But doesn't that invalidate the divinity of the bible itself?
Actually, parang yun pa nga yung claim to divinity eh, kasi kung inerrant/infallible yung scripture, it's because it's divine. If it's not divine, then scripture is fallible and contain errors. Of course subject to interpretation pa rin yan, just look at the debates regarding the creation myths.
In our church, we have been taught that the Scriptures (Old & New Testament in our case) explains itself. Any interpretation of a passage should be supported by the Bible itself and not influenced by human biases. I'm sorry I cannot elaborate deeply because I am still under training on how to do exegesis.
I believe this is the doctrine(?) of the inerrancy of the bible. I'm not an evangelical, so I can't explain as well as an evangelical theologian/pastor/scholar would, but yeah, the bible cannot be influenced by human biases, but humans can interpret it with the ultimate reference being scripture itself, holding that nothing in the bible is false nor does anything in the bible affirm anything contrary to fact.
This is one of the main frictions points between Protestants and Catholics, in that Catholics hold the bible as infallible, meaning there can be apparently opposing notions (within or outside the scripture, such as strict interpretation of mosaic law vs the law of Christ, or the creation myth is vs archaeological history) but in the moral end spiritual level, the bible is the paragon of faith and there is no error in such.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk