Paul O'Brien
10th August 2004, 15:10
"And as for it being "one of the great books of English Literature" - are you suggesting it's fiction"
Um... Winston Churchill's History of the English People is considered great literature. But it's non-fiction. So the question of whether the Bible is fact, fiction, or an endeavour to explain the inexplicable in terms that humans could grasp, doesn't enter into it.
Certainly, the Bible was written long before Fowler, Partridge and the others put pen to paper (and my reference was to an edition that's 300 years old and more). Though I don't think I should comment on whether that makes it out of date.)
But on the other hand, since the current grammatical thinking supports the use of 'And' and 'But' as the first word in a sentence, and the grammarians at the time of the King James Bible appeared to be of the same opinion, I think all that your statement proves is that it's been grammatically correct for an awfully long time.
Um... Winston Churchill's History of the English People is considered great literature. But it's non-fiction. So the question of whether the Bible is fact, fiction, or an endeavour to explain the inexplicable in terms that humans could grasp, doesn't enter into it.
Certainly, the Bible was written long before Fowler, Partridge and the others put pen to paper (and my reference was to an edition that's 300 years old and more). Though I don't think I should comment on whether that makes it out of date.)
But on the other hand, since the current grammatical thinking supports the use of 'And' and 'But' as the first word in a sentence, and the grammarians at the time of the King James Bible appeared to be of the same opinion, I think all that your statement proves is that it's been grammatically correct for an awfully long time.