| roger.pearse@googlemail.com 2008-01-30, 6:56 pm |
| On Jan 30, 6:34=A0pm, Alistair <alist...@ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 26 Jan, 15:29, roger.pea...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
d in[color=darkred]
e. To[color=darkred]
00[color=darkred]
it is[color=darkred]
e must[color=darkred]
>
me[color=darkred]
im.[color=darkred]
>
[color=darkred]
that[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
any[color=darkred]
part[color=darkred]
human[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
med[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
ical[color=darkred]
iable[color=darkred]
their[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
"[color=darkred]
>
>
>
>
>
>
[color=darkred]
>
> So editing the bible has not been meaningful. Perhaps you would like
> to comment on the gospels which have been shown to (in at least two
> cases) have a common precedent manuscript upon which they are heavily
> based.
Do document how this happens, after all four gospels have been
composed.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
|