Trouble is that an encyclopedia is supposed to ''refer to'' the evidence, not quote it verbatim. It would be a nice idea to quote ''all'' the translations (there are dozens), but IMO PhilipB's proposal is the best, not because the KJV is always the most accurate (it isn't) but because it is the most literal (sometimes absurdly so), and therefore tends to preclude all 'interpretations'. It is also out of copyright. Given the tendency around here to quote the NIV (!) that would seem to be a wise precaution!--[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 13:25, 17 March 2007 (EDT) | Trouble is that an encyclopedia is supposed to ''refer to'' the evidence, not quote it verbatim. It would be a nice idea to quote ''all'' the translations (there are dozens), but IMO PhilipB's proposal is the best, not because the KJV is always the most accurate (it isn't) but because it is the most literal (sometimes absurdly so), and therefore tends to preclude all 'interpretations'. It is also out of copyright. Given the tendency around here to quote the NIV (!) that would seem to be a wise precaution!--[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 13:25, 17 March 2007 (EDT) |