RE: A moral and ethical question for theists
July 12, 2015 at 1:47 pm
(This post was last modified: July 12, 2015 at 1:47 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(July 12, 2015 at 1:41 pm)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:(July 12, 2015 at 1:35 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: It doesn't.
Inerrant = not containing errors.
Bible contains errors, ergo it is not inerrant.
'The underlying message' has nothing to do with it. Either it contains no errors, or it contains errors, 'the message' notwithstanding.
Damn. Beat me to it.
Yeah...what he said. A text's inerrancy isn't in how much personal value the underlying message has, but whether the text contains contradictions and scientific/historical errors. If we're just ignoring what the text says and extrapolating hidden meanings from it, then it's no different from other literature and should be held in no higher regard.
^Well, while you are certainly taking it to the extreme in proportion to my own beliefs about it, this is partly why we have the Church and why we are not Sola Scriptura.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
