We will have to disagree about the reading bit. I have read the words numerous times about as carefully as is possible, not in a cursory way as you suggest, and, with the printed words I have in my RSV Bible, still see the sequences and motivations I mentioned. I will also mention that these inconsistencies were pointed out to me by the Professor, the late Dr. Leith, I mentioned above. I think he read the passage rather carefully and had plenty of scholarly background to help him understand the meaning. He was also the one who explained to me over a Thanksgiving dinner in our home years ago that the two versions were written at different times to communicate different personalities of God. One was while the Jews were beating up on other people and promoted the view of God as a fierce warlike God who was stronger than the gods of the enemy. The other version was written during bondage and showed God as being personally concerned with man by providing for his every need in a loving way. Both views of God are worth understanding. The Reverend Dr. L. also suggested that I not let the inconsistencies in Scripture get in the way of my understanding of the meaning of Scripture.
Do you know how many highly credentialed law professors will confidently inform you that the Second Amendment merely permits states to maintain armed National Guard units?
Look, this is simple. If I said to you, "Hey Notropis, having made this figurine of a buffalo out of some very special walnut I'm going to give it to you today for your birthday," does that necessarily mean I made it recently? Now add another factor: Just before saying that to you, I told you the story of when I made this figurine back before you were even born. Now, as to my gift giving statement, is it logical to assume that I'm saying there that I just made this figurine with the idea of giving it to you for your birthday?
