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