10
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 117:
Line 117: + +
Talk:Essay:Adulteress Story (view source)
Revision as of 23:00, April 8, 2008
, 23:00, April 8, 2008→A reason to "conserve" the story
::::: Mathewson and Devotchka are illustrating point 1 in [[liberal tricks]]. Perhaps they're hoping their fallacious arguments will fool a dimwitted viewer. Just a little thought is required to realize that non-authentic material is not biblical, such as the Gospel of Thomas.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:54, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
::::: Mathewson and Devotchka are illustrating point 1 in [[liberal tricks]]. Perhaps they're hoping their fallacious arguments will fool a dimwitted viewer. Just a little thought is required to realize that non-authentic material is not biblical, such as the Gospel of Thomas.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:54, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
::::::I didn't advance any argument - I asked for clarification. I'll try again: you're saying that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, apart from those parts that clearly aren't. Correct? --[[User:Devotchka|Devotchka]] 19:00, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
== Inspired Word of God or Not ==
== Inspired Word of God or Not ==