Re: RE: For People Who Think There Was No Historical Jesus
February 13, 2013 at 8:24 pm
(This post was last modified: February 13, 2013 at 8:26 pm by fr0d0.)
(February 11, 2013 at 11:43 pm)catfish Wrote: And I'm fighting against that doctrine and when people propagate the lie, I have to point it out. Why do/did people call it inerrant when there's no reason to? I honestly don't think any logical person could ever read it for themself and come to that conclusion. I'm 99.9% sure that in every case it is because someone else convinced them.
.
To me this is just pig ignorance. You're trying to equate mistranslation with biblical errancy. Translation is a moving target. Stuff gets lost, stuff gets found. You are no one man wonder with the secret no one else figured out. What is meant by inerrancy is the accuracy of the text as a whole, as originally intended. Not some nit picking little jerk with some nuggets of new found translations that are nothing new, and that make no difference to the wider meaning.