[CS-FSLUG] [Linux4christians] Re: NIV Bible for Linux (off list topic)

[David Aikema]

On 8/14/06, Lincoln Fessenden <l4c at thelinuxlink.net> wrote:
> > Linc: I think that there are more to objections against the KJV than
> > your earlier comment that these were comments about the language were
> > "excuses."  The language has not remained static, and in some cases
> > this would cause words (such as those in my examples) to be
> > interpreted differently now than they might have been back then.
>
> References.

Hmn... whoops.  I somehow seem to have crossed mailing list boundaries
in this conversation.  The references would be those that I posted
earlier on L4C as some examples.  To quote myself:

One example here is the word let.  In previous times it meant to
hinder, but now it means to allow (eg. Romans 1:13).  Consider also
James 2:3 and the way the word gay is generally translated today.

I seem to recall from prior study of Shakespeare that at his time a
double negative was equivalent to an emphatic no, whereas now a double
negative is interpreted as being positive instead.  I'm not sure if
there are any examples of this in the KJV, but it's another example of
changing rules of grammar and word meaning.

Dave