...so the Bible cannot be entirely inerrant... Can anyone explain...
Good afternoon. My thoughts on the above... I do not believe that Jesus is bound by the covers of a book. Nor do I believe that following Jesus requires an inerrant Bible. The Bible is ‘not’ the foundation of the Christian faith. It wasn’t for early first century Christians (when the Bible didn’t even exist), and it’s not now. The Bible exists ‘because of’ Christianity, Christianity does ‘not’ exist ‘because of’ the Bible. *Jesus’ Resurrection is ‘the’ foundation of the Christian faith.* Christianity would ‘still’ be true even if there were no Bibles and no manuscripts. Jesus’ most devout first century followers never owned a Bible, never read a Bible...because there was no Bible to be had or read. And they never held a Bible because there was no Bible until the fourth century.
Originally Posted by antlers
IndyCA35 - I ‘do’ believe that the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus are literal historical events on this Earth. And to me, the faith of Christianity is anchored to, and based upon, the ‘event’ of the Resurrection.
Antlers,
I will give you this. Yours is an uncommon understanding of Christianity. You're skeptical enough of the recorded human claims that you are willing to question moral proclamations that see silly, or overly self serving to the authors. This is a good bulwark against you blindly following your religion down an immoral path. Additionally, I don't think you can be accused of blindly following some religious leader, since I'm now aware of any preaching your personal brand of your Faith.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
