Angrillori

Yeah, the argument from ignorance and the argument from incredulity often go hand in hand:

Unfortunately, the: "X must not be true because I, personally, right now, don't know how it could be true,"

is too often followed by:

"Well, X must not be true, because, I, personally, just can't wrap my mind around the facts that you've supplied,"

when the information/facts/statistics that the first response was ignorant to are supplied.

Godless Wonder

Yeah, of course, I know that. Yet, if you buy a physical Bible in paper book form, generally you're still going to find a copyright notice in the front of it to cover all the footnotes and commentary they typically put in, or the translation, if it's a recent enough retranslation. The point is, the book was made by men, and it says so right in the front.

Not to say that nobody's publishing a paper Bible without a copyright notice, but you'd have to specifically look for such a thing, or just luck out, as all the ones I've seen do have a copyright notice in the front.

jdlongmire

...and the old thought is still full of malarkey...but since no one can actually test the hypothesis...

"the Heavens declare the glory of God"

JD

Yahzi

I had no idea anybody would do such a crazy thing. I bow to the authority of the person who actually looked. Stupid facts (grumble grumble).

"Facts are useless. With facts, you can prove anything that's even remotely true" - Homer Simpson

jbernier

If you look at the copyrights I am pretty sure that it is the translation that is copyrighted, not the Biblical text itself. I think that is fair: Translations do cost money as translators do not work for free. You want to recoup your investment somehow.