Responding to Critics

Responses to Some General Criticisms of I&I

• Introduction
• Criticism 1: I&I Is Inconsistent with the Reformed Faith
• Criticism 2: I&I Ignores Other Possible Solutions
• Criticism 3: I&I Denies Inerrancy
• Criticism 4: I&I Lacks Precision and Clarity
• Criticism 5: I&I Has Been Criticized by Some Important Scholars

Interactions with Bruce Waltke

• Bruce Waltke’s Revisiting Inspiration and Incarnation.
• My Response from the Westminster Theological Journal (Spring 2009)
• My response to the Introduction of Bruce Waltke’s surrejoinder to my response above.

Some Reflections on I&I and the Reformed Tradition

• Introduction
• I&I and the Authority of Scripture
• I&I and the Westminster Confession of Faith
• I&I and Inerrancy
• The Audience of I&I

Responses to Other Critical Reviews

• A Response to Paul Helm’s Review of Inspiration and Incarnation
• A “Conversation” Richard Pratt’s “Westminster and Contemporary Reformed Hermeneutics”