A Challenge to Farrell Till
Joseph Crea Joseph.Crea@worldnet.att.net
Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:52:44 +0000 (00918010364, 19990202205244.BMTO7829@LOCALNAME)
Hello, Matt!
At 04:06 PM 2/2/99 -0000, Matthew Bell wrote:
>Matthew Bell
>It is high time that I put my neck on the line for what I believe, i.e.
>Biblical Inerrancy, hence I am proposing to you (Farrell Till) that I will
>engage in written debate on any subject either:
>
>a) previously published in TSR and not responded to by an inerrantist.
>b) any other matter of alleged errancy you wish to discuss.
>
>The only things I require from any such debate is sufficient time to compose my
>responses and arguments and the right to either consult or involve CCBE on the
>matter(s) of debate.
>
>All debates will meet the criteria you requested of Turkel, i.e. debated on an
>open forum (the errancy list) and then in the TSR if you consider them anywhere
>near worthy of being included there. There will be no recourse to the use of
>eisegesis in my replies and as much as my ability allows me I will attempt to
>reply using the rules of logic, (e.g. not begging the question etc etc). To
>enable me to fulfil the latter, I would suggest that if he was willing, I would
>send all my replies to Michael Fisher before sending them to the list. He could
>then point out any logical fallacies contained within my post, which I would
>redress before sending to yourself. This is of course optional as they can be
>corrected as they are made.
>
>If I back out of any debate then I will remove myself from the list and engage
>no further in the apologetics of Biblical Inerrancy.
>
>I also reserve the right to publish any debate in full (no editing) on my
>web-page or any other appropriate forum I may choose.
>
>So what do you think Goliath? :)
CREA
Sounds good from here, Matt. Howerver, two questions (occasioned by
recent events) need to be answered. First, do you accept Farrell's
definition of the term inerrancy (of the Biblical sort, of course) for the
purposes of this proposed debate? And second, precisely what are the
criteria for determining that a text is in fact errant? After all, Jason
Carter held that even if the passage at Gen 2:19 meant that the animals were
created AFTER Adam, this would be an example of a fallible Bible but
wouldn't impugn the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy (or words to that effect).
With Mettaa,
Joseph Crea
<Joseph.Crea@worldnet.att.net>