Kam Weng Ng

Inerrancy and Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. Pt.2

Inerrancy and Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. Pt.2. KP10-IAB-09

A. Discrepancies due to copyist errors related to numbers due to copyist or scribal error. Examples: 1) Did David capture 1,700 of King Zobah’s horsemen (2 Samuel 8:4), or was it 7,000 (1 Chronicles 18:4)? 2) In 1 Sam 13:5, how were there 30,000 chariots and only 6,000 charioteers? 3) 1 Kings 4:26 – How can this verse say Solomon had 40,000 stalls when 2 Chronicles 9:25 says he had only 4,000 stalls? 4) David’s famine was seven years (2 Sam. 24:13) or three years (1 Chron. 21:12)?

B. Alleged discrepancies arising from incomplete but complementary accounts: Did Judas die by hanging himself (Matthew 27:5) or by falling headlong and bursting open with all his bowels gushing out (Acts 1:18)?

C. Proper perspective on archaeological data and alleged discrepancies (Edwin Yamauchi).

D. Lessons
1) Proper interpretation is crucial in the affirmation of inerrancy:2) Scripture is its best interpreter in canonical context. Scripture priority over fragmentary historical data.3) Inerrancy not naïve or simplistic but highly nuanced Biblical exegesis and hermeneutics must also be highly nuanced

You may view the full video at:
Inerrancy and Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. Pt.2.

Christological Origins of Paul’s Gospel

I. Doubts About the Authenticity of Paul’s Teachings
A common objection raised by critics of Christianity and Muslim apologists is that the apostle Paul distorted the teachings of Jesus and the apostles of the early Jewish-Christian community by importing ideas from the Greco-Roman mystery religions. These included ideas like a dying and rising god, sacramental meals of communion with patron gods, and salvation through union with a divine figure. The purpose of this paper is to refute the critics with historical and biblical evidence, and demonstrate how Paul’s gospel which was received by revelation in his encounter with the risen Christ on his way to Damascus displays consistencies with the teaching of Jesus and the apostles of the early Church.

A. The Claim of Hellenistic Influence
There are several problems with the critics’ theory that Paul was influenced by Hellenistic religions. Continue reading “Christological Origins of Paul’s Gospel”

Inerrancy and Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. Pt.1

Inerrancy and Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. Pt.1. KP10-IAB-08

A. Present purpose is to address claims of contradiction by laying out the proper framework in dealing with the difficulties and demonstrating with examples why we are justified in calling them “alleged contradictions”.

B. Origins of Discrepancies.

C. Common mistakes in alleging contradictions/ discrepancies .

D. Possibility of harmonization and principles of interpretation. The doctrine of inerrancy does not tell us a priori how we are to interpret individual passages. Rather, inerrancy maintains merely that whatever statements the Bible affirms are fully truthful when they are correctly interpreted in terms of their meaning in their cultural setting and the purpose for which they were written.

E. Some examples of alleged contradiction discussed and resolved – 1) Jesus cleansing of the temple, 2) Ordination of the disciples, 3) Temptations of Jesus, 4) Genealogies of Jesus, 5) Timing of Jesus cursing the fig tree and 6) Jesus sat on two or one donkey in the Triumphal entry, 6) date of Quirinius governorship etc.

You can watch the video at
Inerrancy and Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. Pt.1. KP10-IAB-08

Will N.T. Wright Go to Heaven?

New video from N.T. Wright
What if the Reformers had Emphasized Ephesians Instead? What the Reformers Missed about Justification: –

Will NT Wright go to heaven? Given all his polemics against the idea of saved souls going to heaven, I will certainly rejoice with the angels in heaven upon hearing an affirmative answer from NTW. Furthermore, given NTW’s rejection of soul-body dualism (of which there are various forms), it would be most enlightening to know how NTW would describe the nature of his existence in heaven (however defined by NTW).

The title of the video should have been – “What NT Wright missed about justification, the soul being forgiven and received into presence of God.” Continue reading “Will N.T. Wright Go to Heaven?”

The Covenant of Redemption Does Not Entail Social Trinitarianism or Tritheism

In my previous post, Salvation is Grounded in the Trinitarian Covenant of Redemption, I described how the plan of salvation which began with the “Father’s will” was then accepted for completion by the Son and fulfilled by the operation of the Holy Spirit raises a challenging question.¹ “Given that any covenant is premised on a plurality of participants, doesn’t the theology of Covenant of Redemption” lead to the questionable doctrine of social trinitarianism or worse, the heresy of tritheism?” Continue reading “The Covenant of Redemption Does Not Entail Social Trinitarianism or Tritheism”

1
It should be noted the sequence is logical rather than temporal.

Fundamental Argument of Inerrancy as a Necessary Consequence of Inspiration

Fundamental Argument of Inerrancy as a Necessary Consequence of Inspiration. KP10-IAB-07

A. The Fundamental Argument of Inerrancy
(1) Whatever the Bible affirms, God affirms.
(2) Whatever God affirms is true.
(3) Therefore, whatever the Bible affirms is true.

Inerrancy is a necessary deduction from the Bible’s teaching concerning its inspiration.
OT requirements for God’s prophets to be distinguished from false prophets is premised on absolute truthfulness. The Bible teaches its own authority, and this requires inerrancy. Matt. 5:17 – 20 and John 10: 34 – 35. Inerrancy follows from what the Bible says about God’s character.

