I just wanted to make a clarification, since Mitchell is not the first person to twist my words from the post, Inerrancy as White Evangelical Folklore
Mitchell’s (and others from a facebook group I belonged to argued something similar)comments:
“It is you, Rod, you and not I, who have suggested that you take a specifically non-white, non-linear, and non-inerrantist approach in which your interpretation of the Bible is colored by your skin and you are free to consider certain parts of the Bible erroneous on some things.”
The question I have for readers like Mitchell, and others, understandably, is where exactly did I say that I could not trust the Bible when it came to slavery? Again, it is not the text or the people behind the text that is the problem, but the reception, of interpreters like Gary North and others. My challenge to inerrantists was to show us why we should even believe in the original manuscripts and their perfection, if Scripture does not even define itself in this manner? Do you see that? That is why it is white evangelical folklore, because the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy made it such. There were not black churches, etc., that were asked to be a part of defining this notion of inerrancy. Of course they would not be! Quite convenient!
Instead of relying on the “original manuscript” as being perfect, I argued that, “Jesus is the only original Bio-Text that one will ever need” and it is through that lens that Christians interpret Scripture. Of course, the idea that our bodies are texts in and of themselves may be heavy philosophical duty for some, but I think this is a clear departure from the white culture wars, white leaders on the right versus white leaders on the left. I was not arguing my skin color (as if that’s the definition of race) determined my hermeneutic. Only are poor reading of the aforementioned article would conclude such a fallacy. Lastly, I must add that such a reading is an indicator that the commenter does not wish to enter a conversation, but be the first to introduce the heretic accusation.
