You know, you made that accusation on another thread a few weeks ago, and I PROVED you WRONG about that statement. Care to retract it now? That is a personal attack, and I want to see C4K reprimand you for it! But I won't hold my breath.
You know, if you or I had posted something like that, we'd be "called to the woodshed" by now! Yet they deny bias on here. I said before this forum is sad. Now it's becoming sickening.
Actually the problem now is that folks QUOTED the offensive part - I did not know what was "clippled" (thank you C4k) but just reading a bit further and there is was again and again and again. :tonofbricks:
I basically agree with your overall position. If KJV-Onlyism was universally adopted by the True Church today, what would be the situation, say, in the year 2409? (Assuming that English changes at least at the same rate it has for the last 400 years.) But I have some difficulties with some of your specific statements. For example --
You state "a language" (singular) so it is unclear whether you are referring to either Hebrew or Greek. They both still exist, or else we wouldn't be talking about them (I think you meant as an 'active' language); and they CAN be understood (for the most part).
I agree that if we don't read or speak a language, then we may want a translation.
Beowulf is technically Old English (not even Middle English). However, in the strictest sense we specifically speak in Modern English (since about 1550).
Due to a convenience of sorts, yet no one ever spoke as the 1611's language. It is distinctive in its relativities to the original tongues as being perfectly definable beyond the disparaging atlerations of modernisms.:godisgood:
Nothing is misleading in its contextual harmony, that cannot be said about modern versions and remain honest.:sleeping_2:
Dost thou condmenest thyself, my Brother, in Christ Jesus?
I wot not thou shouldest continue in such a manner as to hang thyself so readily.
I agree, your "attack group" is unacceptable. If you're not attacking the KJB, you're attacking those who kinow it to be accurate in relating to anyone the mind of God.
I mean that the precise Hebrew/Greek of that time no longer exist.
There are many professors and scholars that are very good a determining the meanings from that period, but the languages from that time are gone.
Just as the language from 17th Century English is gone.
None of us speak it natively.
That is the central point of my post.
If you got that, then the rest is just supportive.
Exactly, Old English, Middle English, Classic Greek, Greek of I don't know how many forms.
Languages constantly change.
You're taking a walk in the great wide open to suggest anyone has said anything to the contrary.
No matter how often the receptor tongues change, the root meanings are the only ones that remain intact. Not knowing the nuances of the modernisms of vernacular one can be led astray as to the meaning. So to prevent that confusion, we stick with the best of all versions as in relating the message within its covers.
We find that the original meanings have been altered by modernizations of the words. That is our objection! If that causes a schizm then so be it!:godisgood: