The Devil in Mohler's Inerrancy Details

[Stephen Fox]

http://www.albertmohler.com/2011/09/14/ ... ntroversy/

Mohler was on NPR Talk of the Nation Weds of this week, or Thursday, 21 or 22. I talked to a Beeson Div School student yesterday of Timothy George's school who wasn't buying Mohler's gobbledygook.

You put the column above with Mohler's national discussion with a scholar from Calvin College and Southern Baptists have talked themselves into a corner.
How long will public school teachers continue to fund this nonsense with their Cooperative Program Dollars.

Bring Rachel Held Evans to Shorter College to discuss Evolving in MonkeyTown with Mohler and then maybe Florida Atlantic. Take it on the road.
Google Mohler on Talk of the Nation and listen closely.


Thanks to Aaron Weaver for pointing out Mohler's blog above in his Baps Today blog wrapup of last week.

Find a copy of Gus Niebuhr's Beyond Tolerance and read his ten pages on Mohler.

[Sandy]

I guess I am not getting what this has to do with public school teachers funding the Cooperative Program. I'm scratching my head over that one.

If you'd care to point out where Mohler is mistaken, I'll read what you have to say.

[KeithE]

[Gene Scarborough]

[Sandy]

Now that's an intelligent, reasoned response, Gene. So why should anyone take you seriously?

[Gene Scarborough]

Anyone watching and listening to the rantings of CR over some 30+ years who has a brain / a little bit of Bible training / ANY knowledge of Jesus' command to "love and forgive one another"---cannot help but draw the same conclusion!!!

This is why many churches have taken "Baptist" off the sign!!!

[Gene Scarborough]

[Sandy]

The irony here is that moderate Baptists are putting together a discussion between two individuals who completely affirm the Chicago Statement on inerrancy, which they do not affirm, to claim that there is a devil in Mohler's inerrancy details. The fact of the matter is that you don't buy Lincona's interpretation or explanation, either, but only use him to make a point about Mohler.

Lincona's position, in fact, is exactly why inerrantists can claim that the accounts of the resurrection can be reconciled, and why the little prooftexts often cited by non-inerrantists to point out difficulty with the position, such as whether it was God or Satan who moved David to conduct the census, don't prove the point.

[KeithE]