Talk politics.

You keep hammering at this, and it's obvious you're not reading what I'm saying. The Scriptures say X. You say Christian theology has no reliance on the scriptures' accuracy. So I say, "Well, let all of the scriptures be false - down to the last detail." This means that historically, any claim made by the scriptures is false, right down to the existence of Jesus. Yes, I understand that the scriptures post-date Christianity. I'm just saying that you must defend at least some parts of them for accuracy, because if they are proven 100% inaccurate, then Jesus never existed. That is, if they are proven a 100% incorrect statement of the facts - like a birth certificate for a birth that never happened - then Christianity collapses. I'm not reversing causality. I'm saying there's an overlap in what the Scriptures say and what must be true for Christianity to be valid theology. Do you disagree? Or do you think that if the scriptures were proven 100% false, down to the statement that Jesus existed, Christianity would survive?