Can You Learn, Unlearn and Relearn from the "Inerrant and Infallible" Bible?

Learn, Unlearn, Relearn. The "conservative" Pharisees believed that Moses, their Torah and the Prophets (the Old Testament) were inerrant and infallible (Ps 18:30; 19:7; 119:89; Prov 30:5; Dt 8:3). It thus formed, framed and fixed their thoughts, consciousness and even their unconscious such that it could never change for any reason, not even upon seeing supernatural miracles (Jn 14:11). In order to learn they needed to unlearn and relearn their very own Scriptures. The problem was that they used their faith in their Scriptures to justify being closed, fixed, rigid, inflexible and not being pliable and open. They couldn't accept the welcoming and forgiveness of "horrible sinners" (Lk 15:1-2). They were "old wine skins" (Mt 9:16-17; Mk 2:22; Lk 5:37-38) stubbornly unwilling to be "born again" (Jn 3:3, 5; 1 Pet 1:23). Thus, they could not learn, unlearn or relearn anything from the Bible they claimed to believe in.

• Conservatives stress holiness, not unity. Liberals stress unity, not holiness. Christ stressed BOTH unity AND holiness and we collectively crucified him.
• "Conservative Christians" emphasize holiness often without unity with "sinners and tax collectors," while "Liberal Christians" emphasize unity with everyone [except those they disagree with!] often without holiness. But Christ emphasized both holiness and unity and both "conservatives" and "liberals" crucified Him.
• "Conservative Christians" emphasize holiness without unity, while "Liberal Christians" emphasize unity without holiness. But Christ emphasized holiness and unity and both "conservatives" and "liberals" crucified Him.
• Conservatives stress holiness not unity. Liberals stress unity not holiness. Christ stressed holiness AND unity and conservatives and liberals crucified Him.

Inerrancy and infallibility both refer to the idea that the Bible is without error. However, inerrancy emphasizes the accuracy of the Bible in all matters, including history and science, while infallibility emphasizes the Bible's reliability in matters of faith and doctrine.

"Inerrant" means there are no errors, while "infallible" means there can be no errors. For example, "inerrancy" refers to the belief that the Bible is free from error in matters of science and faith. "Infallibility" can refer to the more limited view that the Bible is without error in conveying God's self-revelation to humanity.

Some authors use "inerrancy" and "infallibility" interchangeably. Others say that "infallibility" says less than "inerrancy".

"Biblical inerrancy" is the belief that the Bible is without error or fault in its teachings. It implies that the Bible contains no material errors or internal contradictions in the original writings, and that it is completely trustworthy and accurate in all of its teachings and historical accounts. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy says that the Bible speaks with "infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches" and that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact.

Some equate inerrancy with biblical infallibility, while others do not. One definition of biblical infallibility is that the Bible makes no false or misleading statements on any topic.

• Conservatives stress holiness without unity. Liberals stress unity without holiness. But Christ stressed holiness and unity and both conservatives and liberals crucified Him.