A Word from Mr. Lim: Forwarded from CCBE

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

At 04:17 PM 2/4/99 -0000, Matthew Bell wrote:

><snip>

>

>> D.Lim:

>> It seems that Mr Till has backed out from the list challenge, not having

>> reply with anything new or satisfactory for months.

>> 

>> I do not detect any new topic fixed yet for this challenge.

>> Which part of the bible are we referring to this time?

>> Lets see how Mr Till is not begging for question for errancy in the first

>> place.

>

>Matthew Bell

>So why don't you get on with it and give CCBE your 'in-depth' analysis of 'ken'

>which will clearly show the two Hebrew sources presented to you to be

>erroneous?

>


TILL
Matt, you have surely seen the traffic on this list.  I have this project in
the works, but there have been more coming in on the list directed at me
than I can cope with.  How do you expect me to deal with all the tangents
that Carter leads us into and take care of this and other matters too?  You
have no idea how many postings are in my in-box that I haven't been able to
get to.

By the way, if you will go back to what I posted on this subject earlier,
you will see that I said my investigation of the word "ken" had uncovered at
least one example where the word "ken" meant similar.  When I get back to
this project, I will include that in my posting and show that the context in
which the word was used is such that there can be no denial that it mean
only similar and not EXACTLY the same.  Your problem is going to be that you
can make no such claim for that kind of textual clarity in Exodus 7.

Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net

• Previous message: A Word from Mr. Lim: Forwarded from CCBE
• Next message: A Word from Mr. Lim: Forwarded from CCBE
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]