"At least, this is my understanding of where that notion came from."
Why not ask professors of theology at Oxford or Cambridge universities about that 'notion'. Especially what you state here:
"You're thinking about the NKJV. This is the one that was commissioned by the king that wanted a divorce I believe. I think it was one of the King Henry's. Crazy kook either got the divorces he wanted or arranged the death and/or imprisonment of his wives so he could re-marry at will. The KJV is the original copy written and translated by Shakespeare, from the ancient greek and hebrew manuscripts. If not this, he may have translated it from an even earlier english translation (which was then translated from the original greek and hebrew) when english barely resembled what it is today. It's one of these two events. This is why it's considered the most accurate, a direct english translation from the originals and the standard for today despite being a relic from the 1300-1500's where fancy poetic language was the common english of those times."
Methinks this will be their reaction:
image image image image
Then, when they've calmed down and wiped the tears from their eyes, and you say:
"I might be wrong."
They'll start all over again.
Education. (as in a proper one at an accredited academic establishment, and not via 'hoemskuling'; especially classes in history, classical English literature, and comparative religions & RE.)
Get one.
Oh, and as a starter for free, here's a little something about the real author of the KJV Bible you fundies drool over so much:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_I_of_England#Personal_relationships
'Throughout his life James had close relationships with male courtiers, which has caused debate among historians about their nature. After his accession in England, his peaceful and scholarly attitude strikingly contrasted with the bellicose and flirtatious behaviour of Elizabeth, as indicated by the contemporary epigram Rex fuit Elizabeth, nunc est regina Jacobus (Elizabeth was King, now James is Queen). Some of James's biographers conclude that Esmé Stewart (later Duke of Lennox), Robert Carr (later Earl of Somerset), and George Villiers (later Duke of Buckingham) were his lovers. Restoration of Apethorpe Hall, undertaken in 20042008, revealed a previously unknown passage linking the bedchambers of James and Villiers'
And more food for thought:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_relationships_of_James_I_of_England
'The personal relationships of James I of England included relationships with his male courtiers'
'James adopted a severe stance towards sodomy using English law. His book on kingship, Basilikón Doron, (Greek for "Royal Gift") lists sodomy among those “horrible crimes which ye are bound in conscience never to forgive”. He also singled out sodomy in a letter to Lord Burleigh giving directives that Judges were to interpret the law broadly and were not to issue any pardons, saying that "no more colour may be left to judges to work upon their wits in that point."
However, nearly two centuries later, Jeremy Bentham, in an unpublished manuscript, denounced James as a hypocrite after his crackdown: "[James I], if he be the author of that first article of the works which bear his name, and which indeed were owned by him, reckons this practise among the few offences which no Sovereign ever ought to pardon. This must needs seem rather extraordinary to those who have a notion that a pardon in this case is what he himself, had he been a subject, might have stood in need of."'
Now you know why the KJV is referred to as the 'Queen James Version.'
A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing indeed. Lethal, even.
Maybe the fact that all right-wing Fundamentalist Christian preachers use only the QJV explains Ted Faggard?:
image
X3 >:D
Suck on this, Ruptured Retards:
http://www.libchrist.com/other/homosexual/kingjames.html
>:D
And furthermore, RR, ask yourselves this question:
Why has no-one on Libchrist.com been quoted on FSTDT, unlike we on Ruptured Retards?
You do the maths.
Here endeth the lesson.
