Orr adopts the
view that the subject of Inspiration must be approached through that of
Revelation. He says:
The older method was to prove first the inspiration (by historical
evidence, miracles, claims of writers), then through that establish revelation.
This view still finds an echo in the note sometimes heard-If the inspiration of
the Bible (commonly some theory of inspiration) be given up, what have we left
to hold by? It is urged, e.g., that unless we can demonstrate what is called
the “inerrancy” of the Biblical record, down even to its minutest details, the
whole edifice of belief in revealed religion falls to the ground. This, on the
face of it, is a most suicidal position for any defender of revelation to take
up.12
12 lbid.,
pp. 197, 198.
PREVIOUS
NEXT
No comments:
Post a Comment