Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1080817 Posts in 71542 Topics- by 19060 Members - Latest Member: Areon Tomek
Jump to:  
The Trombone ForumPractice BreakChit-ChatReligion(Moderator: bhcordova) TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 154   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: TTF "Read Da Book": The Christian Bible  (Read 132864 times)
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
bhcordova
Wielder of the Cat Litter Scoop

*
*
Offline Offline

Location: Nacogdoches, TX, USA
Joined: May 18, 2000
Posts: 7087
"Carpe Felix"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: Aug 24, 2015, 08:23AM »

No.  We know it's the truth because the Catholic Church says so.  (Remember, we put the New Testament together, and existed before the books were written)
Logged

Billy Cordova, MBA
Forum Administrator
bcordova@tromboneforum.org

Beware the Jabberwock, my son! - Lewis Carroll

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup - Anon.

St. Cecilia, pray for us.
MoominDave

*
Offline Offline

Location: Oxford, UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: 3290

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: Aug 24, 2015, 08:26AM »

"Jesus says so". As reported in Matthew. The connection from Jesus to us goes through Matthew here.

Billy, we're in danger of getting sidetracked from the thread content here. I could take extensive issue with that stance, but I'm not going to, in the interests of staying on-topic. Perhaps you could make the same statement in the RM3 topic?
Logged

Dave Taylor

(me, not the other one)
timothy42b
*
Offline Offline

Location: Colonial Heights, Virginia, US
Joined: Dec 7, 2000
Posts: 12140

View Profile
« Reply #22 on: Aug 24, 2015, 08:36AM »

Matthew 5:17English Standard Version (ESV)


Christ Came to Fulfill the Law

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Jesus in His own words Tim always treated the Scriptures as the divinely inspired Word of God, not just Timothy.

dd,
You're the one who dragged 2 Timothy into a discussion of Gen 1, so don't blame me.   Hi :) :)

1.  You're still stuck in the same circular do loop.  How do we know Jesus treated the scriptures as divinely inspired?  The scriptures say so.  How do we know that is right?  2 Timothy says so.  How do we know 2 Timothy is right?  It's in the scriptures.  

2.  I quote,
Quote
not just Timothy
Not just?  Did you really just say that?  Jesus died decades before Timothy was written.  Not to mention scholars agree 2 Timothy wasn't written by Paul.  Jesus would have had only portions of the OT (the canon of which was not fixed until about 70 AD).  

3.  The relevance to Genesis is in the Documentary Hypothesis, that tracks the Pentateuch to its 4 sources.  
Logged

Tim Richardson
MoominDave

*
Offline Offline

Location: Oxford, UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: 3290

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: Aug 24, 2015, 11:21AM »

So, let's keep this moving - here's my summary of Genesis 2. What do we think of it? NB No need to curtail discussion of Genesis 1 at this point if the conversation isn't finished - the two flow into each other.

Highlights

 - Day 7 = rest
 - Creation of Adam and Eve

Summary


 - We open (as already noted by Martin) with a brief conclusion to the events of Genesis 1 - it is noted that the "heavens and the earth" are now completed, and that after 6 days' labours, the 7th day is a day of rest.
 - The remainder of the chapter deals with the start of humanity - Adam is raised from dust; God plants a garden in Eden, where he places Adam, and in which all that he needs to live may be found.
 - The hydrography of the area is given in surprising detail, with the river of the garden splitting to become four rivers - Pishon, Gihon, Tigris, and Euphrates.
 - Adam is given the instruction to "work" and "keep" the garden - agriculture is officially sanctioned.
 - He is also forbidden to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, on pain of death.
 - Adam names the beasts and the birds.
 - God creates a companion for him (not yet named), constructed from Adam's rib while he sleeps.

