Nemesis_Juggernaut writes:
I understand biblical inerrancy to mean that the bible has an unbroken, common thread running through the entire text, lending itself to divine inspiration.
That's a pretty useless "definition". You could pick 66 books at random from the Library of congress and claim that they have "an unbroken, common thread" but all you'd be doing is handwaving any discrepancies away. And how many people actually deny the possibility of divine inspiration?
However, some people interpret biblical inerrancy to mean that there are no textual errors within the Bible, or if there appear to be some, that its only an error on the part of the reader, or that a particular word or phrase has been effectively lost in translation.
That would certainly be the more common attitude at EvC. Some people even start new threads to sidestep the contradictions in other threads.
A proper definition of inerrancy would have to include the
a priori assumption that there aren't any genuine errors in the Bible, that four-legged insects, bat-birds and cud-chewing rabbits are errors on the readers' part and not the writers'.
Disclaimer: The above statement is without a doubt, the most LUDICROUS, IDIOTIC AND PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WILLFUL STUPIDITY, THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN OR HEARD.
™ Version 4.2