Shaking Matt's Faith
JAlw@aol.com JAlw@aol.com
Sun, 31 Jan 1999 01:20:55 EST (00917785255, 3694d290.36b3f647@aol.com)
In a message dated 99-01-31 01:10:58 EST, you write:
<< Subj: Re: Shaking Matt's Faith
Date: 99-01-31 01:10:58 EST
From: wcarter@mediaone.net (Jason Carter)
Sender: owner-errancy@infidels.org
To: errancy@infidels.org
> Matthew Bell
> The same as holding to the swoon theory can be done only by begging the
> question of NT inaccuracy!
> >>
>===============
>Joe Alward:
>
>So, are you admitting that you assume the Bible to be entirely truthful no
>matter how strong the evidence against certain passages might appear to be?
CARTER
Please show us this "strong evidence" against "certain passages."
-Jason
==================
Joe Alward:
I will try to do that later, if that's all right with you. The intent of my
question was not to allege that Matt *is* ignoring strong evidence; instead,
it was to determine whether he would consider anyone who would allege Bible
error to be one who "begs the question of NT errancy". More to the point, I
wanted to know whether he could even *imagine* evidence which cause him to
admit that the the bible contains significant error. I suspect that there
could not exist even hypothetical evidence which could shake the faith of the
believer, and I want to test to see if this were true for Matt Bell .
Perhaps you wouldn't mind taking this question? Can you conceive of any form
of evidence that would cause your faith in the inerrancy of the Bible to be
shaken?
After you answer that, if you want, I'll try to point to a passage for which a
strong case can be made for Bible error.