DAVE to TOD
<< One question: if you acknowledge that this god could
exist, but feel that you CAN deny certain "characteristics" of
this god, from where are you getting your sources of evidence
to judge this god? From the Bible? But don't you the believe
the Bible to be errant, and NOT have any divine inspiration?
So why would you accept it as truth and as representative of
the god it is discussing? >>
DAR
Whew.
But DAVE said earlier:
"Biblical errancy would definitely mean God does not exist -
and the reverse is true: if God does not exist, the Bible is
errant." --DAVE 11/27
And more:
(COURT 3/12) Darrel: I agree with your original point: that
the Bible cannot be used to validate itself - the validation for
the Bible must be found elsewhere. The Bible CAN be used
to discredit itself, if there is error found in it - I agree with this
as well.
(COURT 3/12) Farrell: I think the Bible can discredit itself -
as any document could - certainly. I don't think it can validate
itself though. It may be right in what it says certainly. But
what it says about itself is not submissible in this kind of
examination.
<snip> I disagree with you, I don't think the Bible can be
used to support its validity - there must be external sources for
this to be true (for example - God's existence and revelation of
authorship would validate what the Bible says) - but the Bible
just saying it is not enough. I agree with Yoel and Darrel on
this one.
DAR
Well, we do know Dave can type.
cheers,
Darrel
-------------------------
"By the way - I CANNOT demonstrate that my God exists." --
-Dave C. 3/31