Allgemein

Im Westminster Theological Journal ist der Artikel:

• Paul Helm: »B. B. Warfield’s Path to Inerrancy: An Attempt to Correct Some Serious Misunderstandings«, WTJ, Vol. 72, 2010, S. 23–42

erschienen. Helm schreibt:

There may well be features of Warfield’s path, the logic of his argument for the doctrine of biblical infallibility or inerrancy, that are open to criticism. Perhaps there is an inherent logical weakness in his inductivist approach to the data of Scripture. Perhaps Warfield is too naïve in his acceptance of the general reliability of the Bible. Perhaps he does not appreciate as he should that a river cannot rise higher than its source, that a book whose inerrancy is established on inductive grounds is, at best, only very probably inerrant. Perhaps he does not do justice to what Calvin called the self-authenticating character of Scripture. Perhaps he does not sufficiently stress the ineffability of the operation of the divine and human elements in the concursus that is inspiration. Perhaps at certain points he is under the influence of the Scottish Common Sense Philosophy. Perhaps he is not sufficiently under the influence of that philosophy. All such issues are a matter of legitimate debate. But these legitimate points of debate must arise from a fair and accurate and full exposition of Warfield’s views themselves, not from a caricature of them. To follow up these important issues here would take us beyond the scope of this study, which is to consider Warfield’s own path to inerrancy, not whether this is the best possible path.

Der Artikel, der gewiss einige Debatten anstiftet, kann derzeit hier heruntergeladen werden: Warfield20Inerrancy.pdf.