Is the doctrine of reserve, uknown to most, the reason that the doctrine of biblical inerrancy exists?

Question

Is biblical inerrancy simply the protestants replacement of papal inerrancy? Both of which amounts to idolatry?

The doctrine of reserve was a practice that hid certain biblical ideas from a new believer in order to not shake their faith?

Mix the two together and people over time blindly follow something that is not the original idea.

Suppose through the doctrine of reserve that contradictions or things hard to imagine were explained away or not at all?

Your thoughts?

or perhaps they were afraid that people would poke holes in their errorneous doctrines...

Interesting, not many responses... :-(

Answer 1

I believe it was to combat papal inerrancy. I agree, they both do amount to idolatry. Too many are placing the Bible equal to their God to the point that if someone says something disagreeable with their understanding of the Bible, they automatically start with the threats.

Most of the things that were hidden, through the doctrine of reserve, wasn't explained at all... if the "believer" came upon it and asked questions, the phrase "we take that on faith" is thrown out. As if, for some reason, you didn't just take it on faith, that meant you didn't believe anything of it and therefore the threat of hell would be assigned to you till you did just fall in with the "we take it on faith".

I believe a vast majority of pastors, etc... are using this very thing in order to keep the followers they do have and to keep those new to the faith from asking questions.

Claiming the Bible is inerrant, as if it were God, is Bibliolatry. Some scholars believe this is the majority of Protestants today... just like the majority of Catholics believe in the inerrancy of the Pope (though some explain it's only Moral Inerrancy... this still labels the Pope something that even the Bible claims doesn't exist since "all men are liars")

Answer 2

If they are afraid to shake the faith of a new believer, then they must not have a religion that inspires much faith at all.

Or they must not have faith in their god to keep others strong in faith. Or perhaps it is themselves they do not have faith in... I did not know this doctrine was practiced.

Perhaps this is one reason I'm not a Christian. In my prime questioning years, when asking about religion at church, I was given only the tritest and most simplistic of responces. (As adults often do when faced with a child who "cannot comprehend the more complex answer.") Since I trusted my elders to answer me to the best of their ability, it was easy to leave the church behind when I found more satisfactory answers elsewhere from people who were willing to explain complex ideas. Later, reading the Bible only confirmed my decision.

Thank you for this bit of enlightenment.

Answer 3

I'm not sure if that is how it happened or not but by simply comparing the doctrines of Judaism which should be the basis of Christian belief with the doctrines of Catholicism and Protestantism and it becomes blatantly obvious that huge changes in doctrine have taken place.

Answer 4

advantageous dream yet enable's be real...it extremely is not in any respect going to ensue. There are different the right thank you to ward off sexually transmitted ailments. and you seem suggesting that for the period of common terms "real" Christians wait until eventually marriage - human beings of different religions do as nicely, you be attentive to.