Boro Nut

You could try Googling it. You never know, it might say "Cannot find Porphyry's Tree. Did you mean Tyre Prophesy?"

Boro Nut

Boro Nut

I think you should consider Albert Cliprianu's avatar at the freethought forum
Albert's Avatar - Whoever is peeing on Adams neck has an amazing chopper - and at that elevation who else could it be but God? I think is contradictory that god would even have a chopper at all, let alone need to excrete, even on naked apple scrumpers.

Boro Nut

Chris Weimer

Thank you. That was mine That was hours of work on the genealogies, which I'll be adding the rest later.

Peter Kirby

Update: Kirbybot has finished making stubs for the 66 books of the Protestant Bible.

And work on the wiki is slow but splendid. The following alleged "errors" have been posted:

1 Chronicles 3:19

Mark 1:16

Mark 8:12

Mary Magdalene and the resurrection

Genesis 1:11

Luke 2:1

Luke 2:2

Luke 2:3

Genesis 1:2

Matthew placed first

Go ahead and write in the "Con" pieces or add arguments concerning different verses. Thanks!

best wishes,
Peter Kirby

Vinnie

if i submit something is someone allowed to delete or edit it?

Peter Kirby

People are allowed to edit only on the side that they support. Except for admins, who are allowed to edit everywhere. The principle is that one is not to undermine the arguments that are presented. If an insult is made, however, that will be edited or deleted.

There is a history to each page. If someone makes an unjustified edit, you can revert it to a previous version in the history.

If you would like your material not to be edited at all, please mark it "Vinnie:" before the entry and sign it with --~~~~. This would have the effect of providing a quote of oneself.

Legally, though, the site is licensed such that it can be edited without restriction; someone can even create a "fork" of the site and host it elsewhere, so long as a linkback is provided on every page that copies over material.

On the site errancywiki.com, however, I will make sure that quotes, of self and others, are not mucked up.

best wishes,
Peter Kirby

Stacey Melissa

What happens if I agree with most of the Pro side, but also some of the Con side at times?

Here's a hypothetical scenario... I'm on the Pro side of an issue, and I post my Pro material. No one comes along to post matching Con material, so my material is left just arguing to the wind. Furthermore, Con material can easily be found with a Google search. Would I be able to summarize and post the Con material that I find in the Google search, or would I be forced to wait for an inerrantist to do it?

The last thing I'd want to do would be to misrepresent anyone's position, but it sounds like I couldn't even present the Con side at all, since I'm very much an errantist.

Frankly, I think both sides often overstate their cases in debates on this topic, and I'd like to be able to give as fair a treatment as possible to both sides.

Peter Kirby

If you want to post in both sides on a particular verse, here's my suggestion:

Post your "Con" quotes and facts and other material under "Neutral". If appropriate, I will bump it up to the "Con" section.

If you want to be "Con" on some verses and "Pro" on others:

Be my guest.

best wishes,
Peter Kirby

LegendaryFrog

Looks to be a very welll executed project. I am looking forward to contributing!

lpetrich

I wonder how one handles text that extends over several verses, like Deuteronomy 7:1-5, which commands genocide for the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites.