Sorry, you lose that one. If you're going to count first editions as the only editions, then you'll have to count all the books of the bible that were in the first edition of the KJV to have been removed from later editions, as they, in fact, were.
Use current editions in your argument, and...
You are correct, SoyLeche. Knowledge of the earth's shape was held by various groups even that far back. One cannot say "everyone thought this or that" at any one time, in times when many cultures were isolated and insular, each holding their own often differing conventional wisdom. In cases...
Is that all you have to say about it? The information is in error. You need to look at the sources. Try Britannica, or Bullfinch. Or, as I suggested before, the actual depictions of Atlas from that era. Quoting someone else who's wrong doesn't make it correct.
Let me explain a little...
I agree with you wholeheartedly, NetDoc. It's a relatively small number of modern English speakers who have no problem understanding Shakespeare, who was still alive when the KJV was first printed 395 years ago. Using a translation rendered in archaic English is little better than using a...
If you're going with Wikipedia, how about the article about Atlas the Titan, not Atlas the book of maps?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_%28mythology%29
" Zeus condemned Atlas to stand at the western edge of the earth and hold up the heavens on his shoulders, to prevent the two from...
So they chose either not to include verses of questionable origin, or ones that did not appear in the version of the manuscripts they used. What's the problem? They were using older texts, judged more reliable and authentic than the ones used by the KJV. You prefer to have extra verses? Why...
I'd like to know what you two have against the NIV as well. I've compared a number of passages from the NIV, KJV, RSV, and a couple of French translations, and they all seem to be saying essentially the same things. (In the ones I've compared.)