It Isn't at All Hard to Understand, Dave

Farrell Till (jftill@midwest.net)
Mon, 28 Apr 1997 23:08:39 -0500 (CDT)

Helen:
David, David, David, we been around about this before you don't merely claim
the Bible to be without contradiction, you claim it to be inerrant, without
error. Now, even if we bought you strange claim about the above, and I think
there are major problems when you put all the places in context and try and
explain where they wandered when, you not really going to claim that the
above mess is without error? Are you? To quote Yoel what kind of grade do you
think this kind of writing would get in grade school? Why?

TILL
You see, Dave, the problem isn't a bit difficult to understand. IF your
explanation of the Moseroth-Mt. Hor problem is true, then it is true that
this would not be a point of contradiction in the Bible. However, this
would not take you out of the woods, because you would then have to explain
why an omniscient, omnipotent deity would have inspired vague, confusing
passages that would lead people to suspect that a contradiction does exist
in the matter of where Aaron died. Inexact, confusing communication,
whether oral or written, is a mistake, an error, a flaw, an inaccuracy, a
gaffe, a boo-boo... call it whatever you may wish. It would be a state of
affairs that is incompatible with the claim that an omniscient, omnipotent
deity inspired the writing of the two passages that created the confusion.

Either deal with the problem or else leave the defense of biblical inerrancy
up to someone else, because, as an apologist, you have been a miserable failure.

Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net