not the point in question.
you rebutted some statement concerning a lack of clear Biblical condemnation of slavery with "I GUESS YOU MISSED THIS" accompanied by your selection (from among a rather diverse set of same) of a translation of Timothy 1:9-10.
The implication: That YOUR version should be well known to any who have consulted any Bible.
I provided ample evidence that your SNARKINESS was, given that multitde of dissimilar translations, quite unjustifiable.
Just *admit it*, and apologise for the snarky barb.
That *is* required of sinners, yes?
whether or no, it IS required of men worthy of respect.
you rebutted some statement concerning a lack of clear Biblical condemnation of slavery with "I GUESS YOU MISSED THIS" accompanied by your selection (from among a rather diverse set of same) of a translation of Timothy 1:9-10.
The implication: That YOUR version should be well known to any who have consulted any Bible.
The 'some statement' was to js1138. So far HE hasn't complained about my 'snarkiness'. For you to take offence for him seems to be a reach.
YOU, however, came back with a statement saying that something wasn't in the KJV, implying (to me at least) that you considere the KJV as a more authoritative version of English translation.
I provided ample evidence that your SNARKINESS was, given that multitde of dissimilar translations, quite unjustifiable.
Just *admit it*, and apologise for the snarky barb.
That *is* required of sinners, yes?
whether or no, it IS required of men worthy of respect.
What you've PROVIDED, is that there ARE many translations and that it is quite possible that people HAVE, in fact, quite possibly MISSED something that is another translation that isn't the one they use most often.
Whether or not I'm 'worthy of respect' is, in fact, quite debateable. I, however, will not try to prove that I am worthy.