the relationship of the human writers to God’s role in producing the Scriptures. I have argued that it is flawed thinking to deny that Scripture originated with humans in ANY sense; that is, anthropopneustos is neither denied by 2 Tim 3:16 nor 2 Peter [...]
MSH | July 20, 2008
In this post I want to turn to 2 Peter 1:20-21 and share a few thoughts on how this passage dovetails with my views on 2 Tim 3:16. Here’s the passage (ESV): 20 knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. 21 For no prophecy was ever produced [...]
MSH | July 17, 2008
Well, Chet gave us a good example — so good that I have to bump my next inspiration post. The conflicting accounts of the death of Ahaziah is a good example of a genuine problem for inerrancy. The late Raymond Dillard, former OT prof at Westminster called it “one of the most difficult historical questions [...]
MSH | July 16, 2008
I’ve reached a point with this subject where I think it’s time to just start putting out what I think about inspiration and inerrancy. It’ll probably take a few posts on the former before I get to the latter. Your comments have been helpful, but I’m sensing that I could be clearer. I’m going to [...]
MSH | July 13, 2008
I’ve tried to put forth what I think is the standard “only God is responsible for the Bible” view reflected in the Westminster addendum quotation (the theopneustos, not anthropopneustos one reproduced in two posts already). I’ve noted a few questions in the course of this as well. I may not be getting it right, but [...]
