Comment from a Ministry Colleague Received by Email: "During his tenure (GWB: of the missions agency president referred to in this post) he constantly reached across the lines that existed during that season in the SBC to befriend and show care for all the political parties. He spoke at our meetings and banquets for new work. He encouraged the language missions. You could tell he had lived it and been in the trenches. He came many times to be with our pastors (a wide variety) and gave support to our New Work and Church Planting in meaningful ways. He was a great encourager to me. "
Comment from a Ministry Colleague Received by Email: "Good morning. I just read your comments on biblical inerrancy and write to thank you profoundly for your broaching the subject and for the way you did it. I believe/hope that your openness in essay can have impact on some folks who are caught up in that hermeneutic. Your statement about the idea of one inerrant interpretation of every text is exactly to the point. I think the whole inerrancy movement in the SBC is evidence that the doctrine requires the idea of inerrant interpreters, and that we are observing where that approach has taken and is taking the SBC. Again, thank you for your statement of concern, and for the way you articulated it."
Thanks so much for this reflection. My journey has taken me from the fundamentalist upbringing where inerrancy was the mantra, establishing our identity over and against the world and specifically others who said they shared the same faith. Though I would say I hold to a high view of scripture, I would now only use the term Word in relation to the living Christ.
Thank you for your comment, Peter. Yes, the Richard Niebuhr Christ and Culture typology provides a lot of opportunity for dialogue and describing where we all are in our faith perspective. Further, the issue of when the word/Word is capitalized reveals a lot about each of us. I refer to the Bible as the written word of God's story of redemption. I refer to Jesus the Christ as the Living Word of God. I love the first chapter of the Gospel of John, and in particular the 1st and 14th verses.
George, thanks for your story in regard to "inerrancy." I remember the days you were with the SC Baptist Convention. You were certainly a mentor in my early years. Another story: It was during the turbulent days of the fundamentalist movement. I was pastor in Augusta, GA. Judge Pressler and Paige Patterson were making the Association rounds inciting the troops. They had cherry-picked, often truncated, quotes from "liberal professors" to make it personal. Inerrancy was the topic du jour, often qualified by saying, "in the original manuscripts." I raised a hand to point out that he was making an argument from a theological black hole, since we have no "original manuscripts." And the text we have today is composed from many variant manuscripts texts. So, they can not all be "inerrant," but we can trust that God preserved truth. I too, like "truth without mixture of error." God communicated his redemption story in Christ, that we might be restored, not a science text or one person's interpretation of a text. What we see today, this new Christian nationalism, with it's own Bible, with political documents included, and it's own messiah looks a lot like the 1930's. By the way, in that meeting, one pastor came to me and said, "You're going to be OK, son." And I was. Thanks for your work. sb
Steve, you were trying to confuse Patterson and Pressler with the facts. That never works! :-) It has always concerned me how fragile the faith is of some people that script of the drama of redemption has a greater impact on them than the actual drama--God's real-time story of redemption. I am thankful for a vibrant relationship with the Living Word of God as the reality drama is so amazing and can be experienced by all my senses as I journey with our Triune God as my guide. George
I have neither a theory of inerrancy or errancy with respect to the Bible. I take it as authoritative in my life even as I reject the need for a foundationalist epistemology to undergird my taking it to be so.
Richard, thank you for sharing your perspective regarding the authority of the Bible. All perspectives are welcome. Thank you, also, for sending me--and probably other readers--to search online--since it has been 50 years since I was in seminary--to refresh my memory on the meaning of "foundationalist epistemology". I do not think about that every day. George
Thank you for your openness on this issue, George! I have a similar “nails on the chalkboard” experience with the word. Fortunately, I never had to “profess” my position in my 2 pastorates!
Comment from a Ministry Colleague Received by Email: "During his tenure (GWB: of the missions agency president referred to in this post) he constantly reached across the lines that existed during that season in the SBC to befriend and show care for all the political parties. He spoke at our meetings and banquets for new work. He encouraged the language missions. You could tell he had lived it and been in the trenches. He came many times to be with our pastors (a wide variety) and gave support to our New Work and Church Planting in meaningful ways. He was a great encourager to me. "
Comment from a Ministry Colleague Received by Email: "Good morning. I just read your comments on biblical inerrancy and write to thank you profoundly for your broaching the subject and for the way you did it. I believe/hope that your openness in essay can have impact on some folks who are caught up in that hermeneutic. Your statement about the idea of one inerrant interpretation of every text is exactly to the point. I think the whole inerrancy movement in the SBC is evidence that the doctrine requires the idea of inerrant interpreters, and that we are observing where that approach has taken and is taking the SBC. Again, thank you for your statement of concern, and for the way you articulated it."
Thanks so much for this reflection. My journey has taken me from the fundamentalist upbringing where inerrancy was the mantra, establishing our identity over and against the world and specifically others who said they shared the same faith. Though I would say I hold to a high view of scripture, I would now only use the term Word in relation to the living Christ.
Thank you for your comment, Peter. Yes, the Richard Niebuhr Christ and Culture typology provides a lot of opportunity for dialogue and describing where we all are in our faith perspective. Further, the issue of when the word/Word is capitalized reveals a lot about each of us. I refer to the Bible as the written word of God's story of redemption. I refer to Jesus the Christ as the Living Word of God. I love the first chapter of the Gospel of John, and in particular the 1st and 14th verses.
George, thanks for your story in regard to "inerrancy." I remember the days you were with the SC Baptist Convention. You were certainly a mentor in my early years. Another story: It was during the turbulent days of the fundamentalist movement. I was pastor in Augusta, GA. Judge Pressler and Paige Patterson were making the Association rounds inciting the troops. They had cherry-picked, often truncated, quotes from "liberal professors" to make it personal. Inerrancy was the topic du jour, often qualified by saying, "in the original manuscripts." I raised a hand to point out that he was making an argument from a theological black hole, since we have no "original manuscripts." And the text we have today is composed from many variant manuscripts texts. So, they can not all be "inerrant," but we can trust that God preserved truth. I too, like "truth without mixture of error." God communicated his redemption story in Christ, that we might be restored, not a science text or one person's interpretation of a text. What we see today, this new Christian nationalism, with it's own Bible, with political documents included, and it's own messiah looks a lot like the 1930's. By the way, in that meeting, one pastor came to me and said, "You're going to be OK, son." And I was. Thanks for your work. sb
Steve, you were trying to confuse Patterson and Pressler with the facts. That never works! :-) It has always concerned me how fragile the faith is of some people that script of the drama of redemption has a greater impact on them than the actual drama--God's real-time story of redemption. I am thankful for a vibrant relationship with the Living Word of God as the reality drama is so amazing and can be experienced by all my senses as I journey with our Triune God as my guide. George
I have neither a theory of inerrancy or errancy with respect to the Bible. I take it as authoritative in my life even as I reject the need for a foundationalist epistemology to undergird my taking it to be so.
Richard, thank you for sharing your perspective regarding the authority of the Bible. All perspectives are welcome. Thank you, also, for sending me--and probably other readers--to search online--since it has been 50 years since I was in seminary--to refresh my memory on the meaning of "foundationalist epistemology". I do not think about that every day. George
Thank you for your openness on this issue, George! I have a similar “nails on the chalkboard” experience with the word. Fortunately, I never had to “profess” my position in my 2 pastorates!
Dan, hope you had the opportunity to share some solid theology with both of those churches as you faithfully served them! George
I believe I did! I was blessed to be trained at SBTS prior to the 90’s! 😁