#2->Re: Problems with the Virgin Birth Story

Michael Fisher mwfisher@cts.com
Mon, 08 Feb 1999 21:18:46 -0800 (00918559126, 36BFC535.6919AC69@cts.com) 


JAlw@aol.com wrote:


> In a message dated 99-02-08 01:15:33 EST, you write:

> Michael Fisher:

>

> << If the inerrantist asserts that Jesus was born of Mary, betrothed to Joseph

>  and Virgin at coneption and birth then it is for HIM to prove the truth of

> the

>  assertion.

>

>      If the inerrantist cannot give reasonable answers, supported by evidence,

> to

>  any queries I make about that assertion, then that is evidence that perhaps

> there

>  is an error. >>

> =================

> Joe Alward:

>

> You're saying that if there's no evidence of a miracle having occurred, then

> that can be taken as evidence that the bible is in error.


ELF    Nope. I said evidence that _perhaps_ there is an error. The qualifier is
deliberate.

    Granted, the most correct statement of the conclusion that inerrancy reamains
unproven -- which is the proponents burden. If he has failed to prove the
proposition true, then he cannot validly continue to assert his claim.

JOE


> I think the most

> that can be done Till's challenge is to make Bell realize that he believes a

> miracle occurred because the Bible told him so.


ELF
    No.

    The most that can be done is to show that there is no valid reason to suppose
that any miracle occured.

    I suggest you go to your university library and check out a copy of Copi's
_Introduciton to Logic_, or other such text, and study the first few chapters
carefully.

    I say this not to be cute or sarcastic, but rather because whay you're having
a problem understanding is how logical arguments work, and rather than reinvent
the wheel I'm trying to send you to a souce that you can study which will clear up
the confusion you're experiencing on logical proof and valid conclusions.

¡Salud!

Mike, aka Elfish Chimera