RE: Record few Americans believe in Biblical inerrancy.
December 21, 2017 at 4:50 pm
(This post was last modified: December 21, 2017 at 4:52 pm by Jehanne.)
(December 21, 2017 at 4:47 pm)alpha male Wrote:(December 21, 2017 at 4:05 pm)Jehanne Wrote: I would agree that in cultures without an established scientific community that superstitious beliefs are not necessarily a mental illness, but persisting in ridiculous beliefs when shown clear and convincing evidence to the contrary is a mental illness.
I agree. We disagree on the existence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. To you, a wiki page asserting scholarly consensus is clear and convincing evidence. To me, it's not.
It isn't Wikipedia; rather, it's the authoritative sources that the Wiki article cites and references.
(December 21, 2017 at 4:38 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(December 20, 2017 at 4:00 am)vulcanlogician Wrote: Other books in the NT are considered to be written "in the name of" various apostles. Dishonest practice, but hey, it's religion.
"In the name of" or "according to" are both way of ascribing authority to a text, not necessarily its authorship. It's like when a low feudalistic official says, "You are hereby summoned in the name of His Majesty, the King." The low official is claiming the King's authority for whatever he is about to say.
The Gospel of Peter claims, explicitly, to have been written by the Apostle Peter; do you accept that as being authentic?
