tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13840519.post3475125409479092592..comments2024-03-27T03:32:53.817-05:00Comments on Euangelion: Around the BlogsMichael F. Birdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09713482855679578651noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13840519.post-1295597689203187902008-12-08T12:58:00.000-06:002008-12-08T12:58:00.000-06:00I don't understand the last two sentences of the q...I don't understand the last two sentences of the quote; they seem circular to me. We decide what scripture "means", and that "meaning" is presumably inerrant -- but that is just saying we ought to interpret and apply scripture in ways that provide an inerrant "meaning" -- which requires a definition of what "inerrant" means on the front-end?dopderbeckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08464721595750013279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13840519.post-86739233826346108822008-12-08T12:45:00.000-06:002008-12-08T12:45:00.000-06:00Thanks for the post, Mike. On the Stephen Carlson...Thanks for the post, Mike. On the Stephen Carlson article, I wonder if you meant to link to Andrew Criddle's piece on Hypotyposeis that references it rather than to Stephen's NTS article? Cheers, MarkMark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13840519.post-33098943458251536122008-12-08T12:43:00.000-06:002008-12-08T12:43:00.000-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Mark Goodacrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.com