To: CynicalBear
"Showing two distinct proven errors in books the CC uses is a straw man?" Are now you claiming the ability to inerrantly determine what is legitimate history as well as what is legitimate Scripture?
My assertion is that "history" does not refute either the Deuterocanonicals or Exodus, but you are demanding that you get to choose when history trumps Scripture and when it does not. You need to pick a story and stick to it.
3,471 posted on
11/22/2011 6:33:51 PM PST by
Natural Law
(If you love the Catholic Church raise your hands, if not raise your standards.)
To: Natural Law
>>but you are demanding that you get to choose when history trumps Scripture and when it does not<<
When a book claims something that is untrue it certainly isn’t infallibly inspired by God and is therefore unreliable.
To: Natural Law; CynicalBear; smvoice; boatbums; caww; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; ...
My assertion is that "history" science does not refute either the Deuterocanonicals or Exodus, but you are demanding that you get to choose when history science trumps Scripture and when it does not. You need to pick a story and stick to it. There, fixed it for YOU.
3,524 posted on
11/23/2011 6:10:40 AM PST by
metmom
(For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson