My rejection of 61 has nothing to do with the story at all, BTW.

It is a 16th century manuscript, and there is no record of its origin. I truly believe that if the tables were turned, and the NASB followed a reading found only in a few LATE manuscripts, no more than 100 years before the creation of the KJV itself, you would reject it on the same grounds I reject the comma.

I reject the comma because I love God's word, and see no reason to add to it to support a doctrine that is easily demonstable without such tactics.


"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose" - Jim Elliott, martyred in Quito, Ecuador 1956