This whole second Cainan subject has been talked to death, mainly by me.
Sorry. So I am going to concede and declare you the winner of this argument.
You wrote: I presume that Luke got his information directly from the LXX,
and that a copyist not finding Cainan in the Hebrew due to its elimination by
a careless scribe, decided to eliminate it from Luke as he was making copies,
thus the variant texts. Dating texts is certainly no easier than dating
flood sediments which you reject out of hand. To say that a copy is older
than another does not automatically mean that it is closer to the original or
has fewer errors. Copies went all over the place. There easily could have
been older texts that have long sense perished containing the second Cainan.
You wrote: We'll never know for sure.
Someday, maybe. When we all get to heaven. (1 Cor. 13:12)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 14 2002 - 14:06:44 EDT