Is the KJV inferior to you?

In my opinion there is no version that is better than the KJV.

A.F.

 

Why? Any proof?

 

C'mon - take off the gloves for once, Cranston. All A. F. said is that in his opinion there is no version better than the KJV. That was certainly not a slanderous statement toward any other versions.

 

Thanks for clearing that up. Interesting web searches on Google.

 

According to internet sources, "stylometry" (an obscure term) is the application of the chronology and development of an author's work (legal, academic, or literary) based especially on the recurrence of particular turns of expression or trends of thought. The term usually refers to written language, but also can be applied to music and to visual art pieces (often to attribute authorship to anonymous or disputed documents).

"Forensic stylonomy would conclude that the new versions were written by an effeminate man or a woman. This corroborates the recent comment by the former Monitor of the Christian Reformed Church that NIV Old Testament Chairman, Martin Woudstra, was believed to be a homosexual."​

Riplinger is asserting that through "stylometry" the presence of one (or even a few) homosexual editors could be detected on translation projects that involve dozens (if not hundreds) of contributors.

 

If the sodomite editors were stylistic consultants, would that not have a bearing on the "stylometry" regardless of the size of the translation project?

 

Only if one believes that God cannot preserve His Word. Jehoiakim couldn't destroy the Word of God what makes you think a few puny stylistic consultants might be able to?

 

Well, I certainly believe God can preserve His word, though I wonder about the argument that he'd use sodomites to do it.

 

Maybe you'd rather have your versions "kept" in the cookstove firestarter basket or on the dusty shelf of the vatican?

The church has always been responsible for the work of God to preserve the Bible for all men, not the catholics in their pagan monastaries where they keep the skulls of former monks.

Am I "inferior to the KJB"? Yes, I am inferior to the word of God and so are we all.

 

The only thing God uses a sodomite to preserve is the certain future judgement upon the sin of sodomy!

God has preserved His word and never used corrupt mss to accomplish it either.

 

Reckon it could be proof enough for you that the KJB uses less words to tell the Old, Old Story? Could it be proof the KJB incorporates the idiomatic use of langauge which is far superior than anything considered to tbe modern English?

Could it be proof that the KJB is NOT written in any form of English used primarily by any group past or present due to its eloquence and preciseness?

Could it be proof that the KJB is NOT the langauge of Shakespeare who used 37,000 words in his writings verses the 8,000 words of the KJB?

Could it be the KJB is proof that the Hebrew and Greek have been accurately preserved and conveyed to us English speaking peoples in English?

Denying even these few proofs doesn't make you justifiable in your cause, whatever that "cause" may seem.

 

I don't think their motivation would have been to destroy the word of God entirely, only to destroy the harmony of it to advocate their deathstyle/ what they call a "lifestyle"

 

God has used a murderers, harlots, idol worshipers, and worse to do His will.

 

Sure...but His word? Sodomites? If he turned 'em over to reprobate minds why would He involve them with His word?

"I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." - Psalm 138:2​

 

First of all, is there any PROOF other than GAR's forensic stylonomy suppositions that homosexuals were involved in any modern translations?

Secondly are homosexuals the only ones with reprobate minds? Do we know the minds of all the men who translated the KJV, much less any modern version?

And lastly, God is much bigger, much more gracious, wiser, merciful and more powerful than us and if he wanted to involve a homosexual in the translation of his Word, that's his business.

 

No disrespect, but is this a debatable issue? Do MVers deny that Virginia Mollenkott was a stylistic consultant for the NIV and TNIV or do they deny that she was a lesbi*n?

No, sodomites aren't the only ones given up to a reprobate mind.

Right surely it is. However, if we are to understand the nature of God are we to believe that he would assign people given up to a reprobate mind to be responsible for the care of His word? If He wanted to I wouldn't stand opposed but I'm questioning whether or not my God would want to.

 

Salamander:Reckon it could be proof enough for you that the KJB uses less words to tell the Old, Old Story?

Doesn't prove a thing except this version differs from that version.


Could it be proof the KJB incorporates the idiomatic use of langauge which is far superior than anything considered to tbe modern English?

It used the language of its time, same as earlier versions did, & today's versions do.

Could it be proof that the KJB is NOT written in any form of English used primarily by any group past or present due to its eloquence and preciseness?

So are other versions.

Could it be proof that the KJB is NOT the langauge of Shakespeare who used 37,000 words in his writings verses the 8,000 words of the KJB?

Shakespeare was writing entertainment, not Scripture. He was under no constraints to follow any prior work being translated.[/i]

Could it be the KJB is proof that the Hebrew and Greek have been accurately preserved and conveyed to us English speaking peoples in English?

So are lotsa other versions.

Denying even these few proofs doesn't make you justifiable in your cause, whatever that "cause" may seem.

My cause...denying the KJVO doctrine...is just because KJVO is not true.

I believe the KJV is superior to some versions, inferior to others. It's certainly a valid version, but certainly not the ONLY valid version.[/b]

 

Mollencott is a lesby, no doubt about it. But the amount of her influence in the translation of the NIV is another matter and it is doubtful just how much pull or push she had on individual word selections.

Let me ask you a qq... do you think that all of the men who made copies of the sacred writ were believers? Isn't it possible that God may have used a homosexual to copy his word? He used an unrepentant thief to do His will (Judas).

He has used homosexuals, child abusers, and thieves as pastors. Not in any way excusing their sin, but God still used them in spite of their evil.

 

According to what I've heard, she was responsible for "removing every single reference to sodomy in the NIV." It's not like you can't preach against homosexuality using the NIV, so I'm forced to ask, "So what?" Regardless, the KJVers are hanging their hat on her having a large amount of influence.