Gumby: until someone showed the product was flawed.
No offense intended, but I'm still waiting ...
Gumby: I notice you artfully skirted the request that you explain why that chronological detail matters.
No offense intended, but I'm still waiting ...
Gumby: I just raised a simple question regarding the basis for your accusation.
No offense intended, but I'm still waiting ...
Gumby: Your hypotheses couldn't even take a single simple question.
No offense intended, but I'm still waiting ... while you delight yourself with grand claims of having doused the Bible good with a heaping pile of Shiite (although where you got the heaping pile of adherents to Islam is still a mystery to me). Your claim has not stood the test of a single simple question. You have presented no direct response or substantiation.
Now you claim there are many more proofs and that this particular one was insignificant? Can I expect more dogmatically ranting claims that fall apart under brief scrutiny, or do you actually have something that can stump me? I am simply turning the critics eye back on your logic, that shouldn't prevent you from making your case if it can be made - it should only cause you to be certain of your stance.
It is an interesting proposition, you will attempt to prove the Bible false by presenting apparent contradictions while I question the basis for your opinion that they are contradictions at all. Since the Bible NEVER purports to relate every detail of any event or of anyone's life, you may find yourself quickly out of contradictions.
Whenever you are ready, you may begin.
Respectfully,
OldSoul