RE: For People Who Think There Was No Historical Jesus
February 11, 2013 at 11:28 pm
(This post was last modified: February 11, 2013 at 11:29 pm by Cyberman.)
(February 11, 2013 at 11:19 pm)catfish Wrote: Yes, language matters. I was pointing out mistakes, so obviously I don't think it's inerrant, right? That's why it was a question. I want to know why he thinks it's "supposedly" inerrant. Did he (or you) take the word of someone else, or did he (or you) read it him/yourself?
Well, I managed to get his meaning without even having to think about it. The first thing I spotted was that he was agreeing with you. You pointed out some mistakes and Min pointed out the irony inherent in what is generally believed to be an inerrant book. He didn't say that he believes it is inerrant, supposedly or not, and neither did I. Rather, he was pointing out that it is commonly held to be inerrant, not necessarily by any present company but as a general perception.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
