Back Page: autumn 1990
All first-year subscriptions to The Skeptical Review are free. We will
gladly send it to anyone who requests it as well as to those whom our readers
recommend to us. We ask only that you be reasonably certain that those you
recommend to receive it will be willing to read it. Many copies of this year's
issues were marked refused and returned to us.
Those who have contributed articles and other materials to The Skeptical
Review will continue to receive gift subscriptions; otherwise, all free sub-
scriptions for 1990 will expire with this issue. If you wish to continue receiv-
ing it, the annual cost will be $4. Paid subscriptions should be mailed to the
address at the bottom of page 2.
We would like to continue free subscriptions beyond the first year to
everyone wanting to read TSR, but publishing costs will not permit it. The
nominal subscription cost will also guarantee that the paper is going to those
interested in reading it.
Farrell Till and Bill Jackson, a Church-of-Christ preacher from Austin,
Texas, have completed a written debate on the Bible inerrancy doctrine. The
manuscripts are being published by the Southwest Church of Christ, 8900
Manchaca Road, Austin, TX 78748 and will soon be available at $2.25 per
This debate clearly exposes the absurdity of the inerrancy doctrine. We
enthusiastically recommend it. All orders should be directed to the above
the Septuagint dilemma, for what is true of the Septuagint version of Jeremi-
ah is generally true of its versions of the other Old Testament books. They
are characterized by faulty translation and significant variations from the
Masoretic text. Skeptics of the inerrancy doctrine have every right, then, to
ask its believers to explain why the Holy Spirit chose a flawed version of the
Old Testament as his primary source of scripture quotations in the writing of
the New Testament. And what should be our position relative to significant
variations between the Septuagint and Masoretic texts, as in the examples
cited above? Are we to believe that the Septuagint was verbally inspired and
the Masoretic wasn't? Or should we believe the Masoretic was inspired and
the Septuagint wasn't? Either choice poses major problems for inerrancy
proponents. If they go with the Holy Spirit and choose the Septuagint as the
"verbally inspired" version, they must explain why they have relied for so
long on the Masoretic as their primary textual source. If, on the other
hand, they choose the Masoretic, then they return us to where we started.
How do they explain why the Holy Spirit directed New Testament writers to
quote the uninspired Septuagint?
These are questions begging for answers. Perhaps some enterprising
inerrantist among our readers can give us the answers.
IF YOU MOVE...
All issues of TSR are now being mailed at bulk rates. If you move, you
must send us your new address if you wish to continue receiving TSR. The
post office will not forward it.
FREE SUBSCRIPTION: A free one-year subscription to The Skeptical
Review can be obtained by writing to P. O. Box 617, Canton, IL 61520-0617.