George,
Thank you, your assessment is reasonable, I believe. I am not yet
convinced that the events described actually happened, but I am
satisfied right now in believing that the gospels are not the pristine
historical and literal accounts that my church has been telling me they
are.
-Josh
>> "Does the evidence presented lend itself to belief that these
>> accounts are an absolutely infallible recollection of history,
or
>>could
>> they be something else? What that something else is I will not
>>attempt
>> to definitively conclude. It could be that they are the best
>> recollection of rumored or seen events; it could be fiction; it
>>could be
>> based on history, but embellished for political and theological
>> purposes."
>>With his "I will not attempt ..." he is (at least for the purposes of
that
>>essay)
>>ignoring what is in fact the purpose of the gospels. They are not
history
>>"embellished
>>for ... theological purposes" but theological documents based on
>>historical
>>persons and events.
>>
>> Shalom,
>> George
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Shalom,
>> George
>>
>>
>>George L. Murphy
>>gmurphy@raex.com
>>http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Tue Feb 3 09:41:49 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 03 2004 - 09:41:50 EST