Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BATTLE TALK ~ Battle Royale IV - JALTUS vs. s9s27s54

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: the KJV or the Book Of Mormon

    Originally posted by AJ4Yeshua
    Yxboom

    Heyyyyy. Long time no hear.
    Whoa....no kidding. How you been? Good to see you back Bible in hand and all

    I have often enjoyed LDS company and offered a drink to them although recently they have refrained from coming here? Curious. Oh well. It's all good.

    Hopefully you gonna stick around and join us for a marraige ceremony for our fellow Supermoderator Goose and his lady in waiting, Lucybelle.

    Comment


    • #17
      Goose tying the knot? will wonders never cease!? couldn't have happened to a better sucker.

      Congrats there Goose!

      Comment


      • #18
        This should be mildly interesting... if not just embarrasing for s79... Sorry, but I forgot how it goes. I got into a bit of textual criticism with Jaltus on the "God is not an OV'er" thread and barely managed to keep my head above water, so to speak.

        Anyway, I do look forward to the battle and wish both the candidates good luck.

        By the way, Jaltus, there's absolutely nothing wrong with double negatives. For strict schoolmarms, perhaps, but it's merely prescriptive grammar. In fact, double negatives were widely employed in Chaucer's time and are still the rage in modern French (e.g. Je ne sais pas, where both "ne" and "pas" are negations).

        Not to be a nitpicker, but I've been reading The Language Instinct by Steven Pinker. Fascinating stuff.

        God bless,
        Dr. Deutsch
        Praecipitatum verius quam editum "Thrown together rather than edited."
        -Erasmus describing his Textus Receptus (the MS the KJV/NKJV is translated from)

        Comment


        • #19
          I think Jaltus is winning. He went ahead by leaps and bounds by saying
          You might want to post the link for s9, though.

          Comment


          • #20
            I'm highly irritated by double negatives.

            Comment


            • #21
              But all the other grammer errors I make are perfectly acceptable.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by drdeutsch
                By the way, Jaltus, there's absolutely nothing wrong with double negatives.
                As is always the case when defining that which is "right" and "wrong", it all depends on what is chosen as the standard.

                Comment


                • #23
                  In English it is wrong. In Greek a double negative asserts a specific point or stresses the negation. In French, it is actually a single negative, the second half specifies the type of negation (pas = default, rien = anything, jamais = ever, etc., so it would be not, nothing, never respectively).
                  For Greek conversion,

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Oh, ne by itself means nothing. You should read about the pleonastic ne. (I took French this summer, and frankly I am pretty good at it, though I cannot speak it well I can read it very well)
                    For Greek conversion,

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by JackS
                      I still want to know how the KJV can be inspired when it can't even get the 10 commandments correct?

                      It's murder, the 6th commandment is you shall not murder. I cringe whenever I see Thou shalt not kill.
                      I agree with you, JackS. Here in Tulsa, the PETA folks put a billboard up with a bearded figure (God? Moses?) dressed all in white holding a bunch of carrots with the caption, "I said, 'Thou shalt not KILL!' " As if capital punishment and animal sacrifices weren't both commanded just chapters later.
                      "To deny Calvinism is to deny the gospel of Jesus Christ." - Charles Spurgeon

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Paul,

                        According to PETA Jesus was also a vegetarian.

                        Right in line with

                        John 21:13 KJV Jesus then cometh, and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish likewise.

                        dont ya think

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          That's it! That's the billboard!
                          "To deny Calvinism is to deny the gospel of Jesus Christ." - Charles Spurgeon

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Well, Jaltus,

                            If grammar mavens say that people shouldn't use double negatives, it is because that is prescriptive grammar, not descriptive grammar.

                            If someone always says "not hardly" then it is no longer an error -- it is a rule. Much like there are no grammatical errors in Inner City English (i.e. Black English): It is completely consistent in it's use, thus it is grammatical.

                            Not to mention that "not hardly" is practically an idiom, and idioms, whether "grammatical" or not, pretty much have their own rules.

                            Take "I can't get no satisfaction." You would probably argue that this means "I can get satisfaction" because the two negatives cancel each other out. Wrong! No one on earth would say, after receiving a plentiful amount of satisfaction, "Gee! I can't get no satisfaction!" No, the meaning is quite clear.

                            Anyway, I would highly recommend that book. The Language Instinct by Steven Pinker, Ph.D. at MIT. I think it is chapter 12 where he deals with double negatives.

                            By the way, I do love prescriptive grammar, as well, and no, I don't use no double negatives. I am, however, compelled as a hopeful linguist, to study descriptive grammar and it's consistency and use.

                            God bless,
                            Dr. Deutsch
                            Praecipitatum verius quam editum "Thrown together rather than edited."
                            -Erasmus describing his Textus Receptus (the MS the KJV/NKJV is translated from)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Redeemed

                              As is always the case when defining that which is "right" and "wrong", it all depends on what is chosen as the standard.
                              And it depends on what is defined as "standard." Obviously, Standard American English prescriptive grammar would say "no double negatives," "no split infinitives," and "no dangling participles."

                              However, if they are used consistently, then they are no longer grammatical errors; rather, they are rules of the language itself, whether that language is used by 1 person or 1 million.

                              Dr. Deutsch
                              Praecipitatum verius quam editum "Thrown together rather than edited."
                              -Erasmus describing his Textus Receptus (the MS the KJV/NKJV is translated from)

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                We ain't not gonna have no double negatives 'round here nohow.

                                Triple negatives, on the other hand....

                                Michael
                                I don't care how systematic your theology is, until you show me how biblical it is.

                                2 Tim 2:15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X