Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
I'm telling you that at its base is a false premise: That the scriptures are in error. It goes foreward from that assumption to find reasonable hypothesis why it is error. The Bible starts off as guilty.
If you took a look at their various historical theories closely you would find very little merit in them. At best they could have happened that way. The reason why conjecture is so readily accepted is because it fits with their false premise.
|
Tell me how trying to discover the historical authenticity of the existence of David and his empire, or anything else, as recorded in the bible, is assuming the scriptures are in error to begin with. Make no mistake (or willful mistake), it isn't "the bible is wrong on this subject, therefore let's show where it is wrong," it's "let's see if the bible is right or wrong on this subject." It's not until determining this that a premise is formed and a hypothesis follows. Just because the bible is incorrect more often than not is no fault of the scholars who study it.