doojable

:blink: Clear? To whom? I don't have that book. I never read that book. I don't know what is written. That's why I asked for the summary and the paragraphs leading up to the statement made by WC. The jump is easy without this information... I'm guilty of impatience. I have nothing that "I want to see."

I'm gonna go ahead and re-state what Oakspear stated. WJC was a researcher for vp. It was vp's show, his name went on the end product. It is my understanding that nothing got past his approval. So, it's an easy jump to state that when W^lter was referring to "a researcher" that he was in fact not speaking in generic esoteric terms. He most likely was speaking on behalf of vp's hand-picked research dept.

I was gonna say Dickens... but I'm not so sure now.

Thanks WD. I never wanted the whole chapter. I think a good summary and perhaps a few paragraphs leading up to the quote in question would suffice.

Edited to keep the conversation moving.

SMALL/Phil "Smallville"

There ya go.

Okay, well in the interest of truth, (and just for chits and giggles, as well) I'd like to know what led up to this conversation about some unnamed, studious, "researcher." In other words, I'd like to read the paragraph or two that led up to W^lter talking about what a literal according to usage is. It may go nowhere. It may answer some questions on either side. I never read the book so I don't have a clue as to what I'm asking for here - just that it would set some bigger context. Isn't it odd that this thread sat kinda quietly until that quote entered the room?

toad? Toad/Phil Toad/Dr ????

Here's the shoe... does it fit White Dove? Definition of "Apologist" *edited to fix spelling*

If it was an honest question, it required no answer from you. If it wasn't an honest question, then you took the bait by answering it. The truth is that you do seem to come out in defense of vp more often than not. Is that in and of itself a problem? I dunno. As far as vp's honesty in researching goes... well it was more than apparent to me that he built pf al on Bullinger's How to Enjoy the Bible. (It was years and years later that I saw Kenyon's and Stiles's works.) I always questioned (even back then) how folks railed against commentaries but soaked up "literals according to usage" like sponges. BTW, when I first was introduced to the Amplified Bible, I hated it. I still don't really care for it. It just seems like another mediated experience. It's like watching a National Geographic special on the Grand Canyon and thinking that now you've been there.

Three pics - you need the name of the first:

White Dove - this reads as a question and not name-calling. I guess for me it falls in the "if the shoe fits" category. I think that had you asked a question of someone and they got as offended as you have over this question here, you'd be fuming. *I think* but I don't know you, just how you post. Has anyone ever read the The Amplified Bible? It reads like a whole book of literals according to usuage. Here's an example: Phil 3:13(Amplified Bible) 13. I do not consider, brethren, that I have captured and made it my own [yet]; but one thing I do [it is my one aspiration]: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, 14. I press on toward the goal to win the [supreme and heavenly] prize to which God in Christ Jesus is calling us upward. 15. So let those [of us] who are spiritually mature and full-grown have this mind and hold these convictions; and if in any respect you have a different attitude of mind, God will make that clear to you also. Compare that to the KJV we all got so used to: 13. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, 14. I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. 15. Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. The first copyright of the Amplified Bible was in 1954. It does make me wonder.... It would be interesting to compare some of twi's "literals according to usage" and compare them to the Amplified Bible's handling. (I don't have any to compare or I would do it myself.) It may go nowhere - but then again, who knows where that rabbit hole could lead.

The Departed?

:o

Ummmmm.... considering his last name... I can only guess. ;)

And?

Geo - you need "Wow's!" name... ;)

Three pics:

George, I only actually got Jill/drain.. and that show was the only one I could think of with "Children" in the title. New clue:

"Endless Love"?

"Married With Children"?

Ya Ha!