Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (963)	9/20/2000 4:52:48 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 28931

We further deny that this absence renders the assertion of Biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant." If the translations are not necessarily inerrant, then which Bible is? Is there an original letter from Paul locked in the Vatican vaults? Even if the autographs are completely true, how can any copy be assertained as inerrant without the original to compare? Something doesn't add up here. TP

To: Greg or e who wrote (963)	9/20/2000 5:54:14 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

We further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original. Which means, Greg, that to the extent that they deviate from the original...they are NOT the word of God. Greg? There are no originals. Other than the fact, that the aforequoted statement is an unproven assertion made by fiat, and therefore remarkable only as a piece of trash, it still places upon your powers of reasoning(if, in fact, you still choose to believe it) the necessity of seeing that it admits the bible is errant where it does not agree with the original. In that you have no idea where it deviates from the original, it is irrational of you to trust even one word of it. And certainly, there would be absolutely no reason for you to EVER speak confidently about any of it (at least not on the basis of the Chicago argument)--loud laughter.