Before The KJV

[Surfer5]

Does that KJV1635
have Gothic letters or Roman letters?

It has Roman letters, but there are the standard old variations. For example, Jesus is Iesus, "even" is "euen", voice is "voyce", he is often "hee", etc.

 

[Surfer5]

i'm watching this thread to see how long he'll duck BrianT's specific questions on W-H.

I'm watching to see when Bryan will deal with the specific Quotes of W & H that I already posted.


Surfer

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Originally posted by Surfer5:
The issue of Wycliff - for them - then gets into the implications of whether or not Wycliffe should be included among the 7 versions.

Yet it still does not address the fact that there is nothing to suggest that this Scriptural Passage is misinterpreted.

Some will suggest it should be, others will suggest that Wycliffe should not count, or his first pre-death version should not count.

That was the first English translation. This cannot be denied, and cannot be ignored.

I have also seen the "purified 7 times" concept applied to languages. First it was Hebrew, then Greek, then Latin, then ... until English is # 7 because it is the universal language spoken today.

What? English is not "the universal language." There are over a BILLION people in China, most of whom do not speak English. Central and South America speak Spanish and Portugese, not to mention the thousands of native dialects. English is not even the dominant language in Europe. Northern Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia are dominated by Islam, and I would imagine that they can read/understand Arabic in addition to their native tongue. To say that English is the "universal language" is ethnocentric.

While I have no objection to the purification process, how to apply the purification process seems to me to be more a matter of conjecture, than of absolute proven fact.

I would agree, and take it a step further: it is TOTAL conjecture.

While I agree with some of the conclusions, there may be other ways at arriving at those conclusions, without the use of the "purified 7 times" concept.

Then perhaps you could answer the question I have asked dozens of times: what is the Scriptural justification for KJV-Onlyism? Nobody has answered it thus far. All I have received are responses that say "Prove that it isn't." (laughable) and links to the Chick Publications website. I am willing to consider anything you can offer to justify the total rejection of all other English translations of God's Holy Word, from Wiclif all the way up to _The Message._

Like I said: welcome to the party.

 

[Baptist in Richmond]

Oops, got a little overzealous with my left mouse button..............