re-watched contagion. what a good movie

(Source: Spotify)

Last year, I think the author of hebrew’s bizarre way of interpreting texts threw me off more than it needed to. My initial thoughts were: the author is completely violating the text! Surely this is a mistake, and therefore bible must be wrong. Looking back now, I think this was an overreaction. It’s a really shallow definition for what it means to be “wrong” to begin with. A different mode of interpretation doesn’t necessarily mean the his point, that Jesus is above Jewish traditions, is false or anything. 

Still, I think this raises a very important question about the idea of the “non-contradiction” and “infallibility” of the Bible. What does it mean to be “infallible?” 

And what does it mean for the author of Hebrews to be doing a bad reading of Old Testament scripture?

THE TITLE IS A LINK

edit: wait guys, i wrote the post—i thought that was implied!

Experience was…merely the name men gave to their mistakes

—Oscar Wilde.