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 : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (13717)	2/18/2011 10:30:34 AM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

"The Bible contains many items presented as fact that cannot have been true. Typically these are presented as miracles." If THAT is your chief objection to inerrancy then it is a very weak one. In fact it is nothing more than an assertion of your own philosophic naturalism. Certainly if one acknowledges the one miracle of the Creation of the Universe from nothing, then floating axe heads hardly represent much of an impediment to a larger understanding of reality and the possibility of the miraculous. "My belief is not a dogma because I don't teach it, nor do I consider it immutable ... two requirements of dogma." Forgive me if I am having a hard time not seeing your first statement as a dogmatic assertion. "I don't teach it" Assert/teach: what's the diff? Is it unsubstantiated? Philosophical Naturalism is indeed unsubstantiated. "(The moment one says the flood was regional, inerrancy has yielded to infallibility.)" I think you are confusing an inerrant text with an infallible interpretation. The two things are really quite different.