Quote:
Originally Posted by Apocrypha
No, I don't hold up to 100% infalliability. There are places where there are allegories, there are a few minor places where theres differences in manuscripts like the ending of Mark or Daniel, and there are places that have the opinions of man (like when Paul said it was his personal opinion).
I believe it contains the message of salvation and the minor issues of this or that doesn't affect the main points. If I hinged my salvation in the 100% of everything or 0% of nothing position that too many folks take I would have walked away a long time ago when I studied how the cannon was formed, why there are different sets of manuscripts (not major differences, but it still torpedos the fundamentalist position on it), or when NT authors made minor memory to paper mistakes in referencing OT prophecies or NT stories.
It doesn't shake my faith on how many angels were at the tomb, how Judas died, or any of the other minor easy to understand memory to story to manuscript issues that exist.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by holinesspk
God's word is completely infallible. To believe otherwise is heretical and apostacy.
|
The holy one has a good point. If one admits that there are
any mistakes in the Bible (whether by transcription errors, or mistranslations, or "edits", or misquotes of Jesus or of anyone else, or contradictions, or historical errors, or in the canon selection), one must wonder if one's important doctrines may be derived from mistakes. Mustn't one?
Threaded Mode
