JOURNAL ARTICLE CRITIQUE
Moises Silva “Old Princeton, Westminister, and Inerrancy” Westminister
Theological Journal 50(1988) 65-80
THEO 525 B10 LUO (Spring 2014)
Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary
Thomas O. Elder24618510
25 March, 2014
Interaction ...view middle of the document...
In fact, the former Princetonian president(Hodge)has been described as the champion of Biblical inerrancy. Third, the work proceeds to acknowledge the debate around Biblical inerrancy and progresses to the exegetical necessity of proper Biblical interpretation. The movement to Westminister of the mid
nineteen eighties is smoothly connected to “…the Old Princeton foundation of inerrancy….” The original speech and by necessity the article expand upon the concept that through proper
exegetical work there is a deepening rather than a lessening of Biblical authority “…within the framework of reformed orthodoxy….”
The thesis presented by the speaker is that there is no theologically serving work to be done
if in fact the scholar is accepting that the Holy Scriptures are less than infallible. For this argument, the definition of inerrancy is viewed through the understanding of the proponents of the doctrine. Keying strongly on B.B. Warfield’s work, the speaker focuses on the “…issue of authorial purpose or intent,” The speaker logically points out that this poses questions for the theologian which must be addressed before pushing forward in the discussion of inerrancy. The professional has no choice but to examine exegesis carefully and determine which came first the discussion of inerrancy or the faithfulness of Scriptures. The speaker approaches the topic from the perspective of the professional who is using The Scriptures toward the end work of ministry. The strength of the speaker’s argument is that any responsible theologian will agree that the writer’s purpose and intent must become a part of exegetical work. In doing so, the theologian must accept some things as being true.
The weakness of the speech is that the professor clearly is rallying against the proponants of liberal Biblical theology rampant in the mid nineteen eighties. The standing and the reputation of The Seminary are clearly at stake. If in fact, the speaker is not able to make a clear command
statement on Biblical inerrancy and the infallibility of The Scriptures the banner of right has fallen. Due to twisting of B.B....