Jim Eisele wrote:
>
>
> A) This doesn't seem to be the proper forum for undermining
> the Bible.
First of all, complain to George Murphy who made the statement I
responded to.
Second, who suddenly appointed you to determine what issues may or may
not be discussed? If I am out line, Terry will will bounce the post. If
you want to be the editor, talk to him.
> B) If you are going to claim that there are errors in the
> Bible, please tell us why you think an omnipotent God
> would allow them.
Because, as pointed out in Glenn's original post and reference, our
omnipotent God did not select the books of the Bible ---- non-omnipotent
men did.
Try reading http://www.asa3.org/ASA/faithASA.html ---- item number 1.
That, I have always accepted.
Since you recently said:
> Could it be that Bible translators make presuppositions. Who is
> correct? The NIV folks, or the NASB and the RSV folks?
>
> Certainly, both cannot be correct. The proper translation is
> either "one day" or "the first day."
>
> I'm going with the NASB. I guess the NIV folks just figured no one
> would notice. Wouldn't it be nice if Bible translators didn't
> promote misunderstanding? Maybe ONE DAY I'll get a chance to make
> my feelings known to someone who has decision-making power.
>
Let me know when you, Jim Eisele, personally declare which version of
the Bible is completely error free so that I can be certain only to use
that version.
Walt
===================================
Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
In any consistent theory, there must
exist true but not provable statements.
(Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic
If you have already found the truth
without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 10 2002 - 09:40:53 EDT