Search results

It is not just the Middle English words. It is also the sentence structure. This is why the NKJV also is archaic. It is a bit like the way Yoda speaks. I hope, right, you are. If KJV was still relevant, there would not be new translations.

Yes, me and millions like me. For decade the KJV-only crowd kept me from even reading the Bible.

There is no option C to my question. :mad:

We already established it is not a matter of opinon but a matter of fact. See generation loss. Now, you resort to doing laps on ground already coverered.

False. You have invoked the socialist myth of Robin Hood, "Steal from the rich and give to the poor." But this is not what Robin Hood actually did. What Robin Hood actually did was follow the evil Sheriff of Nottingham who extorted excessive taxes from one town after another. In between Hood...

Sure it is. One source is good. Another is better. Why not go with the better source? You never answer that question.

Not an answer to my question, A or B? You present a False Alternative. Once be become a Christian AND not have to understand Middle English. For some reason, you are proceeding AS IF it is a requirement when it is not. You do realize Jesus did not speak Middle English, right?

Not modern English. That's what I speak, 21st American. I don't speak Middle English from the 16th century, the King's English.

You lost me with the Middle English, 'said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?' I kind of wish I could change my screen name to Mr No Translation With James In Title. :contemplate:

@RLT63, can you field this one?

Your logic is flawed. It is not even about what my abilities are. I have no will to translate a translation. My question to KJV-only folks is what is more important to you: A. Force as many people as possible to read your preferred translation? B. Bring people to Christ? For me, I would NEVER...

I think the question is a False Alternative. Who died, Barbara Walters the famous person on TV or the woman? When one says 'Being X" died, it means all of what makes that Being exist died, in their entirety. A part of one who died does not live on when we say "they" died.

Check out nondenominational churches too.

You keep creating a Strawmen to support the KJV/NKJV. Implied is you are admitting the Alexanderian texts ARE superior. They are just not 'so superior' to rely on compared to the manuscripts the KJV/NKJV - AS IF a greater degreee of superiority is required than what exists. The strawman is to...

Yea, OK.

No. This is the crux of the matter. People like you are falsely equating words with actions, like Jesus turning over tables and whipping people. The "act" by the victim that was bad wass not developing good character, not embracing the wisdom of 'sticks and stones', of being overly sensitive...

That may be true but I have not seen it.

No one does. In other threads, I often talk about ones thesis or hypothesis and what the acceptance criteria is. @Holy999 often writes provocatively titled threads with 'can you say me it' as the entirety of the OP. Too funny! :woot: