Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
20,682
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: − == HAHAHAHA == − Oh my god! You guys are delightfully retarded! Thanks for the laughs :) − − -Steve − −
Talk:Conservative Bible Project (view source)
Revision as of 16:54, September 29, 2009
, 16:54, September 29, 2009Reverted edits by Shopps (Talk) to last version by Aschlafly
==The Example==
==The Example==
I learned on this site that the Adulteress Story might not be an original addition to the Bible, and after looking into it myself, there does seem to be a good deal of evidence supporting this. I've similarly been trying to find authorities who question the authenticity of the Luke passage given here, but I haven't been able to find any. What is the source for this, and perhaps should the second to last paragraph of [[Essay:Adulteress Story]] be modified to reflect that this passage is also in dispute? [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 10:54, 13 August 2009 (EDT)
I learned on this site that the Adulteress Story might not be an original addition to the Bible, and after looking into it myself, there does seem to be a good deal of evidence supporting this. I've similarly been trying to find authorities who question the authenticity of the Luke passage given here, but I haven't been able to find any. What is the source for this, and perhaps should the second to last paragraph of [[Essay:Adulteress Story]] be modified to reflect that this passage is also in dispute? [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 10:54, 13 August 2009 (EDT)