. . . and there was this post that was obviously trying to inflame a debate about the Bible, and it came right out and said it - proclaiming an attack on the supposed "inerrency" of the Bible and there were already posts about how science has proven that it cannot absolutely in no-way-shape-or-form be accurate, and there I was, trying to post, trying to frame the debate, a simple question asking the presenter of the debate to frame the argument, specifically to define what were the parameters of the term "inerrency" - I even gave the example about the literal 6 days of Creation, because I know that's what hangs up a lot of people, because you have the fundamentalists who send everyone to Hell if they don't believe that the Earth is exactly 7000 years old - BY OUR RELATIVE VIEW OF TIME - and then you have the others who puff and fume and pout like little schoolboys "well if yer gonna tell me that garbage well youse can tek yer Bibble-n-shuvvit" and I really really want to get through that question and state that time is relative and the more we learn about the nature of the universe the more the Bible is proven true, and the smaller that we become in the scale of creation then the greater the gift of Jesus Christ and my GOD both those who believe and those who don't believe in the Bible are both wrong equally and it's a beautiful thing that we have the Word of God and each and every one of us is looking at it the wrong way!
and no, I'm not saying I have any great insight, because I'm wrong as well, and it's a beautiful beautiful thing to be wholly incorrect, because it reminds me upon Whom I must lean . . .
but then when I tried to go back to the debate I think it's been removed by the TED folks, because I can't find it anywhere! The only evidence is an email from some rube who replied to my post and he started out by saying, "The English police want you to know that the word is spelled INERRANT - with an A!"
oops! said I . . . my entire argument, killed by a misappropriated vowel!
No comments:
Post a Comment