Questions

1) The seventh day is specified as 'blessed' and 'holy' because God rested on it. How do we get from there to the injunction that we should rest on it? And how do we determine what day of the week is the seventh?
2) What is it that is breathed into Adam's nostrils by God? Does it correspond to a known concept?
3) Eden is described as "in the East", and some of the rivers listed as issuing from it are tantalisingly easily identified. What historical info do we have that might bear on its location?
4) Had the fall never occurred, how far do "work" and "keep" extend? Presumably the increasing population over generations would have necessitated an increase in food production in time. In what ways would this have been permissible?
5) The penalty for eating from the Tree of Knowledge is (slow) death. Were Adam and Eve immortal prior to eating from it? If so, would their children also have been? If so, how do we reconcile this intent with the knowledge that this implies an ever-increasing population? God must have known that this would become a problem in time with the initial conditions as set up. So did God know/intend from the start that the Tree of Knowledge would be eaten from? And hence did he set them up for a fall (pun fully intended)?
6) Is the medical fact that men and women have the same number of ribs a problem?
Logged

Dave Taylor

(me, not the other one)
Piano man
*
Offline Offline

Location:
Joined: Feb 10, 2006
Posts: 9860

View Profile
« Reply #24 on: Aug 24, 2015, 01:15PM »

I'm just posting to lurk (I think Moomin Dave has the right attitude toward this, but I think in general it will be more illuminating without the Christians circling the wagons against heathens such as myself).

I will say that in the interest of theology, I spent a lot of time in my teens and twenties carefully counting women's ribs.
Logged

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so." --Mark Twain
drizabone
*
Offline Offline

Location: Central Coast, Australia
Joined: Jun 30, 2004
Posts: 1919

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: Aug 24, 2015, 01:50PM »

Tim (or any other liberalish christian)

while I was researching this I looked up "best commentaries" to update my resources.  The answers were always fairly conservative commentaries.  I expext that's because the people that provided those reviews were conservative themselves.  But that leads to the question as to why liberals don't rate commentaries? 

So my questions are:
- do liberals read and write commentaries?  if not, then why not?
- what are some liberal commentaries that are respected, have good explanations of their understanding, are not too big and are at the easy/intermediate level?

thanks

Logged
drizabone
*
Offline Offline

Location: Central Coast, Australia
Joined: Jun 30, 2004
Posts: 1919

View Profile
« Reply #26 on: Aug 24, 2015, 02:16PM »

So, let's keep this moving - here's my summary of Genesis 2. What do we think of it? NB No need to curtail discussion of Genesis 1 at this point if the conversation isn't finished - the two flow into each other.

Highlights

 - Day 7 = rest
 - Creation of Adam and Eve

Summary


 - We open (as already noted by Martin) with a brief conclusion to the events of Genesis 1 - it is noted that the "heavens and the earth" are now completed, and that after 6 days' labours, the 7th day is a day of rest.
 - The remainder of the chapter deals with the start of humanity - Adam is raised from dust; God plants a garden in Eden, where he places Adam, and in which all that he needs to live may be found.
 - The hydrography of the area is given in surprising detail, with the river of the garden splitting to become four rivers - Pishon, Gihon, Tigris, and Euphrates.
 - Adam is given the instruction to "work" and "keep" the garden - agriculture is officially sanctioned.
 - He is also forbidden to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, on pain of death.
 - Adam names the beasts and the birds.
 - God creates a companion for him (not yet named), constructed from Adam's rib while he sleeps.

Questions

1) The seventh day is specified as 'blessed' and 'holy' because God rested on it. How do we get from there to the injunction that we should rest on it? And how do we determine what day of the week is the seventh?
2) What is it that is breathed into Adam's nostrils by God? Does it correspond to a known concept?
3) Eden is described as "in the East", and some of the rivers listed as issuing from it are tantalisingly easily identified. What historical info do we have that might bear on its location?
4) Had the fall never occurred, how far do "work" and "keep" extend? Presumably the increasing population over generations would have necessitated an increase in food production in time. In what ways would this have been permissible?
5) The penalty for eating from the Tree of Knowledge is (slow) death. Were Adam and Eve immortal prior to eating from it? If so, would their children also have been? If so, how do we reconcile this intent with the knowledge that this implies an ever-increasing population? God must have known that this would become a problem in time with the initial conditions as set up. So did God know/intend from the start that the Tree of Knowledge would be eaten from? And hence did he set them up for a fall (pun fully intended)?
6) Is the medical fact that men and women have the same number of ribs a problem?

Good stuff, Dave.

You didn't notice that in verse 5 that "no small plant of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground".  That seems to me an indication that God wasn't doing things without normal cause and effect applying, otherwise the logic of the verse wouldn't work.

My answers to your questions are:
1.  The Sabbath : you have to wait until Exodus 28: 8-11 to find out about that. 
2.  What is breathed into Adam's nostrils? Breathe is the same word as spirit. And I think its deliberately ambiguous - referring both to our actual breathe and to life.
3.  We don't know exactly where Eden is.  It was "hidden" when Adam and Eve are evicted.
4.  The Fall.  You're getting ahead of yourself.  Just be patient grasshopper, all will be explained in the next chapter.  :)
5.  Ditto
6.  I used to wonder about that when I was younger.  But always got distracted.  I expect that the number of ribs we have is determined by our genes and not whether God pinched one of Adams to make Eve.  So its not a problem.  (Reminds me of a brain teaser :  An archeologist found 2 very old dead bodies and immediately knew who they were.  How?)
Logged
MoominDave

*
Offline Offline

Location: Oxford, UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: 3290

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: Aug 24, 2015, 02:45PM »

1.  The Sabbath : you have to wait until Exodus 28: 8-11 to find out about that. 

8 And the skillfully woven band on it shall be made like it and be of one piece with it, of gold, blue and purple and scarlet yarns, and fine twined linen. 9 You shall take two onyx stones, and engrave on them the names of the sons of Israel, 10 six of their names on the one stone, and the names of the remaining six on the other stone, in the order of their birth. 11 As a jeweler engraves signets, so shall you engrave the two stones with the names of the sons of Israel. You shall enclose them in settings of gold filigree.

 Confused
 
Exodus 20:10 looks a more likely candidate, but not the only one.

2.  What is breathed into Adam's nostrils? Breathe is the same word as spirit. And I think its deliberately ambiguous - referring both to our actual breathe and to life.

I wonder if it has any relation to the religious concept of the soul?

3.  We don't know exactly where Eden is.  It was "hidden" when Adam and Eve are evicted.

Was it? Genesis 3:23-24 simply says

23 therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life.

That makes it sound to me as if it should still be there, along with the guards and their flaming swords. Which, completely tangentially, sparks me to recommend a (comedy) book: Good Omens, by (the sadly recently deceased) Terry Pratchett and (the happily not deceased yet) Neil Gaiman. You can read a slightly buggy version of the text online here - the first page makes clear the reason for the thought to have occurred here and now. One of my favourite books.

4.  The Fall.  You're getting ahead of yourself.  Just be patient grasshopper, all will be explained in the next chapter.  :)
5.  Ditto

Okay, I'll ask these again after John posts his summary of Chapter 3 when we've finished talking about this material.

6.  I used to wonder about that when I was younger.  But always got distracted.  I expect that the number of ribs we have is determined by our genes and not whether God pinched one of Adams to make Eve.  So its not a problem.  (Reminds me of a brain teaser :  An archeologist found 2 very old dead bodies and immediately knew who they were.  How?)

I concur - for a loss of a body part in life to propagate to the next generation would be an example of Lamarck's long-discredited theory of heritability. But I wondered if it had at any point sparked theological debate.
Logged

Dave Taylor

(me, not the other one)
MoominDave

*
Offline Offline

Location: Oxford, UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: 3290

View Profile
« Reply #28 on: Aug 24, 2015, 03:18PM »

I've created an online Google spreadsheet which anyone can edit to keep track of who is due to summarise which chapters.

If you can't work it (some phones don't work well with Google sheets, for example), just make a post here, and I or another will modify it for you. I've also altered the initial post of this thread to contain the same link.
Logged

Dave Taylor

(me, not the other one)
John the Theologian
*
Online Online

Location:
Joined: Feb 16, 2013
Posts: 741

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: Aug 24, 2015, 03:39PM »

Thanks! I think it has a lot of potential too. Do you fancy putting your name down for a chapter or two? We're still working out the details of how best to allocate/volunteer chapters - looks like we have the first 5 chapters covered at the moment.

Not my findings - rather what the internet tells me is the current academic consensus. Assuming I read it all correctly, anyhow!

But don't forget that as a non-Christian I (and more generally, scholars) am/are not bound by your rule - if it seems historically and textually most plausible that the Pentateuch came together over a vast span of years, there's no imperative to automatically reject that conclusion simply because someone else later on in the same book (in a passage authored a further millennium later on) says that it can't be so. Similarly, scholars seem quite divided on whether Moses himself was a historical personage - certainly they have had a very hard time trying to match his times and deeds up with say the more rigorously chronicled history of Egypt.

You take as axiomatic that what is in this book that we consider is True. I don't. That's cool - though I do reserve the right to point out interesting moments of contradiction within it as they arise - just as you reserve the right to scorn my lack of faith as demonstrated in pointing those out. It's all cool, and helps create the diversity of opinion that we're aiming for in this thread. By the way, can I talk you into contributing a summary or two as we go on?

Actually, it's not really accurate to say it's a consensus.  I was a Teaching Assistant under a very liberal Jewish rabbi who taught at the University of Iowa and he made fun of the so-called Documentary Hypothesis every opportunity he could and said that it was just a bunch of foolish speculation.  I wasn't particularly enthralled with his own interpretation at all, but he very much upheld the integrity of the authorship of the text and quoted a number of other academics who were by no means conservative Christians who felt the same way.

The best critique of the whole tendency to find multiple authors in Bibical books is by British Old Testament scholar David Clines.  You'll notice that it is rather humerous and thus very entertaining.

http://www.academia.edu/3176336/New_Directions_in_Pooh_Studies_%C3%9Cberlieferungs-_und_traditionsgeschichtliche_Studien_zum_Pu-Buch
Logged
MoominDave

*
Offline Offline

Location: Oxford, UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: 3290

View Profile
« Reply #30 on: Aug 24, 2015, 04:06PM »

Very amusing! Somebody invested a lot of time working that up, time well spent.

If I might be so churlish as to raise objections to the charming analogy of Milne versus Moses:
 - We are dealing with a much more recent and well-documented span of time
 - We are dealing with a much shorter span of time, and possess the original manuscripts of Milne, as well as instances of all subsequent published editions, knowing the provenance of all of these documents from start to present, plus also substantial independent corroborating information detailing Milne's life
 - We are dealing with a span of time and place where orthography and language have been relatively highly standardised, and literacy is widespread; the generation and verification of copies of a text is a much more straightforward process than in the first and second millennia BC
 - Alas, the Pooh corpus has not attracted the strong and potentially distorting motives of interpretation that the Pentateuch has

I am not dogmatically stating that the documentary hypothesis (or rather, one of its modernly refined successors, e.g. ) is correct. Rather I am saying that it strikes me as intuitively very sensible to acknowledge that the transmission of important behaviour-regulating texts over vast tracts of time by a societal elite is very unlikely to result in 100% perfect transmission, and that to the non-religious (and maybe to the religious also?), it seems very plausible that the elite would every so often find the need to revise the manual to bring it up to date.
Logged

Dave Taylor

(me, not the other one)
John the Theologian
*
Online Online

Location:
Joined: Feb 16, 2013
Posts: 741

View Profile
« Reply #31 on: Aug 24, 2015, 04:16PM »

Very amusing! Somebody spent a lot of time working that up, time well spent.

If I might be so churlish as to raise objections to the charming analogy of Milne versus Moses:
 - We are dealing with a much more recent and well-documented span of time
 - We are dealing with a much shorter span of time, and possess the original manuscripts of Milne, as well as instances of all subsequent published editions, knowing the provenance of all of these documents from start to present, plus also substantial independent corroborating information detailing Milne's life
 - We are dealing with a span of time and place where orthography and language have been relatively highly standardised, and literacy is widespread; the generation and verification of copies of a text is a much more straightforward process than in the first and second millennia BC
 - Alas, the Pooh corpus has not attracted the strong and potentially distorting motives of interpretation that the Pentateuch has

I am not dogmatically stating that the documentary hypothesis (or rather, one of its modernly refined successors, e.g. ) is correct. Rather I am saying that it strikes me as intuitively very sensible to acknowledge that the transmission of important behaviour-regulating texts over vast tracts of time by a societal elite is very unlikely to result in 100% perfect transmission, and that to the non-religious (and maybe to the religious also?), it seems very plausible that the elite would every so often find the need to revise the manual to bring it up to date.

