The author writes: "The New Testament was inspired by God, and came from the pens of its writers or their amanuenses in infallible form, free from any defect of any sort, including scribal mistakes."

1) What does "inspired by God" mean? Does it mean the writer went into a trance and transcribed a verbatim message from God, as Berg seemed to believe? Sorry, I don't accept that, and there's plenty of evidence to suggest this is NOT how the synoptic gospels were written.

2) What is meant by the "infallible form, free of any defect"--? We know that the scriptures reflect the culture and historical periods in which they were written. NT writers who view the subjugation of women as God-ordained from the Fall of Man reflect that social bias in their texts. This bias is contradicted in the teachings and ministry of Jesus. If a cultural bias that goes against the teachings of Christ isn't a defect, then what is?

3) "...including scribal mistakes." Does that include contradictory details in Gospel accounts of Jesus' life? For example: Jesus' assault on the money-changers in the Temple courtyard. The synoptic gospels place this event at the end of his career; John's gospel places it at the beginning. Did Jesus overturn the money-changer's tables more than once? An inerrant scribe might be expected to at least mention the frequency with which a major teaching event occurred if it was more than once and at two different points in Jesus' life.

I don't like splitting hairs over the incongruency of details in various Gospel accounts, but I simply cannot understand the doctrine of scriptural inerrancy that Baptists cling to with such unreasonable force of conviction. Where are the scriptures to support the notion that scribal errors didn't occur in the writing of sacred texts? Even if there are such "proof" texts, it's a circular argument that says, "These writings are without error because God says they are without error." There's no way to prove such a claim. On the other hand, considerable evidence supports the argument that scripture contains scribal errors directly attributable to the fallible human beings who received the inspiration and penned all those jots and tittles.

4) What about the various formations of the New Testament canon that were made through a long string of church councils and synods? I believe the Holy Spirit guided the process when church leaders decided which books and which versions of those books were in and which were out of the official canon, but surely such a process over a period of time also implies a level of human error. Who's to say the canon was formulated under King James is without defect? The KJV canon stems from a 4th century fiat by one man--Bishop Athenaseus of Alexandria. Who's to say Athenaseus produced an "infallible form" and Gregory of Nazianzus got it totally wrong?