https://www.reasonablefaith.org/podcasts/defenders-podcast-series-3/s3-doctrine-of-revelation/doctrine-of-revelation-part-8
Difficulties with Biblical Inerrancy. The last time we met, we talked about a theory of biblical inspiration that would give us a verbal, plenary, and truly confluent Word of God that would make sense of the doctrine of inspiration found in the Bible. This raises the question of biblical authority and inerrancy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8c_imrGvMM
For more resources visit: http://www.reasonablefaith.orgDefenders is Dr William Lane Craig's weekly Sunday school class on Christian doctrine and apologetics

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/podcasts/defenders-podcast-series-2/s2-doctrine-of-revelation/doctrine-of-revelation-part-8
Doctrine of Revelation (part 8) February 13, 2010 Time: 00:32:43 ... Then I gave some suggestions on what our approaches to biblical difficulties ought to be. ... (if I may use that word!) on the side of caution. We should have a strong doctrine of biblical inerrancy unless and until it has been demonstrated that that is untenable, which we

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/contemporary-challenges-to-inerrancy/
The third of our four final challenges to inerrancy, and thus to truth, is a challenge to one's ability to know the truth about something. "The art of imperious ignorance" is an expression coined in an important essay by the late Michael J. Ovey. 6 It is well exemplified, Ovey says, in the Council of Sirmium (AD 357).

https://player.fm/series/defenders-podcast/defenders-doctrine-of-revelation-part-8-the-difficulties-of-biblical-inerrancy
Listen to Defenders: Doctrine Of Revelation (Part 8): The Difficulties Of Biblical Inerrancy and 299 more episodes by Defenders Podcast, free! No signup or install needed. Defenders: Doctrine of Creation (Part 6): Objections to creatio ex nihilo. Doctrine of Creation (Part 5): Arguments for creatio ex nihilo.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/unsystematictheology/2015/05/seven-problems-with-inerrancy-leaving-evangelicalism-2/
(7) The doctrine of inerrancy too often accepts the biblical texts as they are rather than seeking to discern what they might be pointing us toward. If we were to only read the Bible literally

https://theconversation.com/what-is-biblical-inerrancy-a-new-testament-scholar-explains-163613
The doctrine of inerrancy took shape during the 19th and 20th centuries in the United States. A statement crafted in 1978 by hundreds of evangelical leaders remains its fullest articulation.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/bible-difficulties/question6-consequences-when-inerrancy-is-rejected.cfm
1. The Bible Would Be Testifying Falsely about Itself. A denial of inerrancy means that Scripture is wrong when declaring God's words are never wrong. Consequently, when the Bible says that God's words are true it is telling a lie. If a person denies the doctrine of inerrancy, in effect, they are denying God's Word. God tells us His Word

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/bible-difficulties/question2-clarifications-to-inerrancy.cfm
5. Inerrancy Allows for Recording Different Details of the Same Event. The doctrine of inerrancy also allows for different writers to describe the same events with different details. This is particularly the case with the four gospels. Each gospel writer would have viewed events from his own unique perspective.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/podcasts/defenders-podcast-series-4/doctrine-of-revelation/difficulties-with-biblical-inerrancy-part-8
(2) Difficulties with Biblical Inerrancy. The last time We saw that inerrancy is properly defined in terms, not simply of what the Bible says, but in terms of what the Bible teaches, and that the Bible therefore (in virtue of being God's Word) is inerrant in all that it teaches. This doctrine confronts difficulties of various sorts.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/bible-difficulties/question1-what-is-the-doctrine-of-biblical-inerrancy.cfm
The doctrine of inerrancy teaches that the Bible, when properly interpreted, does not make any mistakes or contain any legends or myths. There are not any mistakes in recording historical events, or stating theological truths. The Bible is not deceitful or fraudulent in any way.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/images/uploads/02-revelation-final.pdf
will be on the doctrine of revelation. In surveying Christian doctrine, we are going to be looking at the traditional so-called loci communes of Protestant theology. The loci communes is Latin for the common places or chief themes or topics of Christian theology. Traditionally the loci communes would include things like doctrine of God,

https://www.cslewisinstitute.org/resources/the-inerrancy-of-scripture/
Inerrancy, positively defined, refers to a central and crucial property of the Bible, namely, its utter truthfulness. The basis for the doctrine of biblical inerrancy is located both in the nature of God and in the Bible's teaching about itself. First, if God is perfect—all-knowing, all-wise, all-good—it follows that God speaks the truth.

