Great Book On King James Only by Mark Ward

Because Henry Morris said it does not prove it to be true or does not make it true.

Henry Morris indicated that he was repeating claims from other sources, but he failed to document his specific sources for his claims in his 1996 booklet A Creationist's Defense of the KJB. On this subject, his sources likely included some unreliable KJV-only sources such as Gail Riplinger.

 

Precisely my point. Anyone can make that claim, but what does that claim MEAN?

 

So Morris was an idiot, huh?

 

Straw man. Nobody said that. But you are avoiding the major issue. How does Morris make his claim of 10th grade reading level? What is that based on? Where is the evidence?

 

Thanks for clearing that up. Maybe the public schools should teach Elizabethan English as a second language but we would have to retrain our teachers so maybe the KJV is best left to the colleges.

 

How many times are you going to ask a question that you yourself said was apples and oranges?

 

And what would the point in that be? That's ridiculous. Should we also teach Ancient Greek to everyone, Aramaic? Any number of other dead languages? Language changes. We were never meant to use one English language translation as the end all be all, that's nonsense.

 

As many times as you keep putting forth this nonsense about it being 10th grade reading level.

 

Instead of offering any sound evidence for what Morris claimed, you seem to suggest a bogus, false accusation with your question. I do not claim at all what your question suggested.

Too often it seems typical for those who make unproven claims for the KJV to try to put words in the mouths of others that they did not say instead of providing sound evidence for their claims.

Because Henry Morris was well-studied and well-respected in the area of creation science does not mean that he should be blindly accepted as an authority in the very different subject of English Bible translations or KJV-only.

 

Do you mean that he was an idiot savant even though he never suggested KJV only?

 

Why can't you just answer the actual arguments?

 

Well, you said that it was apples and oranges when I asked you what reading level it is. You said that it is not modern English. So why are you saying that it is not 10th grade but refusing to say what level it is? Are you trying to compare apples & oranges? Ha!ha!

 

Are you the moderator? Can't I ask Logos for clarification?

 

I'm saying there is no reading level for it it is a language we do not speak today.

It's like saying what level is a piece written in ancient Greek for today's Modern Greek reader? It is no level, it's not the same language they speak.

 

You aren't asking for clarification, you are clearly putting words in people's mouths. And you are kind of taking MY thread off topic.

 

You are saying that Elizabethan English is not modern English & the KJV is not on a 10th grade level.

 

Of course it isn't.

 

Are you telling me what I am doing when I ask someone else a question about what he posted? How do you know?

 

Are you sure?

 

If you think we speak today in Elizebethian English you need to be put in an insane asylum. Now if you are going with the technical definition of "Modern" don't even go there. That is overly broad.