Embed Notice
HTML Code
Corresponding Notice
- Embed this noticeThings NEET has said
>A translation of a later copy of an ancient text is more accurate than the oldest known copies of the text
>I will cite an early church father as a source to the claim that my version of the text is correct. Not that it merely existed, but that it is the true source, even though I can only cite one person potentially claiming this.
>That same person is not a viable source for your claim that "the world" doesn't refer to Incans and Native Americans, even though it clearly doesn't.
>In fact, I reject your entire claim and state that "the world" mean the entire planet and everything on it, even though nobody for the last 5000 years meant this.
Why do you think the Genesis 10 nations are in there? Where do you find the hubris to claim that the bible says something other than what it means? I can quote multiple OT prophets who in an english translation refer to "the world" and it not meaning the entire planet. I can quote the Gospel writers doing the same thing, referring to "the world" as the Roman empire alone. If other peoples were unknown to them, how in your tiny little brain can you assume they were referring to the unknown in their text? In fact, in some places the Greek grammar makes it clear they cannot be referring to things they have no knowledge of.