[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

If someone is saying that I am "adversarial" and "an opponent", perhaps that person is actually on the wrong side.

And .. perhaps .. Matthew, you should reconsider your continual negative aspersions on those who have ably disassembled multiple modern version confusions, patiently demonstrating how the opponents have misinterpreted history, overlooked texts, made false claims about Greek and Hebrew, abused English, downplayed or missed the early church writers, accepted false textcrit indoctrinations, not seen the dissonance between modern textcrit and true evangelical faith, missed the Reformation battle of the Bible, lacked consistency, failed in common sense .... your aspersions against those who have used many tools for this purpose of disassembling the anti-KJB errors, old and new.

Technically speaking, your aspersions would even go so far as to the magnificent work of Brandon's in the 'Magic Marker' page, since that battle was already won. Unless you feel the victory just occurred after that page was placed on-line -- and now while it is now a fossil, it was prepared before the final victory when apologetics and defense is no more.

As I have made clear, I have great respect for the PCE labour, it has the sense of being in the right time in the right way. And if that is a gift and calling from God it is irrespective of other foibles and confusions you may have. However that does not mean you should not try to grow in other areas, including growing in respect and understanding and perspective, trying to understand the needs of those who have been mistaught about the Bible versions and texts. And learning how to correct errors, avoid historical revisionism and write accurately seeking precision in representation of others.

And simply discarding unsupportable arguments. e.g. That Redpath's knowledge of the Greek OT somehow provided fundamental assistance to Cambridge Edition edition, an argument based on misdirecting the Dean Burgon comment that mentions the Greek OT. Since we know that the Dean felt that the Greek might in some future day actually be changed and retranslated (whether placed in margin or text) we can now have a common sense understanding of his comment. An understanding which has nothing to do with PCE-type refinement. Thus while Redpath's Greek OT knowledge would not be a hindrance, we have absolutely no indication that it did anything whatsoever for the Cambridge edition issues. And to assert otherwise without many examples, or even a single example, being available is to place a tint on your own scholastic efforts. Why make an assertion that simply hangs in the air ? When you learn more context, remove the assertion.

When an issue like that arises you are painfully slow to really grasp hold of the real issues. Apparently feeling that since you had written otherwise you have to stay with the program.

Shalom,
Steven