51
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 178:
Line 178: +
Talk:Essay:Adulteress Story (view source)
Revision as of 04:18, April 10, 2008
, 04:18, April 10, 2008→Inspired Word of God or Not
::::::::: Interesting how the first quote on your link to support a [[liberal]] interpretation of [[Jesus]] is ... the phony adulteress story. Will you admit that [[liberal]]s' favorite quote from the Gospels is widely recognized not to be an authentic original?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:41, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
::::::::: Interesting how the first quote on your link to support a [[liberal]] interpretation of [[Jesus]] is ... the phony adulteress story. Will you admit that [[liberal]]s' favorite quote from the Gospels is widely recognized not to be an authentic original?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:41, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
::::::::::I think the arguments above - that later addition might not be an adequate proxy for falsity - are well made. The Bible was compiled from various authors at various times. Some built upon the works of others, and added their own experiences. That a late edition must needs be a falsity doesn't follow. Further, if you're admitting that the Bible isn't all literal - that it's open to interpretation on some issues - there's a much harder issue you must face. How do you know which parts are open to interpretation, and which aren't? How can you be certain of any of your literal interpretations, anymore? This is a slipper slope, upon which I'm surprised to see you embark.-[[User:ArcturusM|ArcturusM]] 00:18, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
== Mosaic law ==
== Mosaic law ==