Re: OT: Racial superiority / Intelligent design was Re:

On 26 Jan, 15:29, roger.pea...@googlemail.com wrote:
> On Jan 25, 1:31=A0am, "Charles Hottel" <chot...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
in 
To 
 
t is 
must 
> 
 
.
> 
at 
y 
rt 
man 
d 
al 
ble 
eir 
> 
>
> Who knows?
> 
>
> Quite a lot of theological assumptions in there! =A0But it's fairly
> obvious that I can give you a message; quite why a God should not be
> able to do the same is not clear to me.
> 
>
> Not in any meaningful sense. =A0But I sense a perfect storm of strawmen
> about to be deployed. =A0The question that we should ask, surely, is why
> our masters want our minds to be populated with some many excuses as
> to why "Do not steal, do not commit adultery, do not lie" is not
> binding. =A0While they keep our minds off this question, and while we
> internalise what they feed us, we are unlikely to reach *any* valid
> conclusions. =A0Surely?
>
> All the best,
>
> Roger Pearse- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

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.