Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1874Re: Luke 3:36 and the LXX

Expand Messages
  • Wieland Willker
    Dec 22, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      > The Cain under discussion was not a son of Shem,
      > but of Arphaxad.

      Well, acc. to Gen 10:24, but acc. to Gen 10:22 he looks like a son of Shem. Perhaps the name was omitted at some stage to get rid of this problem? Not of relevance here, though.

      Thanks for alerting me to Jubilees 8:1-5. Not sure though to take "he" for Arphaxad.

      Best wishes
      Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic