Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site petsd.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!hplabs!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!petsd!cjh From: cjh@petsd.UUCP (Chris Henrich) Newsgroups: net.religion.christian Subject: Re: About Literalism: in what sense is Jesus son of David Message-ID: <612@petsd.UUCP> Date: Fri, 9-Aug-85 13:18:53 EDT Article-I.D.: petsd.612 Posted: Fri Aug 9 13:18:53 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 14-Aug-85 22:20:16 EDT References: <2194@sdcrdcf.UUCP> <1050@umcp-cs.UUCP> <2222@sdcrdcf.UUCP> <498@utastro.UUCP> Reply-To: cjh@petsd.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE) Organization: Perkin-Elmer DSG, Tinton Falls, N.J. Lines: 22 [] In article <498@utastro.UUCP> bill@utastro.UUCP (William H. Jefferys) addresses the issue of the conflicting family trees of Jesus: >There is a third theory that is convincing to me: Scripture was written >by men, and like all things written by men, it contains errors. There, >now, that wasn't so bad, was it? Nat bad at all. I incline to the view that these two incompatible passages are put there precisely to show us that we cannot take Scripture to be literally true down to the last irrelevant detail. Of course, this theory requires one to suppose that Somebody Up There has a sense of humor ... Chris -- Full-Name: Christopher J. Henrich UUCP: ..!(cornell | ariel | ukc | houxz)!vax135!petsd!cjh US Mail: MS 313; Perkin-Elmer; 106 Apple St; Tinton Falls, NJ 07724 Phone: (201) 758-7288