*Alward: Alward Debates Till

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Joe Alward:

This post does not contain a response to Farrell's challenge to debate the
inerrancy question, and it's not even a signal that my views are as othogonal
to his as he seems to believe.  

In a another post to another correspondent, Till wrote:  " I am determined not
to spend any more time on Alward until he indicates that he is going to
address the central issue in his dispute with me, which is the longstanding
purpose of this list, i.e., to debate the Bible in accordance with the
doctrine of biblical inerrancy that was derived from the doctrine of verbal
inspiration."


I will be happy to address whatever issue Farrell cares to raise, but our
correspondence will be more productive, I think, if he would spell out in just
a few sentences what it is he affirms, what it is he thinks I believe that is
contrary to his view, and which specific points he wants me to address.  Then,
I will do that.  In return, perhaps he would agree to discuss the murrain-hail
dispute and tell me in greater detail why he thinks Bell's "harmonization" is
more viable than mine.  But, those can come after we discuss inerrancy.  I
will wait for a brief statement from Till. 

• Previous message: *Alward: All or Nothing (My thanks to Till)
• Next message: *Alward: Alward Debates Till
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]