Liberals love to
say “The Bible talks more about poverty than anything
else,” and from this they claim support for their increasingly
socialist agenda.

The problem is, nearly every one of them reject
inerrancy—that is, the belief that the Bible in its original
autographs does not contain any errors. So the argument fails.




A
demonstrator shouts during a protest in front of the Finland embassy
against a new pulp mill in Uruguay owned by Finnish producer Botnia, in
Buenos Aires September 12, 2007. The plant in Uruguay’s Fray Bentos,
which will start production soon, has sparked a diplomatic dispute
between Argentina and Uruguay before the International Court in The
Hague. Environmentalists who fear it will pollute the River Uruguay,
shared by both countries, say they will not give up their fight until
the plant is relocated or dismantled. The placard reads: “Finland
pirate”. REUTERS/Enrique Marcarian (ARGENTINA)

Here’s how.

You can ask one question and expose the fundamental error in how liberals misread the Bible.

I did this last week in a lively exchange on my show with Bob
Edgar, who’s recently stepped down as the general secretary of
the National Council of Churches (ncccusa.org) in order to head up
another liberal group called Common Cause (commoncause.org).

I had asked him to lay out his main thesis from his latest book
“Middle Church: Reclaiming the Moral Values of the Faithful
Majority from the Religious Right.” [Read Al Mohler’s
excellent review here.]
Seeing as how I’m a proud member of the religious right, I was
curious as to how he planned to reclaim those moral values and, in
particular, which moral values he was referring to.

To no one’s surprise, least of all to me, Edgar laid out
exactly what I expected him to. I’ve heard the same thing dozens
of times from other leaders of the religious left I’ve had on.

Essentially, they want religious people to care less about
abortion, homosexuality and gay marriage and more about poverty, war
and the environment. That is, they want people to support pacifism,
environmentalism and socialism—or in terms of specific policies,
they want higher taxes to grow a larger welfare state, immediate
withdrawal from Iraq and everybody to pay a pollution tax in the form
of carbon offsets.

Or, to be even more clear, they just want voters to put Hillary in the White House.

Edgar’s primary argument comes down to this. He said,
“The Bible mentions abortion not once, homosexuality only twice,
and poverty or peace more than two thousand times. Yet somehow abortion
and homosexuality have become the litmus test of faith in public life
today.”

Set aside the obvious point that though the words
“abortion” and “homosexuality” aren’t in
the text, the concepts certainly are at Exodus 21:22-25; Gen 19:5-8;
Jude 7; Leviticus 18:22-23, 20:13; 1 Corinthians 6:9; 1 Timothy 1:9-10
and Romans 1:16-17, respectively. Far more than “not once or
twice.” Killing an unborn child is murder and homosexuality is a
sin. No way around it.

But here’s how to really expose how liberals misread the Bible. Ask them this question:

If the Bible is not the inerrant Word of God, then why should we
assume that God cares more about one group of merely human words over
another group of merely human words simply because they occur more
frequently in the text?

You see, it all comes down to one’s view of inerrancy.

Inerrancy is the view that God is the author of every single
word of the original autographs of both the Old and New Testaments, and
that He superintended the human authors to compose and record without
error exactly what He wanted, even down to the specific words that were
used.
continued…http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/FrankPastore/2007/09/16/exposing_how_liberals_misread_the_bible

Powered by ScribeFire.