Flotsam and jetsam (6/10)

Down with congregational government. Not the people who believe in it or appreciate its history, not the good or bad people who try to function well in a bad system—down with the system itself. It’s unbiblical, unhealthy and too often a tool of Satan for the discouragement of good Pastors, godly Elders, and local churches everywhere.

  • A few days ago, James McGrath discussed the Inerrancy of the Bible and Sarah Palin, arguing that those defending Palin were just doing the same thing as traditional defenders of inerrancy. And now, Collin Hansen has responded with Inerrancy, Not So Arrogant. You should read both articles to get two very different perspectives on the issue.

Interpreters who believe the Bible is utterly authoritative and without error in the original writings are commonly regarded by opponents as arrogant in their certainty and lazy in their confessionalism. Critics such as McGrath describe their exegesis as strained beyond credulity.

So yes, in some sense, one can affirm inerrancy and do historical work as long as one is willing to admit they believe something happened on the basis of a confessional stance rather than on its likelihood when examined through the lens of a historian.

I’m convinced that bad art derives, like bad literary theory, from bad theology. To know God falsely is to write and paint and sculpt and cook and dance Him falsely. Perhaps it’s not poor artistic skill that yields bad Christian art, in other words, but poor Christianity.

Comments

comments

Trackbacks/Pingbacks:

  1. Conversations Around the Blogosphere | Exploring Our Matrix - June 10, 2011

    [...] More people have joined in the Lady Gaga inerrancy conversation, including Rod of Alexandria. [...]

Leave a Reply:

Gravatar Image