Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxj.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!ihnp4!ihuxj!dob
From: dob@ihuxj.UUCP (Daniel M. O'Brien)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Bible *not* bible!
Message-ID: <356@ihuxj.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Jan-84 21:01:48 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxj.356
Posted: Fri Jan 13 21:01:48 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Jan-84 00:06:29 EST
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 22

(for the line eater)


I am tired of seeing "bible" being used to refer to the collection
of writings held to be sacred by Christians.  At least in my dictionary,
the Oxford, the correct way is to write "Bible".

When writers use "bible", they show far more than just their contempt for it,
they show their ignorance. Would they as quickly write "koran" or
"bhagavad gita"? I think not.

It makes me sad that even well-meaning Christians write "bible". I fear that
it too may go the way of kleenex, xerox, and coke.
-- 
		
			Daniel M. O'Brien
			AT&T Bell Laboratories
			IH 1C-202
			Naperville, IL 60566
		
			....!ihuxj!dob