I would agree with Jim's statements. In everything there is truth. Even a
well construed lie must have truth in order to be believable. If one
understands this premise, then it must be true that all versions of the
bible and interpretations made must hold some truth. The question should be
which holds greater truth. Two people can come to the same conclusion from
different points of view, but it is the conclusion that is important, not on
which beach one stands.
Don P
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
Behalf Of Jim Eisele
Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2002 10:04 AM
To: spamfilter@BizTaxPros.com
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: Troy's two cents
Troy writes
>e) I believe that the original autographs of scripture were inspired by
God.
>I believe that they are completely authoritative. I also believe that they
>have been destroyed. Not one shred of any of it remains. If God did not
>preserve his word, then he is a liar and a fruitcake, and I want no part of
>him. (Psalm 12:6-7). If he did preserve his word, then it is here. Now
>where is it? I have made my choice. If you don't like my choice, lump it,
>or blow it out your ear for all I care.
Troy, I see no constructive value in your last statement.
Why would God have wasted the NIV, NASB, NKJV, RSV, etc. etc. etc. etc.
etc. people's time? Not to mention all foreign translations.
Jim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 17 2002 - 16:18:56 EST