Now here's an opportunity for some real bridge-building. Will you take it? Will you acknowledge you're accusing the poster of slur against the KJV, when any normative reading of what was said would recognize the poster was mocking the uneducated, dogmatic, devotees of a particular translation of the Bible?
All you have to do is admit you accused him of something he didn't do, and we'll know you are more interested in truth than "winning."
Will you admit you are ignoring his criticism of certain people deserving of criticism, and accusing him of criticizing something that would degrade his credibility if true?
Will you admit that Philo-Junius has not taken advantage of the opportunity to explain the purpose to me?
I am perfectly willing to listen to the poster.
Are you willing to admit you may be mistaken in your interpretation?
BTW It was an opportunity for you to ping Philo-Junius as a step in your "bridge-building" rather than posting a veiled command that I "admit" I am all wrong.
Will you admit that Philo-Junius has not taken advantage of the opportunity to explain the purpose to me?No. I have no familiarity with what you were discussing prior to his KJV comment.
Are you willing to admit you may be mistaken in your interpretation?
No. There is no interpretation. There may be fault in that what you wrote does not reflect what you mean, but my reading of what you wrote is not flawed.
BTW It was an opportunity for you to ping Philo-Junius as a step in your "bridge-building" rather than posting a veiled command that I "admit" I am all wrong.
This isn't about Philo, it's about you.