The historic message of the Bible needs to take precedence over the theological nature of the Bible. And here is where I feel we Evangelicals, in our zeal and love for the Bible, taint the Gospel with unnecessary additions. These additions, more often than not, drag us down rabbit trails where we can end up losing Jesus altogether as we defend against thousands of claims of Bible contradictions.This is really unbelievable. The theological nature of the Bible, outside some core represents a "taint" that risks "losing Jesus"? Contrast that with:
For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.
And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live.
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.
2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
And what do the Scripture teach about Jesus?
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Much more could be added, but inspiration and special creation are two of the things that Scripture teaches us about Jesus Christ. So, Patton should not consider these theological points either "unnecessary additions" or a "taint."