I think we have thrashed this out sufficiently. I'll end with this
and you can have the last word. (I learned that sly technique from
>You are kidding, aren't you? Overzealous copyists have done all sorts of
>things just like that over the years in misguided attempts to help out God.
>One similar example that comes to mind can be found in your King James Bible
>in 1 John 5:7,8. This passage of "scripture" is widely know to be a complete
>fabrication created by a copyist who thought there were not quite enough
>proof texts for the Trinity doctrine in the Bible.
>You wrote: Further, Bible scholars can't even agree on the date of the
>Exodus, let alone the flood. Some date the Exodus at 1440 BC, and some say
>1290 BC. That's why I defer to archaeologists and historians with the date of
>2900 BC for the flood.
>The Bible scholars who assign a late date to the Exodus do not do so because
>they pay close attention to the words of Scripture. They do so because they
>"defer to archaeologists and historians."
That's a good way to avoid the pitfalls of "overzealous copyists."
Yours in Christ,
Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 10 2002 - 12:43:28 EDT