Users Product Reviews: |
Product Review Summary: not highly recommended All, I have to do is re-quote the "Neo-Calvinist"'s review:
I had to purchase and read this book for a seminary class that I took this past year. To be quite frank, I was very disappointed with it. There are only a few essays in the book that show substantial scholarship and solid writing (e.g. Walter Kaiser Jr.'s). Most of them tend to be reactionary in tone and contribute little to the discussion of inerrancy. I was especially frustrated by the ad hominem attacks on men like G. C. Berkouwer (c.f. Krabbendam's essay where he essentially says that Berkouwer either must have been living in great sin or not been a Christian to hold such a view of inerrancy).
A second problem I had with the book was its naive reliance upon Enlightenment philosophical categories to define the term "inerrancy." Most of the writers implicitly seemed to think that for something to be true it has to be "scientifically accurate" (granted, they would probably deny this; however, the underpinnings of Scottish Common Sense Philosophy are clearly there). The result is that the contributors often miss the point of the teleological thrust of Scripture. They are so concerned about proving the Bible to be a coherent, rational scientific text-book that they seldom stop to ask the questions: "what is the purpose of the Biblical text?" and "am I imposing an unwarranted philosophical framework upon the text which leads to unnecessary problems and dilemmas?"
In conclusion, I was also frustrated by the lack of real engagement with the topic. Most of the authors set up weak straw men of their opponents and talked past the real issues. As noted above the last essay by Henry Krabbendam degenerated into an ad hominem fist fight. While I understand why the authors are determined to defend their version of inerrancy (i.e. they are worried that Christianity will crumble from within if the God breathed character of Scripture is abandoned), I was still disappointed by what I perceived to be a mis-handling of the issues (compare the responses in this book to Millard Erickson's irenic, thoughtful discusion of inerrancy in his book Christian Theology).
Product Review Summary: A Timeless Work Defending Inerrancy of Scripture In our day and age it is not uncommon for people to say that they love Jesus but reject the Bible as the sole authority for faith and pratice. Furthermore, people often will accept the teachings of Jesus (or atleast those they agree with) and yet reject portions of the Bible such as Genesis 1-2 or the miracles recorded in the Bible because of science. They view the Bible as a work of faith and religion but science as being grounded in absolute truth.
This book, INERRANCY, edited by Norman Geisler defends the view that the Bible is to be accepted as the Word of God and without error in the original manuscripts. Based off the historical 1978 Chicago Statement on Inerrancy, this book was published in 1980 but is timeless in its defense of Scripture much the same as B.B. Warfield's book, THE INSPIRATION AND AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE. The book dives into the defense of the Bible as the infallible and inerrant Word of God by first looking at how Jesus viewed Scripture. This is vital. How Jesus viewed the Old Testament leads us to understanding how the Church viewed the entire Canon of Scripture. INERRANCY leaves no doubt that Jesus loved the Old Testament, viewed it as the Word of God, and accepted the Old Testament as historically true.
Overall this is a solid work. Despite being first published in 1980, INERRANCY is vital to helping the true Church of Christ defend the absolute trustworthiness of Scripture. If we doubt the inerrancy of Scripture and doubt, for example, the six day's of creation in Genesis 1-2, how can we trust that what Jesus said or did is true? We must accept the Bible from Genesis to Revelation as the inerrant Word or our faith is built only on faith and not clear, truthful statements from God Himself in His Word.
Product Review Summary: Make no mistake This unpopular but invaluable book sets forth the proofs for biblical "inerrancy"--the doctrine that every word of Christian Scripture is inspired by the Holy Ghost: the Bible is therefore literally true, scientifically sound, and historically accurate.
Granted, Geisler is unconcerned with grammatical errors, lapses in prose style, and awkward syntax. As one of my friends once said, it's interesting to note that when God wished to communicate with mankind, He decided to write a book - and that He did not first learn to write *better*. If I were God, and if the Bible were the best prose I could produce in six thousand years, then I would have the good sense to get off the great White Throne and let someone else sit there and think for a while. "Publish or perish," that's my motto.
But that's not Geisler's point.
