Phil Wilson's Blog: Uhhh....

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Uhhh....

Amazingly, I've got very little to say today. I've got some more fairly serious stuff coming tomorrow and Friday.

So, what do you want to talk about? Open thread.

6 comments:

gavin richardson said...: i wanted to talk about how i have to keep looking up words that lee camp uses... what's up with that? i thought you said it's an easy read. &:~); 3/28/2007 1:25 PM
Phil said...: Compared to Yoder, it is.

I'll give you Lee's email and you can ask him directly... ;-); 3/28/2007 2:03 PM
Adam said...: Proverbs 26:4-5
Discuss.
AE; 3/28/2007 2:08 PM
Jeff said...: I'll give you a topic - the Age of Enlightenment was neither an age, nor was it enlightened.

Discuss.; 3/28/2007 2:12 PM
Phil said...: I think that's a pretty foolish topic, Adam.

Jeff, it was enlightened for its time.; 3/28/2007 2:33 PM
Brent said...: How about something controversial (I know I'm a little late). A little discussion within the topic of inerrancy. I'd be curious to know what anyone thinks.

Luke begins his story by mentioning "In the days of King Herod of Judea...." (Luke 1:5). We know with certainty due to extensive records by the Romans that Herod was King from 37 B.C.E. until his death in 4 B.C.E. We read along in the story and get to Luke 2 where Joseph and Mary go to Nazareth during the reign of Quirinius as governor of Syria. Quirinius held no position in Syria until 6 C.E., where his title was the Imperial Legate of Syria-Cicilia. It is interesting to note that during this time we know an unpopular census for taxation was held in Israel.

Luke got it wrong. He confused some of his historical information and made his story work with incorrect facts. What does this do to the story Luke is telling? Does it cast doubt on his version of what happened, even though he claims to have investigate the matter thoroughly?; 3/28/2007 5:11 PM