RE: Harper Collins Study Bible

Vandergraaf, Chuck (
Sun, 31 Aug 1997 23:12:16 -0400

George Murphy comments, in reference to the Bible course Tamera referred

>"Come on! I certainly disagree with the prof - but wasn't this for a "Bible
as Literature" type of course?"

Maybe George knows more about that particular course than I do, but
Tamera stated that she is taking a "course on the Bible" and asked for
advice on how to deal with statements by an authoritative figure that
she apparently disagrees with. Hence my response and, I would guess,
that by Daniel Criswell as well.

Regardless of the aims of the course, stating that the Bible is not the
inspired Word of God and is "full of errors" draws attention away from
the real purpose of the Bible, which certainly was not to be yet another
piece of prose suitable for dissection to the enjoyment of academics.

I have nothing against studying the "Bible as literature" but I would
think that no study of this type would need the disclaimers that this
particular professor feels he needs to make.

Imagine if similar comments were made about the Koran or the Book of

Chuck Vandergraaf,
Pinawa, MB Canada
>From: Murphy[]
>Sent: Sunday, August 31, 1997 12:04 PM
>To: Daniel Criswell
>Subject: Re: Harper Collins Study Bible
>Daniel Criswell wrote:
>> If the professor told you that the "Harper Collins Study Bible" is not
>> the inspired word of God, what more is there to say?
>> What good is the book, and what good is the class, and what good is the
>> professor who would teach from such a thing.
> Certainly one can teach
>Gilgamesh, The Iliad, or The Divine Comedy - or for that matter, the
>Qu'ran - & think that they're worth knowing without believing them to be
>the inspired word of God.
> In arguing that the Bible should not be excluded from public
>schools, we sometimes make the point that one can't understand our
>culture without it. But if it can only be taught as the inspired Word
>of God, then those who oppose its use are on strong grounds in arguing
>for its exclusion.
> And - the Bible can effectively communicate the gospel even in
>such a secular setting, & even if the person teaching the course doesn't
>recognize its authority.
>George L. Murphy