Troy Elliott Eckhardt wrote:
> > I said "it is a completely absurd position". Don't try to turn this
> into a personal attack. I know, Mr. Murphy. And I said that it didn't
> matter to me whether it was I you thought absurd or merely my thought
> processes. Really, when it all boils down, what are we intellectually
> if not the sum of our thoughts? I think "completely absurd" is a bit
> provocative, don't you? I must admit that I let these words attack
> the pride I possess in violation of God's wishes anyway. For that I
> offer my apology to you and to him. >Presumably the type of tact that
> leads one to say "If you don't like my choice, lump it, or blow it out
> your ear for all I care." I would say that my statement above
> indicates that I do not care one way or the other how you feel about
> my decision to accept the King James Bible as the final authority for
> English speaking people. I still don't care. I did not, however,
> belittle your decisions or convictions by pronouncing them "absurd." I
> indicated with my original post that: 1) I knew my KJV-onlyism would
> ruffle feathers, and2) I didn't intend to initiate a debate about it.
> I still don't. I don't think this is the right forum. I have been
> told by my peers that my position on the very existence of God was
> absurd. This, I presume, is one "absurdity" about which you and I
> could debate side-by-side against the godless scientists of our time.
> Unfortunately, the issue of the ultimate authority of the KJV for
> English speakers is not. Let's fellowship together on the levels
> where it is possible, and tactfully debate these trivial issues that
> differentiate us one from the other. After all, we're brothers in
> Christ.
Yes. The crucial point is faith in Christ and the task is
proclamation of Christ. The important thing about a Bible translation
is that it enables the witness to Christ to be made. That can be done
even with a poor version - I'm sure there are people who have been
brought to faith by the bad Jehovah's Witness "New World Translation".
But of course that doesn't relieve us of the responsibility to have &
use the best translation we can.
I noted your initial statement that you didn't wish to initiate
a debate & would have left it at that had it not been endorsed by
another person on the list. I'm quite willing to drop the subject if
others are.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 21 2002 - 03:17:27 EST