Leaderboard

One of the hallmarks of Protestant Fundamentalism is its claim of inerrant scripture. This is a relatively new idea about scripture, coming into play around 1920 when some theologians got upset about the critical and historical study of the documents contained in the Bible and put together about 12 long papers called The Fundamentals. (there are plenty of good books documenting the history of fundamentalism and you can Google The Fundamentals and find them online). Historical study asks questions like: where did these documents come from, who wrote them, what kind of cultural influences did the writers inherit, etc. The theologians who wrote, The Fundamentals were afraid that such study undermined people's faith in God, Jesus, and salvation. I disagree with that, faith is faith, which by its nature does not depend on a book. So inerrancy is a "new" claim about scriptures made from what I see as a defensive position. In my view, it stems from a fear that a study of the Bible's sources and different writers, claims, errors, etc. would bother people. I disagree. Plenty of Christians accept the imperfections in the texts while still believing in God, Jesus, salvation, etc. So back to inerrancy. The history of fundamentalism shows that inerrancy is a man-made idea about scriptures and also of a God that has to be "perfect" which is a theological position and therefore unprovable; that, too, is a matter of faith. The burden of showing inerrancy of the scriptures, therefore, lies with the authors of The Fundamentals but since they're not around, it falls to anyone making the assertion. So I ask you, did VP ever prove that the entire KJV was without error or contradiction? Did he or anyone else ever show how the entire Bible "fit" together perfectly? A few more observations before I get off my soapbox: 1) VP and most other fundamentalists do not state which Bible they are referring to when they say it "must be perfect because God is perfect." So the question to ask them is, "Which canon of the scripture is inerrant?" 2) Why is it so important that the scriptures be "perfect"? Many people find value, inspiration, etc. from scriptures in spite of the various viewpoints or contradictions found in it, like the different perspectives of the gospel writers. 3) If God is without contradiction, how do you account for even this simple example of contradiction about the God of Israel (apparently the same one VP taught us about) . One minute he says don't kill - no exceptions are stated. Two chapters later it says he tells Israel to go for it. Dueteronomy 5:17: "Thou shalt not kill" Dueteronomy 7: 2: "And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them...: For those interested, more information about inerrancy is covered in most any book about fundamentalism from writers like James Barr, Ernest Sandeen, George Marsden, and in a book on Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know - and Doesn't, by Stephen Prothero. In closing, I'll just include this food for thought : "...in addition to reading the Bible devotionally there is a value in reading it historically. To be sure, a historical reading can show many of the shortcomings of the Bible - discrepancies, contradictions, faulty claims, impossible statements, and harmful ideologies. But a historical reading can open up entirely new vistas in our understanding of the Bible and its multifarious messages." ~ Jesus, Interrupted by Bart Ehrman. Pg.282. Cheers! Pen

No, not really, insisting that others agree with your take on things, is something peculiar to The Way and a maybe few other groups whose prime concern is control.... That is The Ways way, to force people into conformity and not allow them to think for themselves and make their own decisions. I doubt that there are many people that perceive the scriptures the exact same way. Some churches view that as refreshing, I know that I do.

Dear Johniam, From what I've seen, you've made up your mind about VPW but for others reading this thread I'll just say this: There is plenty of clear evidence of VPW's taking other people's books and stealing passages from them (two main ones are J.E. Stiles, and E.W. Bullinger), his inappropriate use of scripture verses taken out of context; his authoritarian rule over his group as witnessed by many of us who knew him; his condemnation of any other denomination; his denial of the holocaust (he sold The Myth of the Six Million in the bookstore); his alcoholism; his interest in pornography (i.e. showing bestiality films in the Advanced Class) and his sexual abuse of women as accounted by Kristen Skedgell in her book, Losing The Way. If people want to follow someone like that, then that is their choice. I'll shamelessly plug my own story and article which are posted on the front page as further bits of "what we got" for your review. I knew the man for 17 years. I know that not every single thing that came out of his mouth was a lie...if that had been the case, lots of us would not have become associated with TWI. I'll go on record as pointing out he told the truth plenty of times, but he used people and used the Bible to further his own aims. He made his claims sound like they made sense. He manipulated people and intimidated them. Each person's experience in TWI is different depending on many factors, but I suggest for those who want to know, that they seek out information about the man from those of us who knew him and read his books, like the PFAL book to see for themselves how he misused scripture and ranted about "unbelievers" among other things. He was a fundamentalist gone wild. Remember this while you're making up your own mind: "The fanatic inspires and breathes fear. It is the only tie that binds him to his fellow-man and God. So afraid is he of doubt that he pushes it outside the law. Whether his dictatorship is intellectual or theocratic, he pretends to possess a unique and eternal truth. Insist on a discussion, and he takes offense. He accepts questions only if he alone has the right to answer them. It comes to this: The fanatic accepts only answers – his own – while his tolerant adversary prefers questions." ~ Elie Wiesel

Geisha, thanks for the link/article from CRI - he makes a few good points i use to really get into Bullinger's Witness of the Stars - but that and some of his other stuff i just don't look at that much any more. i became somewhat disenchanted with Bullinger when someone pointed out on one of those threads dealing with the errors in PFAL, the picture of five crucifixes that Bullinger used in his Companion Bible [to prove there were four crucified with Jesus] was not an altar but a cemetery...between that and his complex development of numbers in scripture i sometimes wonder if the guy just got into an over-thinking mode one too many times - or maybe it's just my being easily confused [math wasn't my best subject in school ].... i still like his Companion Bible, How to Enjoy the Bible and Figures of Speech but now enjoy them with a bigger grain of salt.....like Waysider was saying - maybe it falls into the Da Vinci Code/Secret Knowledge file. this has been an interesting thread - i just haven't had anything to contribute yet - but in thinking about this discussion and looking through a few Bible encyclopedias and dictionaries i have - i just don't see much concern or interest by the ancient Hebrews over the constellations or astronomy in general. plus the fact that they were forbidden to look to the stars for guidance or information like other cultures did makes me think that as a general rule it was not even fodder for speculative theology. another thing that bugs me is the "plastic" or malleable nature of the constellations- the way the pattern or image is defined is a matter of perception - was it some ancient form of an ink-blot test? .....i'm not big on astrology, astronomy, constellations or anything - but, the images do date back to mythologies of ancient cultures. folks studying the sky noticed some groups of stars stuck together as they moved across the night.naming them and coming up with a way to identify a particular group by associating them with an image seems like a natural thing to do. ~~~ here's the last thing and then i'll shut up - i think it's challenging enough to nail down something definitive on certain subjects in the Bible because of the distance in time, culture, languages, as well as consideration of whether the reference is literal, figurative, symbolic, etc. - and that is a WRITTEN document and not something as subjective as an abstract image. but given the limitations of language and the written word - i think in general it's perhaps a better means of communication than just images.....someone totally unfamiliar with the gospel accounts of the resurrection and Jesus' appearances afterward - would not have a clue about the significance behind a painting of Jesus appearing to two disciples on the road to Emmaus. it just looks like three people out for a stroll - - and none of them have an iPhone - - so how could they be communicating about anything significant anyway :( ...... But for many Christians the painting evokes feelings of joy and wonder. i guess a Bible with God-breathed photographs, pie charts, diagrams and index would be ideal....probably cost an arm and a leg though