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