![]() I believe that in the end all men will be gathered into the love of God” (p. In William Barclay: A Spiritual Autobiography (Grand Rapids, 1977), Barclay wrote: “I am a convinced universalist. 60 to 90, “laid away in some chest amongst the archives of their Churches, covered in dust and buried in neglect” (p. Barclay thinks the churches were so lackadaisical toward the apostolic writings that Paul’s epistles were forgotten and not used for a generation from A.D. He claims that Paul told his readers that he wrote as a mere man and not by divine inspiration (p. He claims that it is a mere accident of history that there are four Gospels, and he repeats his assertion that they contain contradictions and errors. In The Making of the Bible (1961), Barclay claims that the Gospels were not written until forty years after the death of Christ and were not given by inspiration of God but were haphazardly formed from various oral and written testimonies. 143), that the Greek of the book of Revelation is “so bad that a modern schoolboy would get into bad trouble for writing it” (p. 140), that Paul was merely giving his human opinion in 1 Corinthians 7 (p. 61, 141), that the Bible writers did not write under divine inspiration (p. ![]() 54), that the Gospels contain errors (pp. 53), that the Gospels are “not primarily historical documents” (p. 42), that the record of the birth and infancy of Christ are legends which might not be historically accurate (p. 35), that the authors of the Old Testament did not intend to write Scripture and their writings were not accepted as Scripture until centuries later (p. 28), that Isaiah was written by at least two unknown prophets (p. 24), that the Pentateuch evolved over a long period of time (p. 26), that the book of Deuteronomy was not written until the days of the kings (p. 25,26), that the record of creation and the flood are composites and are not historically accurate (p. In this book Barclay claims that Moses did not write most of the Pentateuch (pp. ![]() The Bible is the story of God acting and men interpreting, or failing to interpret, the action of God” (Barclay, Introducing the Bible, pp. … the Bible is rather the record and interpretation of these events rather than revelation in itself. … FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO HOLD THIS VIEW. THAT VIEW IS THE BASIS OF WHAT IS CALLED VERBAL INSPIRATION. In Introducing the Bible (1972), Barclay made the following clear denial of the infallible inspiration of Scripture: “The answer has sometimes been given that this book was written by God that every word and syllable and letter, every page and paragraph and sentence is the writing of God that the book is the verbatim word of God. He denied the miracle of Christ walking on the water and explains away the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000. In his book Daily Bible Reading: The Gospel of John, Barclay said that Jesus is divine but not God. He interpreted the miracles of Christ in a naturalistic fashion, claiming, for example, that Jesus did not actually walk on the water but that he was probably walking in shallow water near the beach and it only appeared to the disciples that he was walking on the water. ![]() He denied the infallibility of the Scripture, the virgin birth, deity, and substitutionary atonement of Christ, the eternality of Hell, and other cardinal Bible doctrines, and promoted the critical modernistic views of the Old Testament. He also published his own translation of the New Testament in 1969.Ģ. William Barclay (1907-1978) was a professor at Glasgow University for 28 years and a popular British Bible expositor who wrote several influential books on the Bible.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |