In the quotation below and the longer text of your post, you are making theological claims, not exegetical or linguistic ones. I don't in any way wish to be insulting, and I ask that this next statement not be taken as either agreeing or disagreeing with your theological views, but your theological views (and the same goes for mine or anyone else) about what God is or is not capable of do not illuminate the Chronicler's use of language, _unless_ you (or I or whoever) can
_demonstrate_ that the Chronicler shared those views.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.