From: SolomonW@citi.com   
      
   On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 22:15:32 -0700 (PDT), Oh so rich & successful JTEM   
   wrote:   
      
   > On Thursday, August 30, 2018 at 1:00:19 AM UTC-4, SolomonW wrote:   
   >> On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 13:22:48 -0700 (PDT), Oh so rich & successful JTEM   
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>> But my question isn't regarding his commentary   
   >>>> though, it's regarding the translation of   
   >>>> "Ravens." Nearly everyone readily admits that   
   >>>> it's an uneasy fit, this "unclean" animal is   
   >>>> actually denounced as an "Abomination" in   
   >>>> modern translations of Leviticus,   
   >   
   >> They are not denounced as an abomination in Leviticus, what it states is   
   >> that they are unclean so they are not kosher to eat.   
   >   
   > Hmmm... unclean...   
      
   Camels, horses, and dogs are unclean, they are not considered abominations.   
      
   >   
   >   
   >> In the bible, unlike   
   >> today in literature the raven is quite favorably viewed.   
   >   
   > "Unclean" is favorable?   
   >   
   > No. I stand with those who note that it makes far more   
   > sense to read it as "Arabs" instead of "Ravens."   
      
   Genesis 8:7   
   To test whether the water subsided, Noah released a raven   
      
   "and it kept flying back and forth until the water had dried up from the   
   earth."   
      
   does not sound like an Arab to me could do this, what did he have a long   
   range helicopter.   
      
      
      
      
      
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > -- --   
   >   
   > http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/177526937268   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)