You sound more & more like Blaine every day!
Give us the context
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 2/26/2005 5:18:39 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Barfh is a monstrous miscreant
The prophets and apostles as such, even in their office,… were real historical men as we are, and … Actually guilty of error in their spoken and written word (Church Dogmatics, I, 2, 528-529).
Like all ancient literature the Old and New Testaments know nothing of the distinction of fact and value … between history on the one hand and saga and legend on the other (I, 2, 509).
The vulnerability of the Bible, i.e., its capacity for error, also extends to its religious or theological content (I, 1,509).
In common with the creation story…the history of the resurrection has to be regarded…. as "saga" or "legend." The death of Jesus Christ can certainly be thought of as history in the modern sense, but not the resurrection (IV, 1, 336).
The "legend" of the finding of the empty tomb is not of itself and as such the attestation of Jesus Christ as he showed himself alive after his death. It is ancillary to this attestation. The one can be as little verified "historically" as the other. Certainly the empty tomb cannot serve as an "historical" proof (IV, 1, 341).
Kevin -- do you own these books? Or are you just quoting from some web site managed by those who are dishonest to the core and, consequently, not of the Spirit of the God. The first two quotes are so out of context as to be shameful in their presentation in your post.
JD
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball.
