Do the Adultery Pericope and Mark 16:9-20 disprove the inerrancy of the Bible?

Upvote:0

There's a difference between how Muslims and Christians view their respective scriptures, which I think drives this argument from Muslims. In Islam, the Quran itself is considered to be holy. That is to say, they believe that the very text itself (and its grammar and words) was given by God through the angel Gabriel to Muhammad and that the text and language used is divine. That is why they treat the actual physical book with great respect.

In Christianity, we maintain that God inspired human writers to write the books which make up the Bible. In the Old Testament, God worked through Moses and the prophets to write the books; in the New Testament, He worked through the Apostles and those closely associated with them (i.e. Mark and Luke). So, the Bible is the Word of God, yet mediated through human writers who imparted their own stylistic and grammatical influences (for example, the Greek of John has semitic influences, whereas the Greek of Luke - since he was a Gentile - does not have these semitic traits).

So, in Islam there would be a problem with a text like the Adultery Pericope and the extended ending of Mark, since that would demonstrate that the text itself was not given by God to Muhammad or that it had been corrupted. However, in Christianity, this is not a problem. Whether these texts are original to the first manuscripts or added later is really immaterial. They don't introduce new doctrines and nothing really changes whether or not they're included or excluded. They fit within the overall context of the Bible, which is why they're part of it.

So, there's a difference between believing in the inerrancy of the Bible and believing whether or not these passages were originally part of it.

There are corollaries with this in other parts of Christian doctrine as well, such as the Sacraments (i.e. God's grace mediated through elements of His creation, like water and bread/wine) and the pastoral office (i.e. God's Word preached by sinful men).

A good article on the Quran is on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran#Significance_in_Islam

Upvote:2

The Adultery Pericope and the Long Ending of Mark prove no more than that they were additions to the gospels as originally written. They, by themselves, do not prove or disprove the inerrancy of the original compositions, and certainly not the spiritual essence of the Bible.

Since you believe in biblical inerancy, you would already have a definition for 'inerrancy' that suits you. However, Wikipedia says that biblical inerrancy, as formulated in the "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy", is the doctrine that the Bible "is without error or fault in all its teaching"; or, at least, that "Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact". Wikipedia goes on to say that some equate inerrancy with infallibility and others do not, and states that biblical inerrancy should not be confused with Biblical literalism.

More post

Search Posts

Related post