{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/92914"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/92914","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"\"A new teaching-with authority!\": Evangelical traditioning and the challenges to the doctrine of inerrancy","abstract":"This study examines the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as an expression of evangelical traditioning and Bibliology. It raises the question of whether or not inerrancy can serve as a pedagogically responsible foundation for evangelical traditioning and Bibliology by asking two questions. Firstly, is inerrancy a barrier to theological growth? And secondly, is inerrancy intellectually honest? In answering these aforementioned questions, the dissertation examines the so-called Peter Enns controversy at Westminster Theological Seminary, contrasting an Ennsian approach as outlined in his Inspiration and Incarnation with an inerrantist approach as articulated in the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. The study argues that the doctrine of inerrancy is an improper foundation for both evangelical traditioning and Bibliology because the doctrine both quells an individual’s potential for theological growth and is intellectually dishonest when confronted with the challenges presented by modern biblical scholarship.","abstract_html":"This study examines the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as an expression of evangelical traditioning and Bibliology. It raises the question of whether or not inerrancy can serve as a pedagogically responsible foundation for evangelical traditioning and Bibliology by asking two questions. Firstly, is inerrancy a barrier to theological growth? And secondly, is inerrancy intellectually honest? In answering these aforementioned questions, the dissertation examines the so-called Peter Enns controversy at Westminster Theological Seminary, contrasting an Ennsian approach as outlined in his Inspiration and Incarnation with an inerrantist approach as articulated in the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. The study argues that the doctrine of inerrancy is an improper foundation for both evangelical traditioning and Bibliology because the doctrine both quells an individual’s potential for theological growth and is intellectually dishonest when confronted with the challenges presented by modern biblical scholarship.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Raybeck, Nathan Daniel"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Educational Policy Studies","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Dhillon, Pradeep","McKim, Robert","Layton, Richard A.","Pitard, Wayne"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2016,"date_issued":"2016-11-10T18:27:37Z","date_published":"2016-11-10T18:27:37Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:35Z","subjects":["Pedagogy","Biblical Inerrancy","Peter Enns Controversy","Evangelical Theology","Bibliology"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Copyright 2016 Nathan Daniel Raybeck"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/92914","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Dhillon, Pradeep","McKim, Robert","Layton, Richard A.","Pitard, Wayne"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Raybeck, Nathan Daniel"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2016-11-10T18:27:37Z","2018-11-11T10:15:19Z","2016-07-01","2016-08"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Educational Policy Studies"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Pedagogy","Biblical Inerrancy","Peter Enns Controversy","Evangelical Theology","Bibliology"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 2016 Nathan Daniel Raybeck"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/92914"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["This study examines the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as an expression of evangelical traditioning and Bibliology. It raises the question of whether or not inerrancy can serve as a pedagogically responsible foundation for evangelical traditioning and Bibliology by asking two questions. Firstly, is inerrancy a barrier to theological growth? And secondly, is inerrancy intellectually honest? In answering these aforementioned questions, the dissertation examines the so-called Peter Enns controversy at Westminster Theological Seminary, contrasting an Ennsian approach as outlined in his Inspiration and Incarnation with an inerrantist approach as articulated in the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. The study argues that the doctrine of inerrancy is an improper foundation for both evangelical traditioning and Bibliology because the doctrine both quells an individual’s potential for theological growth and is intellectually dishonest when confronted with the challenges presented by modern biblical scholarship."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["\"A new teaching-with authority!\": Evangelical traditioning and the challenges to the doctrine of inerrancy"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Dhillon, Pradeep","McKim, Robert","Layton, Richard A.","Pitard, Wayne"],"dc:creator":["Raybeck, Nathan Daniel"],"dc:date":["2016-11-10T18:27:37Z","2018-11-11T10:15:19Z","2016-07-01","2016-08"],"dc:description":["This study examines the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as an expression of evangelical traditioning and Bibliology. It raises the question of whether or not inerrancy can serve as a pedagogically responsible foundation for evangelical traditioning and Bibliology by asking two questions. Firstly, is inerrancy a barrier to theological growth? And secondly, is inerrancy intellectually honest? In answering these aforementioned questions, the dissertation examines the so-called Peter Enns controversy at Westminster Theological Seminary, contrasting an Ennsian approach as outlined in his Inspiration and Incarnation with an inerrantist approach as articulated in the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. The study argues that the doctrine of inerrancy is an improper foundation for both evangelical traditioning and Bibliology because the doctrine both quells an individual’s potential for theological growth and is intellectually dishonest when confronted with the challenges presented by modern biblical scholarship."],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/92914"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 2016 Nathan Daniel Raybeck"],"dc:subject":["Pedagogy","Biblical Inerrancy","Peter Enns Controversy","Evangelical Theology","Bibliology"],"dc:title":["\"A new teaching-with authority!\": Evangelical traditioning and the challenges to the doctrine of inerrancy"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Educational Policy Studies"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:35Z"}