You are undoubtedly right, frogprince, but so far, the vast majority of fundamentalists/literalists that I've run into, including lately, still cling fiercely to the King James, referring to other translations as "revisionist," sometimes "blasphemous revisionism."

Ebbie, the word "trespass" does have a number of meanings, all similar, but I was told by a pretty reputable Bible scholar that the early Bible manuscripts did quote Jesus as saying either "debt" or "sin." So "trespass" could be excused as a loose translation. But at the time the word was inserted in the King James translation, people "trespassing" on the lands of aristocrats, especially poachers, was considered a major problem. And since some of the translators were aristocrats. . . .

Or so I was told by someone who knew much more about it than I did.

####

By the way, I am always astounded by the way in which fundamentalists/literalists, feel that it's perfectly acceptable to support any outrageous belief they care to come up with (for example, the whole schtick about "The Rapture") by carefully "cherry-picking" hitherto unrelated verses from various widespread places in the Bible and putting them together like a Rube Goldberg invention.

The Reverend Barbara R. Rossing (I heard her speak in Seattle a few years ago) has done a whole analysis of "The Rapture" in a book entitled The Rapture Exposed (she wanted to title it The Rapture Racket, but her publisher chickened out), showing just how the whole idea was cobbled up by piecing together previously unrelated verses from various parts of the Bible to come up with a whole new Apocalyptic scenario, and how the author, the Rev. Tim LeHaye, has made a fortune ($60,000,000 last I heard) writing best-selling novels about "The End Times."

If you go to the link, then cllck on "Look Inside," you can actually read parts of what Rev. Rossing wrote.

Don Firth