Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site mhuxr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mfs
From: mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (SIMON)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: flood and Bible
Message-ID: <185@mhuxr.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Jan-85 18:39:13 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxr.185
Posted: Mon Jan  7 18:39:13 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 8-Jan-85 04:03:11 EST
References: <181@teklds.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 18

> What I am wondering is how do you know what the Bible was intended
> to be.  According to the Bible itself, it is the "literal" word of
> God.  That is what sets it apart from all other writings or books.
> Just because God doesn't fit into our way of thinking doesn't mean
> we are right and He is wrong.  Perspective is a powerful thing.
> 
> karen alias larryg

Then in that case we should all learn Aramaic or whatever the written
language of 4000 BC was. There seems to be this interesting idea that
the King James version of the Bible, a translation with considerable
poetic license of the Vulgate, which was a Latin translation of the
Greek texts, which were themselves written records of the oral tradition and
original Aramaic texts. So much for the "literal word of God"
(unless you believe that all the translators and copists were only taking
divine dictation :-)

Marcel Simon