Subject:
|
Re: Why not Both?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Jan 2001 23:10:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
535 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Culberson writes:
> > So, in other words, you refuse to admit that you might be wrong.
> No, I certainly might be wrong. I refuse to admit that the Bible might
> be wrong.
Which Bible, exactly? You're aware, I expect, the so-called original
texts have been translated and copied and edited and excerpted and altered
and reinterpreted and re-translated and re-copied over and over and over
again?What makes you think that the book your reading has any correspondence
to the original texts, and what makes you think the original texts were in
fact original? Much about early Christianity is derivative of surrounding
and existing myths. In addition, before you say "the Dead Sea Scrolls prove
it's the same Word," I would ask you to show me a complete, literal,
unbiased translation of the Scrolls.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
