Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie
I'm back just to try to explain what I meant, which obviously went over your head, Renee. And Beth's. Your husband (and your son in law too I believe) accused me of being a humanist because I dared to express my opinion about the Bible as a personal one, so it only seems fair that he apply the same judgment to your also expressing your opinion about the Bible in personal terms.
Beth of course believes that because my personal opinion is that some changes are in order I'm a humanist, while since your personal opinion is in favor of the status quo you are exempt from the charge. That's not what was said by George, however, what he said was that putting it in personal terms was my offense.
Goodbye.
|
The Greek text that the King James Version translated was printed by humanists (not in the modern sense of humanist, of course) like Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, so consider it a compliment that people who trust in some unnamed committee
of men that revised the text of the KJV in the around 1900 and came up with the "pure Cambridge text" which these wise acres say is alone perfect and inspired of God, and yet they name their forum AV1611 when they see the 1611 as being as corrupt as the NIV itself and only accept the very modern "pure Cambridge text."