In Reply to: limits posted by Traveler on April 27, 2004 at 09:12:28:
I accept that:
1. God is almighty, and is therefore able to
2. Cause teh near-perfect transmission of a whole libray of books, the Bible, to be written over a period of 1500 years by over 40 authors, to be fully inspired and to only contain small grammatical errors in the thousands of extant manuscripts we still have.
Can you concede that this is at least possible?
I believe that other points of view about the richest and fullest archeological evidence in the entire history of the world can be shown to be based on a "liberal" view of theology, based on what is called "higher form criticism", and consist of an approach to the study of extant Bible manuscripts with an assumtion of "anti-supernaturalism's" philosophical prejudice against a simple, yet not simplistic faith, is to be assumed a priori.
On what are you basing your assumptions, Oldtimer?
There are manuscripts of the gospel of John dated at the approximate age of John the Revelator at the time he wrote his epistles and the book of Revelation. That's indisputable, whatever one's belief about it; it is an historical fact.
The Talmudists and the Masoretes copied texts letter for letter, knew the middle word and letter of each Old testament book, scrapped all imperfect manuscripts, etc., etc. This was the tradition into which the completely evangelistically=oriented writters and transmitters of the New Testament documents were born into. Again; that's an indisputable historical fact, not theory or assumption.
What is your actual historicla proof for your assumptions of your statements regading:
"...the time lapse between earth moving events and transcription several decades later by old aged men living a life of hardship, their memory of original experiences being replaced by later realized facts, the limits to writing style and documentation, limits of writing and copying material, writing trends, language and interpretation, translation factors, the passing along by word of mouth (potential disortions and inaccuracies), the limits of human understanding and abilities, the mixing in of egos and interpretations, the selection/discarding of documents by (often self-appointed) spiritual caretakers..."
I am thoroughly familiar with the arguments.
Like I said: On what are you basing this mere opinion?
Your language constructs portray a certainty I don't necessarily even accept as possible; with all due respect.
Be very careful about letting your opinions overthrow people's faith in God and in Christ.
Seriously.