Purposes of the "Bible Study" vs. "The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy" forums

Actually a "Suggestions and Questions" type topic, but since it is fundamental to the new "Bible Study" forum, I'll post it here.The question is: What is the intent, per what sort of discussion is to happen in the two forums?What decides which forum a "Proposed New Topic" will go to?Perhaps I haven't been paying close enough attention in the "Private Administration Forum", but I, for one, am very uncertain about this.Adminnemooseus

Here's my understanding, in it's simplest form: Because of that, "Bible Study" is in "Social and Religious Issues Forums" group, whereas "The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy" is in the "Science Forums" group. In other words, according to this board, the accuracy of the Bible as a historical document should be studied using evidence-based arguments and logic.If another admin wants to add / clarify anything, please chime in!

I agree with Ben, although I would be curious as to what Arachnophilia and Brian would think. To me, Bible Studies will include the philosophy of religious thought pertaining to the Catholic, or the assemblies of God, or the Anglican...whoever the poster is from. The key? The origin of the thought must come from historic denominational belief...not educated theolical assumptions.i don't want Bible Study to be an analysis of what the evidence empirically suggests the passages to mean. i want it to be the traditions and theologies of the denominations. It can be between all denominations and I suppose that wm scott can particiapate on behalf of JW theology. Beyond that, historical evidence has no place in Bible Studies.This message has been edited by Phatboy, 05-15-2005 03:12 PM

I don't believe you can seperate reality from Bible study. The difference between the two forums IMHO is the subject matter of the discussion. For example, the meaning, moral or purpose of the Creation stories in Genesis could be discussed in Bible Studies regardless of whether it is myth or history.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Perhaps the litmus test could be, if the thread is refering to a non-biblical source (say, Josephus' works) it would go into the A&I forum: If it's just based on the Bible texts themselves (and studies thereof)it would go into the study forum.
There might be an exception for threads based on the internal consistancy of the Bible, but I'd be inclined to leave them as Bible Study.
The downside is you'd have to call it from the OP, unless you're psychic and know which way the thread is going to go...

that's sort of what i assumed. a lot of the previous threads from the inerrancy forum really should have gone here. however, a question:what happens if we're talking about errancy on a strictly textual basis? contradictions, or the jesus/torah, nevi'im thread? should it go here, or the other forum?

---

אָרַח

I'd put those all in "Accuracy and Inerrancy"; the topics you're mentioning question those aspects of the Bible (I think). "Bible Study" is more for discussing faith using the Bible than for arguing the accuracy / inaccuracy and errancy / inerrancy of single passages.I don't know if I can put it in words more than that. Feel free to make suggestions on a PNT at the appropriate link below, if you have a strong feeling about where one should go, and if you're convinced it's going to go where you DON'T want it to.BenThis message has been edited by AdminBen, Monday, 2005/05/16 05:34 PM

---

My take on it is that the litmus test for established topics here should be whether or not it is a common teaching within a denomination. Of course there are disagreements, but usually not within a denomination or group of churches.

I would see the Bible study forum as one which contains topics whose contents would be more or less internal to the texts.Obviously some topics would need to invole external data, but in general I'd say a Bible Study forum is to study the Bible.Take the Flood as an example. I'd say that the reasons for the Flood and what the Flood means in an overall biblcal context would be in the Bible Study forum. The topic wouldn't be relevant if it went on about whether there was a Flood or not, this type of discussion would be in the inerrancy forum.I would restrict Bible Study topics to more or less arguments concerned mainly with the content and meaning of the texts.A good example would be the flak that Jar has taken from Buz and Faith about his particular interpretation of certain verses in the Bible. The Bible study forum would be ideal for this as Jar, Faith and Buz are all arguing by using the text and their interpretations of it. This would be an ideal topic for Bible Study.I think as soon as someone mentions whether anything in the bible is either untrue because of some external information then it should not be in the Bible Study forum, if they are saying something is untrue because another part of the Bible *appears* to undermine the original claim, then it stays in the Biblical Studies forum.Brian.

I think much of what people have written above accurately captures the distinction between [forum=-1] and [forum=-31]. The name "Bible Study" was carefully chosen. That forum is intended to replicate a Bible study class that the pastor of a church might conduct. It's a forum for explaining and interpreting Biblical passages from a position of faith. Apologetics would fit in very well in this forum. In fact, I'd tend to be more strict here at EvC, because while many Bible study classes would probably permit skeptical perspectives, that would be out of place in our Bible Study forum. A skeptic wanting to understand how adherents interpret certain passages in the Bible should be welcome in this forum, and he can certainly offer his own interpretations, but he cannot call into question that the passage is the Word of God.The Biblical accuracy and inerrancy forum is intended to address the question of whether the Biblical stories are actually true. Standard approaches to developing evidence and arguing rationally are expected there.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Let me ask a question.In one of the Adult Bible study classes I taught in several churches we examined the myriad events leading to the creation of the Anglican church and KJV Bible as well as the BCP. These were actually historic events and conflicts that also went into RCC practices, various calendars, the Council of Trent, economics, politics and commerce.Would such a discussion fit in the Bible study forum?This message has been edited by jar, 05-16-2005 10:19 AM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sure! What would be out of place would be someone arguing that these events make clear that God and religion are the products of men and that there is no God. Arguments from this perspective would seem to belong in the B:A&I forum.--Percy

It is kinda in that realm as it showed that many of the decisions related to religion were driven by very human needs and restrictions.That's why I asked. But it was all taught with the priest in attendance and in several cases the priest copied all my material to use himself.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The problem here is that in a Bible Study, in some denominations, inerrency is a given and the study proceeds from that notion. The issue is where the source of Biblical interpretation comes from. If one denomination has a different interpretation, such as Anglican vs Assembly of God, it stays within the Bible study forum as a comparitive study. If, however, someone wishes to "prove" a textual interpretation, that would be better proven in accuracy/innerrency IMHO.