In his book, Evangelical Answers (1997), Reformed Protestant apologist, Eric Svendsen, wrote:
Having read the works of Patrick Madrid, Karl Keating, and others who have defended instances of papal error, I would happen to agree 100% with him. However, this quote can also be reworked to present another truth, that of the "historical gymnastics and wishful [thinking]" of those who hold to biblical inerrancy:
It is abundantly clear by reading the Catholic apologists that they will not accept any evidence that overturns papal infallibility. No matter how badly a Pope has erred - morally, doctrinally, or otherwise - no charge against papal infallibility will ever stick. It would save us a lot of time if Catholic apologists will simply admit this. In reality, this is nothing short of historical gymnastics and wishful reconstructions at best - and blatant dishonesty at worst. (Evangelical Answers [Atlanta, Georgia: New Testament Restoration Foundation, 1997], p. 34)
Having read the works of Patrick Madrid, Karl Keating, and others who have defended instances of papal error, I would happen to agree 100% with him. However, this quote can also be reworked to present another truth, that of the "historical gymnastics and wishful [thinking]" of those who hold to biblical inerrancy:
It is abundantly clear by reading the Evangelical Protestant apologists that they will not accept any evidence that overturns biblical inerrancy No matter how badly a text has erred - historically, chronological or otherwise - no charge against biblical inerrancy will ever stick. It would save us a lot of time if Evangelical apologists will simply admit this. In reality, this is nothing short of historical gymnastics and wishful reconstructions at best - and blatant dishonesty at worst.
