Errancy, Devices, and the Courtroom Witness

In the previous video on definitions of "inerrancy" and the reportage model, I explained that if you are a traditional inerrantist, you already believe the reportage model of the Gospels. I also argued that any "inerrancy" that there is any point in believing is incompatible with the compositional device views, according to which the evangelists felt themselves free to change various facts.  But I also left space within the reportage model for those who aren't inerrantists, like myself. What if someone then said that there is nothing to choose between my own viewes and those of the compositional device theorists, claiming that both undermine reliability to an equal extent? I address that criticism in this video.  

If you're interested in more on the topic of Gospel reliability and the compositional device theories in video form, see "The Device Dilemma":  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJBiyXtlRAs&t=557s  

If you want to dive deeper into the arguments for and against, get The Mirror or the Mask, available in paperback or Kindle:  https://www.amazon.com/Mirror-Mask-Liberating-Gospels-Literary/dp/1947929070/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=mirror+or+the+mask&qid=1600272214&sr=8-1  #gospelreliability #mikelicona #lydiamcgrew

Originally uploaded Jul 18 2021