Dave, glad you enjoyed it.  What you are overlooking is the tenacity by which the Jewish tradition has upheld the biblical texts whenever we can check their transmission.  A good example is the Dead Sea Scrolls of Isaiah.  When they were discovered they approximately 1,000 years older than any other texts of the book of Isaiah and yet the differences were tiny.  In fact, what was discovered was that the text of the DSS actually clarified a few texts that scholars assumed had minor corruptions because they did not flow well, but couldn't prove.  In several of those few-in-number-spots, the DSS made their guesses make sense and/or fit with the Greek translations of the Septuagint.  However, nothing, however, of serious consequence was found.  The Jewish tradition had a remarkable ability to transmit texts quite accurately.
Logged
HeRoze
Victor R.

*
Offline Offline

Location: Georgia, USA
Joined: Apr 28, 2008
Posts: 2225
"hack"


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: Aug 24, 2015, 06:18PM »

====
Day 7 : God rested
This is the story of the heavens and the earth.
===

One of the more contentious points is how long is a "day?" My literalist side wants to believe they are 24 hour days. That had led to a young earth philosophy that does not seem to jibe with the fossil records, so I'm left torn; although truthfully it doesn't matter much to my belief system. It matters greatly to some I know.
Logged

As scarce as the truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand - Josh Billings (Henry Wheeler Shaw)
There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction. To know the truth, you must risk everything. - Neo
drizabone
*
Offline Offline

Location: Central Coast, Australia
Joined: Jun 30, 2004
Posts: 1919

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: Aug 24, 2015, 06:43PM »

One of the more contentious points is how long is a "day?" My literalist side wants to believe they are 24 hour days. That had led to a young earth philosophy that does not seem to jibe with the fossil records, so I'm left torn; although truthfully it doesn't matter much to my belief system. It matters greatly to some I know.

Yeah its certainly contentious. I can't see any reason why God couldn't have created everything in 24x6 hour days if he wanted.  But the passage seems to focus on other concerns rather than being a narrative/report of what happened and how and doesn't answer the questions that we think are important.

Its ironic that you quoted Day 7 which theologically speaking is the one that is least likely to be 24 hours.
Logged
MoominDave

*
Offline Offline

Location: Oxford, UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: 3290

View Profile
« Reply #34 on: Aug 25, 2015, 02:58AM »

Dave, glad you enjoyed it.  What you are overlooking is the tenacity by which the Jewish tradition has upheld the biblical texts whenever we can check their transmission.  A good example is the Dead Sea Scrolls of Isaiah.  When they were discovered they approximately 1,000 years older than any other texts of the book of Isaiah and yet the differences were tiny.  In fact, what was discovered was that the text of the DSS actually clarified a few texts that scholars assumed had minor corruptions because they did not flow well, but couldn't prove.  In several of those few-in-number-spots, the DSS made their guesses make sense and/or fit with the Greek translations of the Septuagint.  However, nothing, however, of serious consequence was found.  The Jewish tradition had a remarkable ability to transmit texts quite accurately.

A good piece of evidence to introduce, explicitly reassuring regarding transmission fidelity in the years since, and implicitly suggesting it in the years before. But while suggestive, it doesn't do the whole job by a long way:
 - The Book of Isaiah was written (the internet tells me) somewhere around 800-700 BC, while the Isaiah Scroll dates from somewhere around 200-100 BC. There's still half a millennium of transmission unaccounted for, at the initial period during which the text was most likely to be of use, and hence amenable to political massaging.
 - Further, I read that the authorship of the Book of Isaiah is very widely agreed to have been a composite effort between three time-separated authors, taking place over a span of many years.

