Originally Posted by Zipster  After re-reading this, I feel I should make some more comments, for the entire point of these questions were missed in the responses given. I shall elaborate:
If the AV 1611 KJV is absolutely inerrant then everything within the AV 1611 would have to be inerrant, correct? The AV 1611 had the apocrypha, verse numbers, chapter headings, and marginal notes - along with differing translations for certain words.
Why is this important? Well, the claims being made by KJV-only advocates are all over the map. As has been exemplified in this thread, a vast majority of KJV-only supporters believe that the AV 1611 KJV translators were "inspired."
So, if these men were inspired, then wouldn't everything they write be inspired? Wouldn't the Apocrypha thus be inspired? Wouldn't the verse numbers, the marginal notes, and the letter from the translators in the first pages of the book also be inspired?
Or, were they only "partially inspired?" For, if this is the case - how do we know that the AV 1611 is inspired? If the "inspired" translators write one thing that isn't inspired, then are they really inspired?
So, yes - there's a huge issue here. Either everything that was written and translated that appeared in the AV 1611 is inspired, or none of it is. I can see no mixing of the two available, for a mix compromises the position far too much - something I could easily prove if I wanted to resort to conspiracy theories and other inane arguments.
And, also:
"I went out and cought some fishes today." - This sentence is not grammatically correct.
"I ate some fishes" - not grammatically correct.
"Look at all the fishes" - not grammatically correct.
"I caught a bunch of fishes" - not grammatically correct.
As far as I am aware - and, I could very well be wrong about this - "fishes" is only grammatically correct when it's used as a Verb (The bear fishes his prey out of the water) or when it's referring to many kinds of fish.
But, at the same time, "fish" is an interesting and unique word - it's both singular and plural. The answer given loses a lot if you replace "fish" with any other word that doesn't simply add an "s" to the end of it to make it plural.
Is "deers" correct?
Is "Mices" correct?
Is "Geeses" correct?
So, why would "Cherubims" be correct? The singular form of Cherubim is "Cherub."
"Cherubims" - thus is a grammatical error.
So, does God inspire Grammatical errors? Or, is this just more advanced revelation? |