[bigdaddy45]

A simple question answered with bluster instead of facts. I’m disappointed. I would have liked the have heard your rationale.

[Gil4]

A simple question answered with bluster instead of facts. I’m disappointed. I would have liked the have heard your rationale.

They sounded like reasonable questions, and I too would have liked to have heard the answer, if it was of a better quality than the usual, which is the list of verses from the KJV and NIV followed by "See! The NIV changes God's Word!! (because it's different from the KJV, which, of course, is The Inspired Word of God.) Based on the analogy given, I have my doubts.

That might have had a little attitude in it, but I didn't see any in your questions. (There was certainly much more attitude in the non-answer replies.) I have heard some interesting reasons for rejecting the older manuscripts that are given more weight by many of the modern translators (and were not available to the KJV team), but I haven't seen anyone really tie it all up into a coherent theory.

[WhatNot]

LOL, If you had even the slightest interest in hearing my rational, you never would have wrote this.

That is in no way relevant To the question I asked. Certainly you can do better than that.

The person who wrote that is not interested in discussion, the person who wrote that wants to stack the deck in a one-sided argument. Better luck next time

[DocRock]

I know you didn't ask me, but maybe I can help. The answer you seek takes study and work to achieve. The process of translating the manuscripts was, for lack of better words, super human and super natural. Here is one of the most concise sites that explains it. Take the time to read it if you truly seek an answer. Or you can scroll on down to the section titled "The Translation Process". Hope this helps. Mash Here