B. Limited inerrancy which seeks to replace inerrancy with infallibility is rejected
E. J. Young explains that ‘inerrancy’ meant the Bible does not err, and “infallibility” meant the Bible cannot err. Both are inseparable. Indeed, infallibility is an even stronger affirmation than inerrancy.
“E. J. Young explains that ‘inerrancy’ meant the Bible does not err, and “infallibility” meant the Bible cannot err. Both are inseparable. Indeed, infallibility is an even stronger affirmation than inerrancy.”
CBSI Article XI emphasizes: The two terms are, in context, inextricable. In short, inerrancy and infallibility affirm that the whole of Scripture is true and not only parts of it.
The focus of inerrancy is not limited to issues of factual accuracy in Scripture. It is primarily concerned about the authority of Scripture

C. Consequences of Denial of Inspiration and Inerrancy
Once an interpreter of Scripture begins to use human standards of moral judgment to evaluate the truth status and authority of the Bible, in whole or in part, the authority of the Bible is immediately denied. The real standard of judgment is now to be human moral reason and sensitivity…The abandonment of inerrancy renders every biblical text suspect until it passes or fails some test of human reason (Albert Mohler).

You can watch the full video at:
Fundamental Argument of Inerrancy as a Necessary Consequence of Inspiration. KP10-IAB-07

Salvation is Grounded in the Trinitarian Covenant of Redemption

Christianity teaches a unique salvation where God takes the initiative in saving humankind from the plight of sin. God “chose us in him [Christ] before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will…which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in Christ” (Ephesians 1: 4-5, 10). Continue reading “Salvation is Grounded in the Trinitarian Covenant of Redemption”

Inerrancy Defined and Defended

Inerrancy Defined and Defended. KP10-IAB-06/10

A. Definition of inerrancy: “When all the facts become known, they will demonstrate that the Bible in its original autographs and correctly interpreted is entirely true and never false in all it affirms, whether relative to doctrine or ethics or the social, physical or life sciences” (Paul Feinberg).

Three qualifications: 1) Inerrancy applies equally to all parts of the Scripture as originally written (autographa). 2) Inerrancy is intimately tied up with hermeneutics. 3) Inerrancy is related to Scripture’s intention. 4) Inerrancy applies equally to all parts of the Bible as originally written. This means that no present manuscript or copy of Scripture, no matter how accurate, can be called inerrant. As such, the goal of textual criticism – Not inspired codex, but inspired text.

B. Inerrancy is defined in terms of truth and falsity rather than in terms of error. Inerrancy covers all areas of knowledge. Inerrancy is not limited to matters of soteriological or ethical concern.

C. Inerrancy is affirmed throughout church history (John Woodbridge).

D. Spectrum or typology of views on inerrancy.

E. Clearing common misunderstandings about inerrancy.
Common Charge: No existing original manuscripts. Therefore inerrancy is meaningless.
Answer: Difference between Inerrant Word(text) vs Inspired-Inerrant Codex.

Conclusion: Inerrancy means having an advance commitment to receive as truth from God all that scripture is found on inspection actually to teach (J. I. Packer).

You may view the video at
Inerrancy Defined and Defended. KP10-IAB-06/10

How Does A Triune God Have Mercy Since No One Within The Triune Godhead Needs Mercy?

I received this question in the mail last week.
QUESTION
Some Christian apologists question how Allah could be a God of love if he is absolute oneness or monadic. Who could he love before creation? In contrast, the Christian God is triune. Thus, the persons in the Trinity can love one another. This led me to reflect on another attribute of God, that is, his mercy. How does our triune God have mercy since no one within the triune Godhead needs mercy?

MY ANSWER
To your question whether the triune God had MERCY before creation – the answer is YES. God’s mercy is manifested in the Triune Covenant of Redemption.

First let me affirm your initial proposition that love is found in the triune God. Augustine, the great Christian philosopher in 5C AD shares an amazing insight which helps us grasp fully what the bible means in declaring that God is love (1 John 4:16). He explains how love is a trinity. Continue reading “How Does A Triune God Have Mercy Since No One Within The Triune Godhead Needs Mercy?”

Scriptural and Rational Defence of Eternal Punishment in Hell against Annihilationism

———————–
Annihilationism. The belief that all the wicked will be judged by God and thrown into the lake of fire, where they will cease to exist. Some annihilationists suggest that this will occur instantaneously, while others believe that the unrighteous may experience a brief period of awareness. However, all annihilationists agree that no individual, however wicked, will suffer eternally a conscious existence in hell. [Pocket Dict. Theological Terms]
————————

The Eternality of Future Punishment
Not only is the future judgment of unbelievers irreversible, but their punishment is eternal. We do not reject merely the idea that all will be saved; we also reject the contention that none will be eternally punished. The school of thought known as annihilationism, on the other hand, maintains that although not everyone will be saved, there is only one class of future existence. Those who are saved will have an unending life; those who are not saved will be eliminated or annihilated. They will simply cease to exist. While granting that not everyone deserves to be saved, to receive everlasting bliss, this position maintains that no one deserves endless suffering…

The problem with all of the forms of annihilationism is that they contradict biblical teaching. Continue reading “Scriptural and Rational Defence of Eternal Punishment in Hell against Annihilationism”