Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: djo@pacbell.com (Dan'l DanehyOakes) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Errancy: Reasons? Message-ID: Date: 7 Jan 90 02:10:22 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA Lines: 19 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article kilroy@mimsy.umd.edu (Nancy's Sweetie) writes: >...I am not saying God was incapable of giving us flawless >Scriptures; I am only pointing out that he apparently decided not to, for >whatever reasons. ...(Note that, having read all the verses which >are usually used to claim that Scripture says it is perfect, I find that >interpretation often strained: I do not believe that the Bible claims to >be perfect, and therefore I am not contradicting it.) Hear! Hear!! And as for why God would choose not to give us inerrant Scriptures... ...perhaps its a way of enforcing free will -- a poke in the side and "Think for yourselves, guys -- I ain't going to hand it all to you on a silver platter." What would free will *mean* if we were handed algorithms for Correct Behavior that offered no latitude? Dan'l Danehy-Oakes