https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/what-is-the-inerrancy-debate-and-how-should-we-think-about-it
Finding nuance in the inerrancy debate. To be honest, here we must nuance things very carefully or we risk making indefensible claims about Scripture. It is important to stress that God's revelation in Scripture is accommodated to the worldview and expectations of its original audience in matters of the way the physical world works, the

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/inerrancy-evangelicals/
Inerrancy must be more than a shibboleth to affirm or a confessional box to check. Too much is at stake. Biblical inerrancy is an important part of our evangelical heritage and has deeply shaped our faith and practice. The same is true of the closely related doctrine of plenary-verbal inspiration.

https://beliefsandethics.com/why-i-reject-biblical-inerrancy/
So let's critique the case for inerrancy. 1. The Bible's claim and the authority of Jesus. A claim is a good place to start, but it's never sufficient to establish truth. So quoting 2 Tim. 3:16 or other similar passages is of little value here. The Qur'an and the Bhagavad Gita also claim to be the word of God.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/the-chicago-statement-on-biblical-inerrancy/
Article XII. We affirm that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit. We deny that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/bible-difficulties/question5-difference-between-inerrancy-infallibility.cfm
1. Inerrancy Is True and Should Be Used as a Test of Fellowship This position holds that the doctrine of inerrancy is the only consistent Christian doctrine to hold concerning the nature of the Bible. Those who claim to believe in Jesus, yet reject the doctrine of inerrancy, should not be welcomed in Christian fellowship until they repent.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/podcasts/defenders-podcast-series-3/s3-doctrine-of-revelation
Doctrine of Revelation (Part 7): The Authority of Scripture & Defining Inerrancy. Listen & More. Doctrine of Revelation (Part 8): The Difficulties of Biblical Inerrancy. Listen & More. Doctrine of Revelation (Part 9): Responding to the Difficulties of Biblical Inerrancy. Listen & More. Doctrine of Revelation (Part 10): Canonicity. Listen & More.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/images/uploads/02-revelation-07.pdf
doctrine of biblical inerrancy? Those who defend this doctrine would say that the Bible is truthful in everything that it affirms or everything that it teaches. So the inerrancy of the Bible doesn't extend to those portions of the Bible that are so to speak incidental to Scripture but are not part of the teaching or the affirmations that God

https://www.academia.edu/4711986/Five_Views_of_Biblical_Inerrancy
The rejection of inerrancy is a modern development in the church, brought about by the rejection of specific biblical texts as inspired and authoritative and by the rejection of the very idea of divine inspiration. Inerrancy has been what the church has believed, based upon the Bible's own testimony to itself.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/documents/podcasts/defenders-3/02-revelation-outline.pdf
4. Relation of General Revelation to Arguments for the Existence of God C. Special Revelation 1. Sense of "Special" 2. Types of Special Revelation (a) In the Living Word (Jesus Christ) (b)In the Written Word (the Bible) 3. Inspiration of Scripture (a) Extent of Inspiration (1)Plenary (2)Verbal (3)Confluent (b)Theories of Inspiration (1

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/bible-difficulties/question24-dont-missing-autographs-disprove-inerrancy.cfm
The inerrancy of Scripture is not based upon any missing autograph—it is based upon what the Bible says about itself. It is God's Word, and God does not make mistakes. Add to this the reliable way in which the Scriptures have been transmitted. There is no evidence that any part of Scripture has been changed or tampered with.