The Bible (Letter 5)

Sir Tom,

So here we are again and as we focus this month on the Bible I think there are 2 things to keep in mind.

  1. Biblical reliability. This was why I wanted to do the Bible before Jesus, because when one talks about Jesus one uses the Bible; we talk about prophecies of His life and death, but they only work if we can believe that they are true.
  2. How do we read the Bible? This is the big one, isn’t it? What’s the purpose of the Bible? And that depends on our views of inerrancy, infallibility and Sola Scriptura.

So let’s unpack number 1, get on the same page (or at least know which pages we’re both on). My first big deal is Old Testament dating. I don’t see any issue with taking scholarly dating of the Bible (even though that disqualifies inerrancy) because scholars agree that the books of the OT are based on earlier writings. I don’t want to go too far down this road, but it does lead to 2 interesting points. Firstly, there’s no need. If they’re made up then you only need to date them to their earliest manuscript. Secondly, where is the REAL Israelite history?

So we know that the Bible is reliable because the claims against the Bible don’t stack up. That being said a lot of the issues with the Bible in terms of contradictions are solved by taking the Document Hypothesis of multiple sources being used to construct the first books of the Bible.

So the problem is really not with the historicity of the Bible, but really with a rejection of magic. Magical stuff happens in the Bible, therefore it must be made up. That being said, I think anyone would be hard pressed to point to anything in history or science that says magic can’t happen.

I think we need to talk about this somewhat explicitly in the podcast, but I also think it needs to run through everything we say. The idea that at each point this is reliable, this is true. And true separate from inerrancy. I don’t think it is good enough just to say ‘yeah it’s all true and reliable because the Bible can’t be wrong’.

Look forward to hearing your thoughts,




10 thoughts on “The Bible (Letter 5)

  1. Could you send me an application form? pornhd And so, if the indoctrination is started at a sufficiently young age and repeated forcefully enough, over and over and over, a sufficiently large number of times, that small child will grow up to believe all the desired concepts necessary for a government to be able to maintain control over countless millions of people with a minimum of force.

  2. Excellent work, Nice Design apetube Republicans know what they need to do to defund Obamacare: win an election. They’re just unwilling to do it. They would have to represent the interests of a majority of Americans instead of a rabid minority of anarchists. Republican strategists used to be the smartest guys in the room. What happened?

  3. What part of do you come from? damplips Delta 4 rockets sport a Common Booster Core, but the Heavy version boasts three of those Boeing 727-fuselage-sized boosters strapped side by side. Each Common Booster Core stands 150 feet long and 17 feet in diameter,

  4. I work here xtube As for Scott, he was a seventh-round draft pick in 2011 and was one of the last players to make the 53-man roster out of training camp this summer thanks to an impressive game against the Patriots in the preseason finale. In four games this season Scott ran the ball 16 times for 56 yards (a team-high 3.5 yards per carry among running backs; Eli Manning sadly enough leads the team with 6.8 ypc) and had 10 receptions for 98 yards including a 23-yard touchdown (all highs among running backs). In his first start on Sunday he had five carries for 26 yards and caught one pass, the first play of the game, for zero yards.

  5. Could I ask who’s calling? voyeurweb “We are very pleased that hundreds of thousands of eligible voters will be able to cast ballots in upcoming elections regardless of whether or not they have required identification,” said Jennifer Clarke of the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia.

  6. I’m from England freeones The human ramifications of these changes are likely to be massive and disruptive. Food chains, fishing, and tourism could all be impacted. The study shows that some 470 to 870 million of the world’s poorest people rely on the ocean for food, jobs, and revenues, and live in countries where ocean goods and services could be compromised by multiple ocean biogeochemical changes.

Leave a Reply