Fear and Trembling

(In view of the recent book by J. P. Holding and Nick Peters titled Defining Inerrancy: Affirming a DefensibleFaith for a New Generation , I am re-printing the following post.  I believe the article below addresses some of Holding and Peter’s concerns.  My local newspaper originally published the article.) ARTICLE XV We affirm the necessity of interpreting the Bible according to its literal, or normal, sense. The literal sense is the grammatical-historical sense, that is, the meaning that the writer expressed. Interpretation according to the literal sense will take account of all figures of speech and literary forms found in the text. We deny the legitimacy of any approach to Scripture that attributes to it meaning which the literal sense does not support. So begins The Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics.  Hermeneutics is the science of understanding what the Bible says, and this statement on Biblical Hermeneutics is the collective wisdom of many evangelical sc

“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.” - Jesus (John 6:47, NKJV) Many in the world do not have a firm knowledge that they will go to heaven when they die. Some have a vague trust in their idea of a God who may honor their faith and may not. Some have only the hope that, when God judges the world, He will find that their good works outweigh their bad. Some have not yet reached the point in their thinking that they can acknowledge a God who judges or a heaven that they can go to (Many posts on this blog lay out reasons for believing in both.). We can know that we are on the way to heaven if we have faith in Jesus. This faith is a confident assurance that what Jesus says about how to live life is true. This assurance brings us to a knowledge that we have not, even for one moment, lived free from sin; that is, we have done things that God tells us not to do or failed to do things that God tells us to do. This knowledge of the right path leads to rep

This is part seven of a multi-part series on “He Has Spoken,” a study published by The Colson Center .  This post discusses my final impressions of the lecture and discussion series. The format of the study makes it a great conversation starter for small groups.  The lecture by John Stonestreet kicks of the discussion and the accompanying discussion between T. M. Moore and Stonestreet makes the lecture more personable.  Small group leaders will find much to discuss. These are great conversation starters, but not great conversation enders.  Group leaders who use the material will want to be well-versed in the topics and able to answer questions and guide discussion.  (This is true of any study which follows this format.)   The series inspires study beyond a few minutes of lecture and discussion, and group leaders should present recommended resources to encourage that study  (see www.str.org). There is no more important topic than this one in our society.  We must both understand

I am following the recent debate between Norman Geisler and several scholars I respect regarding inerrancy and interpretations of Bible passages.  This debate was sparked in part by a book written by Geisler and Bill Roach titled Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy of Scripture for a NewGeneration .  The introduction to that book was written by J. I. Packer.  It was enjoined by a response by J. P. Holding and Nick Peters titled Defining Inerrancy: Affirming a DefensibleFaith for a New Generation . The introduction to that response was written by Craig Blomberg, a scholar whose books have been very valuable to me.  I could not help but notice that Geisler’s book did not receive the endorsement of one person who was key in the development of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy: R. C. Sproul.  The Chicago Statement is at the crux of the debate.  (I also lament the fact that several of the original signatories are dead and unable to provide guidance.) The Chicago