DEBATE ON BIBLE MORALITY


In the next issue of _The_Skeptical_Review_, editor
Farrell Till and Lindell Mitchell, a Church-of-Christ preacher
from Livingston, Texas, will begin a written debate. Till will
affirm that the Israelite destruction of the Amalekite nation
(as recorded in the Bible) constituted moral atrocity; Mitchell
will deny that it was a moral atrocity.

As indicated in Clarence Lavender's article "Was It Morally
Right for God to Order the Killing of the Canaanites?" (TSR,
Winter 1993, pp. 6-7), biblical inerrantists argue that the massacre
of civilian populations, including even children and babies, in
time of war was morally right, if God so decreed it. They must
take this position, because the Bible clearly attributes such
actions to the Hebrew god Yahweh, who inerrantists believe was
the omniscient, omnipotent deity who inspired the writing of the
Bible. To say that Yahweh erred morally would be the death knell
for the inerrancy doctrine, so inerrantists must defend baby killing
while usually condemning abortion.

Lindell Mitchell refused to defend the massacre of the Amalekites,
but he did agree to deny that it was an atrocity. The debate will
continue through the Spring 1994 issue.

STUDY AIDS


In addition to _The_Skeptical_Review_, Skepticism,
Inc., publishes other materials that might be useful to those
wishing to hone their skills on the subject of Bible inerrancy.
The following booklets are available at $2.50 each, postage paid.

The _Laws-Till_Debate_, a 56-page unfinished debate
with James Laws, Jr., a professor of apologetics at Tennessee
Bible College. Although Laws challenged, he quit after only three
manuscript exchanges and has since refused to accept mail from
Till. Correspondence is reproduced in the booklet. _Jackson-Till
Debate_, a 64-page debate on the issue of Bible inerrancy
with a Church-of-Christ preacher. _Prophecies:_Imaginary
and_Unfulfilled_, an in-depth examination of the most commonly
claimed examples of prophecy fulfillment. Recently revised to
expand its scope.

BACK ISSUES of _The_Skeptical_Review_ from winter 1990
to the current edition (16 in all) are available at $1 per copy.


SAUL & THE WITCH OF ENDOR


The myth of Bible inerrancy can be easily exposed by two or more
writers. Quite often, the telling of the same story a second or
third time resulted in noticeable discrepancies. An example of
glaring inconsistency can be found in the two accounts of the
death of Saul, the first king of Israel, as told by the writers
of [ref001]2 Samuel
 and [ref002]1 Chronicles
. Both writers claimed that Yahweh engineered Saul's death
because of his disobedience, but the two versions of his disobedience
differ significantly. This is how the Chronicle writer summarized
Saul's ignominious death:

So Saul died for his unfaithfulness which he had committed against
Yahweh, because he did not keep the word of Yahweh, and also because
he consulted a medium for guidance. But he did not inquire of
Yahweh; therefore He killed him, and turned the kingdom over to
David the son of Jesse ([ref003]1 Chron. 10:13-15
).

The statement is too direct to be misunderstood. Saul consulted
a medium for guidance but did not inquire of Yahweh; therefore,
Yahweh killed him. The Chronicle writer did not record Saul's
experience with the medium who is commonly called "the Witch
of Endor," but the event was recorded in [ref004]1 Samuel 28
 in a way that clearly contradicts the statement in [ref005]1 Chronicles
:

Then the Philistines gathered together and came and encamped at
Shunem. So Saul gathered all Israel together, and they encamped
at Gilboa. When Saul saw the army of the Philistines, he was afraid,
and his heart trembled greatly. And when Saul inquired of Yahweh,
Yahweh did not answer him, either by dreams or by Urim or by the
prophets.



Then Saul said to his servants, "Find me a woman who is a
medium, that I may go to her and inquire of her." And his
servants said to him, "In fact, there is a woman who is a
medium at En Dor" ([ref006]vv:4-7
). The rest of the chapter records the actual seance in which
the witch at Endor conjured up the spirit of Samuel the prophet,
who told Saul that the next day his army would be defeated by
the Philistines and that he and his sons would be killed.

The significant thing to notice in this story is not the absurdity
of the writer's apparent belief that a medium actually conducted
a seance in which she conjured up the spirit of a dead man but
his obvious disagreement with the Chronicle writer's version of
Saul's death. The latter said that Saul consulted a medium but
did not inquire of Yahweh, and so Yahweh killed him. The writer
of [ref007]1 Samuel
, however, said that Saul did not consult the medium until
after he had inquired of Yahweh and had received no answer. Both
versions of this story cannot both be right. The discrepancy is
obvious, yet in the face of such glaring inconsistency as this,
inerrantists will stubbornly argue that the Bible is a perfectly
harmonious book from cover to cover. Go figure.

ARTICLES SOLICITED


With the change in our format, we will be publishing more materials.
If you have an idea for an article, we would be interested in
reading it. All articles should address specific points of inconsistency,
discrepancy, contradiction, or logical absurdity that illustrate
fallacies in the Bible inerrancy doctrine. Our style is thoroughness,
so we will expect in-depth discussion of major points. Unsupported
assertions and generalizations that characterize most fundamentalist
papers should be avoided. We will also consider pro-inerrancy
articles with the understanding that if we accept them, they will
be published simultaneously with our rebuttals.




[ref001] http://www.calvin.edu/cgi-bin/bible?II+Samuel
[ref002] http://www.calvin.edu/cgi-bin/bible?I+Chronicles
[ref003] http://www.calvin.edu/cgi-bin/bible?I+Chronicles+10:13-15
[ref004] http://www.calvin.edu/cgi-bin/bible?I+Samuel+28
[ref005] http://www.calvin.edu/cgi-bin/bible?I+Chronicles
[ref006] http://www.calvin.edu/cgi-bin/bible?I+Samuel+28:4-7
[ref007] http://www.calvin.edu/cgi-bin/bible?I+Samuel