A new interview where I discuss the concepts of biblical inspiration and inerrancy on the “What Your Pastor Didn’t Tell You” YouTube channel: ?
In this video, I explain how God can inerrantly include human theological errors within a plenarily inspired biblical text. For further discussion see my book Jesus Loves Canaanites: ?
My new book Conversations with My Inner Atheist features an extended conversation ranging over 25 chapters with my inner voice of questioning and doubt, My Inner Atheist (Mia). I have included chapter 6 below: “If the Bible includes immoral laws, how can it be inspired?” If you enjoy the chapter, consider buying the book. Mia: […]
The other day, I posted the following tweet: Atheists who dismiss the Bible as “iron age fables” should invest a month studying a single book of the Bible by reading a range of biblical commentaries, monographs, and articles on that book. They will come to appreciate that much more is going on than they realized, […]
Here is my attempt to articulate a logical argument in support of inerrancy. By “inerrancy”, I refer here to the view that the affirmations of all human authors are true. I should stress that this is not a view I hold and I have little sympathy with this argument. But be that as it may, […]
This morning, a tweet from Fuz Rana got under my skin. I should begin by saying that he seems like a nice chap and Reasons to Believe is less bad than Answers in Genesis. However, being nice and less-bad cannot save one from the fundamental error of treating the Bible as a confirmatory textbook for […]
Yesterday, I tweeted the following observation: Many Christian conservatives profess to defend the inerrancy of Scripture when, in fact, they are defending the inerrancy of their interpretation of Scripture. In order to appreciate the reasoning of the conservative Christian, we should begin by unpacking the assumption that there is a commonsense way to interpret a […]
We begin with a tweet from Brian Zahnd: “Biblical inerrancy” is an empty signifier. Why? Because an inerrant text still has to be interpreted. Then you run into the problem of pervasive interpretive pluralism (to borrow a phrase from Christian Smith). Plenty of people agree on inerrancy and disagree on everything else!” Next, we have a […]
This morning I posted a tweet on inerrancy which prompted a reply from the philosopher Paul Franks. I thought it was an interesting Twitter exchange and worth repeating here. After compiling our tweets, I’m a bit surprised at how long it is too. I have not bothered to flag or correct the typos that appear in […]
When I was growing up, I learned to read biblical narratives as historically reliable accounts of past events. Whether the issue was the death and resurrection of Jesus, the curious maritime journey of Jonah, the Exodus from Egypt, Samson’s killing a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass, or Adam and Eve talking to […]
That’s the question. You can read my latest article at confusedaboutgrace.com here.
My views on the Bible really began to change when I went to university to pursue a double major in English and religious studies. At that time I began to learn about hermeneutics including the importance of interpreting distinct literary genres, heeding historical context, and attending to the many distinct approaches to textual interpretation. Along […]
The other day I received an emailed question from a reader which focused on the problem of genocide in the Bible. The reader asked: “If someone brought up these biblical narratives [of genocide], as Dawkins and the like have, as a means of discrediting the Christian faith and the biblical text how would you respond?” Note […]
In response to my article “Should additions to the biblical texts be treated as canon?” Simon K posed the following question: “Did Protestants do the right thing by rejecting the deuterocanon? Should that decision be reconsidered? You are discussing here whether people should accept textual variants as inspired; but which books should be accepted in […]