Changes

In general, [[Liberal Christianity|Liberal Christians]] tend to reject Biblical inerrancy in both forms, since certain passages<ref>http://bible.cc/leviticus/18-22.htm</ref> clash with their liberal ideology regarding things like [[Homosexuality]] and the [[Women#New_Testament_statements_on_the_role_of_women|role of women]]. What they fail to realize is that if one is allowed to toss aside those passages which disagree with their personal politics, the document quickly loses any relevance as a guide to morality and [[Christian]] behavior. After all, how can any of it be sacred if one arbitrarily decides that [[Cafeteria Christianity|some of it isn't]]?

In general, [[Liberal Christianity|Liberal Christians]] tend to reject Biblical inerrancy in both forms, since certain passages<ref>http://bible.cc/leviticus/18-22.htm</ref> clash with their liberal ideology regarding things like [[Homosexuality]] and the [[Women#New_Testament_statements_on_the_role_of_women|role of women]]. What they fail to realize is that if one is allowed to toss aside those passages which disagree with their personal politics, the document quickly loses any relevance as a guide to morality and [[Christian]] behavior. After all, how can any of it be sacred if one arbitrarily decides that [[Cafeteria Christianity|some of it isn't]]?

Some argue that if the [[Alleged Bible contradictions|Bible]] cannot be proven inerrant, then the claim within it would be irrelevant.<ref>Geisler & Nix (1986). ''A General Introduction to the Bible.'' Moody Press, Chicago. ISBN 0-8024-2916-5</ref>   

Some argue that if the [[Alleged Bible contradictions|Bible]] cannot be proven inerrant, then the claim within it would be irrelevant.<ref>Geisler & Nix (1986). ''A General Introduction to the Bible.'' Moody Press, Chicago. ISBN 0-8024-2916-5</ref>

 

Two books in 1976 sparked a firestorm of books and papers amongst religious studies scholars. These were  Harold Lindsell's ''The Battle for the Bible'' and James Barr's ''Fundamentalism''.  Lindsell's book is sympathetic towards conservative Christianity, while Barr's is hostile.  Despite this key difference, both were in remarkable agreement that biblical inerrancy provides the "first line of defense" and demarks the "proverbial line in the sand" between [[Religious Left|liberal]] and [[Religious right|conservative christianity]]. <ref> "Evangelicals, Biblical Scholarship, and the Politics of the Modern American Academy" in ''Evangelicals and science in Historical Perspective'', David N. Livingstone, D. G. Hart, Mark A. Noll (Editors), Oxford University Press, 1999, p.306-326 </ref>

==External Links==

==External Links==