Geisler reminds us that the Holy Bible is not just some long, bad, boring book comprised of 66 short, bad, boring books. It is the Word of God. It was written, not by Yahveh or Jesus, nor by Moses or King David or Paul, but by the holy Ghost - which is actually where the English phrase, "Ghost writer," comes from. Each book in the Bible bears the name of a celebrity or saint (e.g., Moses, King David, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John), and yet every one of those 66 books was actually dictated by the holy Ghost (2 Peter 1:21).
Working off and on from about 1500 BCE to 100 CE, with the help of various human secretaries, the holy Ghost finished writing the Bible in just under sixteen centuries - which on God's timetable is quick as a wink. He shifted gears as he went along. Starting out in ancient Hebrew (the only human language he ever fully mastered), the Ghost switched to Aramaic and thence to Greek, thereby to prove his diversity as a linguist, albeit with some unfortunate lapses with respect to standard grammar and prose style. But that's the whole point of Geisler's book: when it comes to proper grammar and literary sophistication, the good Lord, He do'nt give a dead ducks' fart about none of that.
Norman Geisler's *Inerrancy" reminds us that the Word of God was never supposed to be *literature*, it is supposed to be *true*. There is a difference.
With respect to factual accuracy, the holy Ghost's record is unimpeachable. God is a stickler for the facts. In that respect, the Lord is no less strict than, say, Judge Judy. You will not find in the entire English Bible a single misstatement, misquotation, exaggeration, or contradiction. The well-vetted New International Version in particular contains no theological or scientific or historical errors. In fact, apart from the aforesaid grammatical goofs, tangled syntax, bloopers in word-usage, etc., etc., etc., which are easily corrected by translators, the Holy Bible is the world's first and only book containing no mistakes of any kind.
Product Review Summary: Unconvincing Fundamentalism Geisler is a fundamentalist theologian who has written numerous apologetical and theological works. I will admit I'm strongly prejudiced against fundamentalism, but this theologian even actively takes creation science (the belief the Earth and universe are 10,000 years old) seriously and tries to dismiss any science which disagrees with this theological view.
He is familiar with Christian theological tradition, but on the whole, his works which try to prove fundamentalist dogmas are entirely unconvincing.
Product Review Summary: Disappointing I had to purchase and read this book for a seminary class that I took this past year. To be quite frank, I was very disappointed with it. There are only a few essays in the book that show substantial scholarship and solid writing (e.g. Walter Kaiser Jr.'s). Most of them tend to be reactionary in tone and contribute little to the discussion of inerrancy. I was especially frustrated by the ad hominem attacks on men like G. C. Berkouwer (c.f. Krabbendam's essay where he essentially says that Berkouwer either must have been living in great sin or not been a Christian to hold such a view of inerrancy).
A second problem I had with the book was its naive reliance upon Enlightenment philosophical categories to define the term "inerrancy." Most of the writers implicitly seemed to think that for something to be true it has to be "scientifically accurate" (granted, they would probably deny this; however, the underpinnings of Scottish Common Sense Philosophy are clearly there). The result is that the contributors often miss the point of the teleological thrust of Scripture. They are so concerned about proving the Bible to be a coherent, rational scientific text-book that they seldom stop to ask the questions: "what is the purpose of the Biblical text?" and "am I imposing an unwarranted philosophical framework upon the text which leads to unnecessary problems and dilemmas?"
In conclusion, I was also frustrated by the lack of real engagement with the topic. Most of the authors set up weak straw men of their opponents and talked past the real issues. As noted above the last essay by Henry Krabbendam degenerated into an ad hominem fist fight. While I understand why the authors are determined to defend their version of inerrancy (i.e. they are worried that Christianity will crumble from within if the God breathed character of Scripture is abandoned), I was still disappointed by what I perceived to be a mis-handling of the issues (compare the responses in this book to Millard Erickson's irenic, thoughtful discusion of inerrancy in his book Christian Theology).
|
Similar Products with reviews:
Let the Reader Understand: A Guide to Interpreting and Applying the Bible
The Doctrine of God (Contours of Christian Theology)
Christian Theology: An Introduction (4th Edition)
Doctrine of God (Students Reformed Theological Library)
Creation And Change: Genesis 112.4 in the Light of Changing Scientific Paradigms (Mentor)
|
