(April 18, 2012 at 5:24 pm)Stimbo Wrote: I quite often look around Ex Astris Scientia, the parent site, but somehow I missed this part of it. What amuses me is that these sort of 'difficulties' in something like Star Trek or similar are regarded as plot holes and are only to be expected from a long(ish) running series with many writers (Doctor Who is the same, only more so since it's initial run lasted twenty-six years). The same plot holes in the bible are brushed over as a) not there; b) translation errors; c) not meant literally; d) all of the above - a problem made so much worse since the book is meant to have only one, divine, author which either wrote the thing itself or dictated it.
Some inerrantists are changing the definition of inerrancy now to allow contradictions. I've heard some say that that the stories of the O.T. don't have to be factually true since they only served to give Israel "cultural identity." Contradictions in the gospels stories can be allowed now because it was part of the literary genre of writers adding fictive elements in a biography. It's becoming increasingly difficult for me to distinguish the Bible from myth as they concede more and more.
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