I also ponder on the individual susceptibilities of these various texts. Isaiah's topic material deals with the destiny of the Jews - on the face of it a set of ideas eminently suited to political tinkering. The Pentateuch covers both long-range setting of the temporal stage and many explicit law commandments - while the former one might expect to pass through transmissions fairly unscathed (the major risk is probably the carelessness of a bored copyist in genealogies etc.), the law commandments one would expect to require regular revision.

The transmission of the Pentateuch heads further back into history for its origins than Isaiah. If it came from Moses (if he is historical), then quite a few hundred years - if compiled, then over a span of time that includes that of the composition of Isaiah, but extending back further - and presumably drawing on older oral traditions.

I could summarise my position as:
 - It is possible that the Pentateuch broadly came from one person.
 - It is possible that that one person was the Moses described within it.
 - To claim either or both of these things satisfactorily requires a level of proof that we haven't yet seen, and that is (sadly) probably vastly higher than any potential available proof that might be found.
 - So we fall back on probabilities; we note all the possibilities, and we weigh them for likelihood, taking the greatest of care not to let our individual prejudices influence us (e.g. "wouldn't it be nice and clean (also religiously satisfying) if Moses had written this?")
 - And that's where we are, standing here chatting about competing hypotheses...
Logged

Dave Taylor

(me, not the other one)
timothy42b
*
Offline Offline

Location: Colonial Heights, Virginia, US
Joined: Dec 7, 2000
Posts: 12140

View Profile
« Reply #35 on: Aug 25, 2015, 04:45AM »



I wonder if it has any relation to the religious concept of the soul?



Danger, Will Robinson!

The concept of the soul did not exist at this time.  It is a much later Greek concept grafted into Judaism to a limited extent during 2cnd Temple days. 
Logged

Tim Richardson
timothy42b
*
Offline Offline

Location: Colonial Heights, Virginia, US
Joined: Dec 7, 2000
Posts: 12140

View Profile
« Reply #36 on: Aug 25, 2015, 04:48AM »

One of the more contentious points is how long is a "day?" My literalist side wants to believe they are 24 hour days. That had led to a young earth philosophy that does not seem to jibe with the fossil records, so I'm left torn; although truthfully it doesn't matter much to my belief system. It matters greatly to some I know.

I think the intention of the authors (well, storytellers;  these were oral tales for at least 1000 years before being written down) was for literal 24 hour days.  These read like Kipling's "just-so" stories and I think were intended to be taken as such. 

It is only IF you decide to take them as historical scientific fact that you run into a problem with 24 hour days and the age of the Earth, and that results in some mental gymnastics with respect to longer days. 
Logged

Tim Richardson
timothy42b
*
Offline Offline

Location: Colonial Heights, Virginia, US
Joined: Dec 7, 2000
Posts: 12140

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: Aug 25, 2015, 04:51AM »

  The Jewish tradition had a remarkable ability to transmit texts quite accurately.

And a lot of examples where they didn't, especially the Septuagint myth.

But the point is you can faithfully transmit texts written by multiple authors (the J, E, P and D sources).  The faithfulness of transmission does not affect the authorship. 
Logged

Tim Richardson
John the Theologian
*
Online Online

Location:
Joined: Feb 16, 2013
Posts: 741

View Profile
« Reply #38 on: Aug 25, 2015, 04:55AM »

And a lot of examples where they didn't, especially the Septuagint myth.

But the point is you can faithfully transmit texts written by multiple authors (the J, E, P and D sources).  The faithfulness of transmission does not affect the authorship. 


Except that the JEDP theory is based on the idea that the text was transmitted quite UNFAITHFULLY until the final editors got a hold of it.  The t ideas are going in opposite directions for a considerable time.  The strong majority of our examples are of faithful transmission, not extremely garbled transmission, which the JEDP theory would seem to require.
Logged
MoominDave

*
Offline Offline

Location: Oxford, UK
Joined: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: 3290

View Profile
« Reply #39 on: Aug 25, 2015, 05:27AM »

There's a difference between garbling a text in copying and editing several texts into one.
Logged

Dave Taylor

(me, not the other one)
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 154   Go Up
Print
Jump to: