Originally Posted by sophronismos

You shoot yourself in the foot here. Since KJVs differ on "he" and "she" in Ruth 3:15, how are we going to determine which is right without the Hebrew text which you despise as replaced by the KJV wholly and as being a corrupt offscouring? We cannot. Without the Hebrew text we are forever in doubt as to whether it is "he" or "she" there. Sure, we could take your word for it that you have the pure Cambridge edition. But who says the Cambridge edition is the pure one to begin with? You. But why should I beleive you? I have no reason to. In fact, quite to the contrary I have every reason to doubt a man who is so insane as to try and make throughly and thoroughly, divers and diverse, vail and veil out to be different words and have different meanings (and who yet as an indignant obstinate dunce refuses to show wherein they differ!!!)!!!