Thank you Bruce for your points. Your concluding remarks about the paramount importance of our commitment to the key Truth of the Bible, are the important thing.
I am not being lazy - simply agreeing that the eternal truths of God’s love and justice and salvation through Jesus are the key ingredients.
I think that those who are challenging the authenticity of Jesus’ words are challenging God himself. The Bible is God’s Word, inspired and breathed through human means. God says in conclusion that anyone who changes or adds or removes any part of the Bible will be subject to the plagues described therein. So I would be very careful in my criticism of the Bible’s validity.
Does it change the value of the message if Jesus cleared the temple once or twice? I would say no as the message is clear. The temple was meant for worship and not for ripping people off.
You reliably offer gently provocative and thoughtful short articles, Bruce. I appreciate much of what you have written while preferring to retain the framework of inerrancy. Of course, I have a minor quibble with you: I tend not to see a problem with the claim that the original texts (to which we do not have access now) were without error. To make such a claim is merely to make an inference. It is an inference based on the overall and defensible integrity of biblical texts, the character of a perfect God, and the expectation that God will not deceive us in what He reveals.
Thank you Bruce for your points. Your concluding remarks about the paramount importance of our commitment to the key Truth of the Bible, are the important thing.
I am not being lazy - simply agreeing that the eternal truths of God’s love and justice and salvation through Jesus are the key ingredients.
I think that those who are challenging the authenticity of Jesus’ words are challenging God himself. The Bible is God’s Word, inspired and breathed through human means. God says in conclusion that anyone who changes or adds or removes any part of the Bible will be subject to the plagues described therein. So I would be very careful in my criticism of the Bible’s validity.
Does it change the value of the message if Jesus cleared the temple once or twice? I would say no as the message is clear. The temple was meant for worship and not for ripping people off.
Good article.
You reliably offer gently provocative and thoughtful short articles, Bruce. I appreciate much of what you have written while preferring to retain the framework of inerrancy. Of course, I have a minor quibble with you: I tend not to see a problem with the claim that the original texts (to which we do not have access now) were without error. To make such a claim is merely to make an inference. It is an inference based on the overall and defensible integrity of biblical texts, the character of a perfect God, and the expectation that God will not deceive us in what He reveals.