I think this belongs in the translations thread, because it has to do with how God spoke through the original authors and how it came down to us. Just how much do you feel that God allowed the author to have his own style of writing in the originals? I keep hearing how God's words have to be exactly perfect even in the translations (which we know cannot happen--even though they say God can do it anyway--and He probably could, but did not elect to.) It appears that the authors had a lot of leeway in the way they wrote, the style, etc. For example, Luke's works tend to have medical references, (blood and water from Jesus' side, etc.) while John deals with a more "loving" and "emotional" side; while Luke dealing more with factual evidence as if writing a doctor's report. John the gospel was obviously quite different, even in the Greek than Revelation. Whether or not it was the same John, there are obvious differences in the style of Greek used. Paul had his own way of writing, as did each other writer. Did God implant His word into the mind of the author allowing humans to use their own brains to put it into words? It would still be inerrant assuming that God chose to make certain the original was correct. This theory would also throw another small wrench in the KJVo "word for word accuracy" theory. Obviously, it is WHAT the person is saying, not the individual "wording". This being the case, many translations into English can say the same thing without error. What say you?