Debate Format

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

> At 17:14 14-02-99 -0500, G. R. Gaudreau wrote:

> >TILL

> >1.  Matt Bell will agree to affirm that it is a historical fact that

> >the mother of Jesus of Nazareth was a virgin at the time of his birth.

> >(He may, of course, submit a proposition that words the proposition

> >more to his satisfaction.)

> >

> >Matthew Bell

> >Such a proposition would be impossible to affirm. By definition it

> >could be affirmed as being 'historical', but not in it's most

> >meaningful sense, i.e. factually established as having occurred. It

> >could never be affirmed as a fact as it is not verifiable. The

> >proposition also begs the question of the existence of Jesus of

> >Nazareth (and a mother), aswell as the possibility of miracles

> >occurring.

> >

> [Dave Everett]

> Hello Matt,

> What parts of the bible do you think *would* be possible to affirm?


Matthew Bell
All of it could be affirmed, but not in a manner which would determine the
truth or falsity of the inerrancy claim.

> 

> Also, are you saying that you accept the possibility that there wasn't a

> virgin birth?


Matthew Bell
Yes, I accept the possibility that there wasn't a virgin birth, the same way I
accept the possibility that there is not a God, nor that the Bible is His
inerrant word.

Thanks
M.Bell

• Previous message: (The short version: Read this first) Re: Debate Format
• Next message: Debate Format
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]