Here we see a real problem. Giberson and Collins did not say that only a dead and lifeless text can be factually accurate. Dr. Mohler added the word only to the statement and this addition distorts the emphasis of what Giberson and Collins actually write in this paragraph. They are claiming that the Bible is a living and powerful book. This powerful living character is not defined by factual accuracy. Doesn’t the paragraph seem to say that even a dead and lifeless text can be factually accurate rather than only a dead and lifeless text? Scripture contains a variety of genre including poetry and story(at least in the parables) and there is power in the form – even Dr. Mohler would agree with this I believe.
- An Analysis of Mohler’s Response to McLaren (frozenclocks.wordpress.com)
- Karl Giberson – Changing the Language of Science and Faith (thechurchofjesuschrist.us)