Re: [asa] Lamoureux, Concordism, and Inerrancy

From: Merv <>
Date: Sat Mar 01 2008 - 20:29:14 EST

By the way, Michael, I need to go back and read Jonah again. I must
have missed the part where he swallowed the whale. Turnabout would be
fair play? :->


Michael Roberts wrote:
> George is really not so much Barthian as following the principles of
> the early Church where they began with the Gospel of Jesus Christ as
> proclaimed by the apostles and /supported /by the Old Testament and
> later by the NT writings which were recognised fairly quickly as
> authoritative especially the 4 Gospels Acts and Pauls letters . Thus
> Jesus Christ is the key of both the OT and NT.
> Here the use of the Bible is essential fro Christian belief and
> understanding but it is /normative/ rather than /formative./
> //
> This of course works in the opposite direction from inerrancy style
> evangelicalism (to be contrasted with classical protestant or early
> catholic theology), where they start from the Bible rather than
> Christ. Hence they have no guiding theme and of course Jonah
> swallowing the whale is as central as the resurrection.
> We also need to note that Inerrancy is a new idea and first came to
> attention in 1828 with R Haldane. Evangelicals before then (and since
> as well) held similar views of non-inerrancy to George and myself.
> Hence we don't have the problems of Concordism!! Inerrancy and similar
> views create problems and YEC as well as Dick Fischer, Hugh Ross and
> Glenn Morton desperately seek this concord which is not there
> Michael

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Mar 1 20:30:53 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Mar 01 2008 - 20:30:53 EST