On Josephus in the Biblical Errancy newsletter: McKinsey: “This passage is so obviously spurious that it is astonishing to find a single theologian left in our time . The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy has 34 ratings and 4 reviews. Josh said: Anyone who claims themselves to be Christian needs to read this book, and b. This important new volume is the most comprehensive critique of the Bible ever written. Author C. Dennis McKinsey believes that Americans.
|Published (Last):||3 February 2013|
|PDF File Size:||12.13 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.56 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Aside from being merely an argument from authority, we can ask: For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is. Yet, why the hate on McKinsey’s part?
As one example, McKinsey makes the claim that the Bible cannot be true because one parable refers the mustard seed the smallest seed when it is, in fact, not. McKinsey doesn’t claim to be infallible, he leaves those claims to the fundementalists. It implies no such thing; perhaps McKinsey thinks that Pliny’s detailed descriptions indicate that he is trying to inform Trajan’s ignorance; but why should the fact that there were Christians in Rome mean that Trajan had to know what they believed?
He gets it by quoting the letter of Pliny exactly as follows:.
McKinsey then proceeds over several pages to critique arguments from various basic apologetics sources in which the same litany is repeated that “the verse allows no exceptions,” “no alternative was allowed,” , “nothing in the Bible allows for an exception,”  etc. The ellipses in the middle cover a multitude of sins, however. McKinsey cited this, and in response, someone wrote him a letter making the same point we did about taxonomic classification not yet being invented.
To begin, let me state who the intended audience is for this essay. This books serves as a useful tool for basic arguments and a nice summary of biblical contradictions, but is in no way the be-all-end-all of biblical errancy books. And let us not be deluded as to the importance of the trustworthiness of the gospels. McKinsey’s incredible reply, in the rd issue of the BE newsletter, tells us a great deal about the lengths McKinsey will argue to in order to keep from being, in his mind, proven wrong:.
Customers who viewed this item also viewed. I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. But taken in pieces, we shall errancu that his efforts fail. In The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy, McKinsey strives to tell both the good and the bad of biblical writings with the most comprehensive and thoroughly-researched expos?
I am amazed at how many people are able to shrug off the problems and fall back on “God said it, I believe it, that settles it” in spite of the fact that McKinsey rarely if ever goes outside the bible to prove it false. As a side note, McKinsey downplays the miraculous nature of the virgin birth by suggesting that such a birth is not miraculous, since artificial insemination can produce a virgin birth. Much of what I have learned in the defense of Scripture has come from healthy dialectics with skeptics.
Bethsaida was politically in Gaulonitis, and not in the political region of Galilee, but it was in the geographic region of Galilee. At the same time, it is obvious since Jesus did go on to heal the woman’s daughter, and the fact that he was already in Gentile territory, that this was far from being an established and absolute prohibition, but was rather some sort of test of response for faith. I am also a former hardened skeptic and thus can lay claim to the right to assert that I have been on both sides and have at times in my life made arguments from both sides.
Skeptics often fall prey to the idea that Scripture must be as we would think it to be in the 20th century. On the other hand, it should be stated again that McKinsey and those who vociferously attack inerrancy approach the Scriptures from the standpoint that any divergence is an error which requires convincing proof to the contrary.
But let us recall as well that at this time, Nero was not in the most reasonable frame of mind. McKinsey argues that the lack of criticism of biblical writings has wrongly affected millions of people in their beliefs, allowing many to believe the Bible to be the infallible word of God.
I have taught myself the languages and seek to learn more languages so as to help me understand the text so that I could approach the texts with honesty and objectivity. Mark Mirabello rated it it was amazing Apr 09, How does McKinsey know that it is not he who is insane, while the Biblical writers are in their right mind? Both words mean the same thing “skull”. The entire works of Tacitus were once regarded as such.
An Analysis of its Philosophical Roots. Item 5 then objects oddly that there would have been no need to mention an insignificant event like the Crucifixion in Roman records. Anyone wanting to believe Jesus lived and walked as a real live human being must do so despite the evidence, not because of it.
Dennis McKinsey – Wikipedia
The same polemical advantage is gained by quoting the likes of Paine, Ingersoll, etc. All both sides can do is study the issue and remain humble in light of the dearth of facts. In one case Nahum 1: Read it Forward Read it first.
A number of these objections are either repeated elsewhere or are answered by material mckijsey of this page. If the originals don’t have errors then McKinsey is wrong.
Zdenko Juskuv rated it really liked it Jan 11, For if there are errors in the Greek autographa of the gospels, then those of us two millenia removed from the alleged historical events that give boblical Christian faith its non-existential character have to be infallible in separating truth from error.
Something now should be added concerning the a priori views that I bring to this essay. Anyone who claims themselves to be Christian needs to read this book, and be able to explain for themselves how the bible should be understood when compared against the problems this book details. That’s not a surprise. The former said to contradict the latter which indicate that Jews were involved in the killing of Jesus.
Cites verses where Joseph is called the “father” of Jesus. I can’t say that it covers every mistake the bible makes, but biboical does a great job of showing the self-contradictions. For brief periods he was a civil rights investigator, a truant officer, and a government researcher. A personal note is presented for people’s edification.
Unfortunately, given the flexible nature of human discourse, whether written or spoken, it is actually much more work to reasonably assert a discrepancy in Scripture than skeptics seem to appreciate.