Mike wrote: Mr Kutilek's use of "degrading and debasing" ignores historical use, while your "historically correct" ignores the fact that though language does change, it does not necessarily denote deterioration.
I'm not completely convinced of that Mike. I have three children and noticed whilst they went through school there was a decrease in the teaching of grammar and an increase in the use of modern technical "jargonese" such as abbreviated words used in text etc. Also what does the word "gay" convey to our generation then the generations coming up behind? I hear the atheists are trying to do the same thing with the word "bright" to make them more acceptable.
The modern versions are grammatically wrong thats a fact and when you add the dimension of dynamic equivalence then you are "taking from" the Word of God. Curiously enough the NASB does actually use "itself" in connection with a spiritual being so they are being hypocrical when calling the KJV names.
The question is where are we going from here? Will language be corrupted to such an extent that literature becomes defunct? The problem also is in communication and how future generations will deal with this growing current trend?
Jim Lincoln wrote: Strange when it comes to persons the AV refers to "Holy Spirit" as "it" which of course a blasphemy. from, Doug Kutilek wrote: ...the KJV shares this distinction only with the NWT of the Jehovah's Witnesses, and to a lesser extent with the RSV and NRSV translations of the apostate National Council of Churches.... To call any person, but especially to call one of the Persons of the Trinity by the English pronoun "it" is degrading and debasing, and is inexcusable. The correct pronoun--the ONLY correct pronoun--in such a case is "He."
Jim You need to get better theological advisors than Mr Kutilek obviously is.
In Samuel Johnsons Dictionary of 1756 alongside the word "It" he writes, ""It is used absolutely for the state of a person or affair." And "It is sometimes used of the first or second person, sometimes of more."
So I'm afraid your Mr Kutilek is either a liar or ignorant of historic english grammar.
This will mean that the KJV is correct in it's usage of "it/itself" as indeed it is historically correct in all of it's grammar. It is in recent times that the english language has deteriorated into such an abysmal application of grammar, even today in its literature.
4/28/11 12:30 PM
