Defining Inerrancy: Affirming a Defensible Faith for a New Generation, by J. P. Holding and Nick Peters, published by Tekton E-Bricks on 22 May 2014, is intended to be a response to Norm Geisler and Bill Roach’s Defending Inerrancy—and so much more. Both have a similar cover and similar title. Defining Inerrancy, however, is a gloves-off defense and affirmation of a version of inerrancy that many are not acquainted with. That is, many except those who are Old and New Testament scholars.
Defining Inerrancy also interacts heavily with Norm Geisler and David Farnell’s The Jesus Quest, a book published just last March. The info on Amazon says that the eBook is the equivalent of 98 pages long, based on the number of “page turns” on a Kindle. A preliminary Word draft of Defining Inerrancy, sent to me by the authors, weighs in at just 74…
View original post 1,522 more words
St. John One: One 
“Our intuitive or individual type of apprehension may go astray as easily as our scientific or generalized apprehension may, and probably it errs more frequently and more seriously than the latter. It is in the quality, not the inerrancy, of its grasp that is superior. It apprehends events in an individual manner, less unlike the manner in which God apprehends them when he wills them. And therefore to describe the events which we apprehend in this manner as the work of God, has far more truth than to apply the same description to events as science construes them.”
A G Hogg
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you!
LikeLike
thank Dr. Wallace! and thank you.
LikeLike