378
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 150:
Line 150: + + + +
Conservapedia talk:Is the Bible Inerrant? (view source)
Revision as of 15:45, April 5, 2007
, 15:45, April 5, 2007→What's this article trying to achieve?
::::"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again." / "Don't beat a dead horse."
::::"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again." / "Don't beat a dead horse."
:::::19:45, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::19:45, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
Excellent examples! - in fact there are few well-known proverbs that don't also have their opposites. But then that makes the point perfectly. No given 'pair' is likely to have been produced by the same person. Their very oppositeness suggests different hands with different views, ''not a single, monolithic author''.
And no, my purpose wasn't 'to discredit the Bible as the infallible Word of God' - merely to provoke people actually to look at the words (in some cases, apparently for the first time!) and decide for themselves whether that proposition is really tenable in the light of the facts. Thus, 'to discredit ''the dogma'' that the Bible is the infallible Word of God', possibly. But about the Bible I'm perfectly neutral. It's indubitably there, and it indubitably says what it says. I merely urge that people read it through clear glass, not stained glass. It's better for the eyes, you know!--[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 11:45, 5 April 2007 (EDT)