An interesting factoid, but numerological approaches can often lead to problems.
Consider the fact that the original King James Version included several books as a deuterocanon. The "count" to get to 7^7 didn't include the deuterocanon but chose to include the partial numbering system in the word-count.
If you excluded the numbers and then included the deuterocanon, what if that number equalled 7^7? Would KJV only-ists then accept the Deuterocanon as canonical?
Numerology (like this kind of word counting) often creates problems.
I think he addressed this point pretty well in the video. All things considered I think what he is presenting is quite phenomenal, and combined with all the other factors concerning the book I think it will likely only be a positive contribution to our faith.
I think he addressed this point pretty well in the video.
He didn't address it at all. He just stated that he was counting the words from Genesis to Revelation. You can see while he is counting that the deuterocanon was included in his copy after Revelation.
Phenomenal
It's an interesting video/concept. It's a great conversation starter. But numerology lends itself to Babylonian teachings / ways of thinkings. It isn't necessarily inherently bad, but it can be misleading and become a stumblingblock.
I wouldn't take the 7^7 KJV argument as a definitive proof that the deuterocanon wasn't inspired, nor that KJV was the best english translation. I like KJV. It's my usual go-to, but this 7^7 argument doesn't move me to accept a KJV-only position.
All of this said, kudos for finding the video and posting it. I may not agree with the implied conclusions drawn from the observations, but the observations themselves are neat.
[ + ] The_Reunto
[ - ] The_Reunto 0 points 1 weekMay 5, 2024 14:55:00 ago (+0/-0)
Consider the fact that the original King James Version included several books as a deuterocanon. The "count" to get to 7^7 didn't include the deuterocanon but chose to include the partial numbering system in the word-count.
If you excluded the numbers and then included the deuterocanon, what if that number equalled 7^7? Would KJV only-ists then accept the Deuterocanon as canonical?
Numerology (like this kind of word counting) often creates problems.
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer [op] 0 points 1 weekMay 5, 2024 16:56:26 ago (+0/-0)
All things considered I think what he is presenting is quite phenomenal, and combined with all the other factors concerning the book I think it will likely only be a positive contribution to our faith.
[ + ] The_Reunto
[ - ] The_Reunto 0 points 1 weekMay 5, 2024 18:09:40 ago (+0/-0)
He didn't address it at all. He just stated that he was counting the words from Genesis to Revelation. You can see while he is counting that the deuterocanon was included in his copy after Revelation.
It's an interesting video/concept. It's a great conversation starter. But numerology lends itself to Babylonian teachings / ways of thinkings. It isn't necessarily inherently bad, but it can be misleading and become a stumblingblock.
I wouldn't take the 7^7 KJV argument as a definitive proof that the deuterocanon wasn't inspired, nor that KJV was the best english translation. I like KJV. It's my usual go-to, but this 7^7 argument doesn't move me to accept a KJV-only position.
All of this said, kudos for finding the video and posting it. I may not agree with the implied conclusions drawn from the observations, but the observations themselves are neat.
[ + ] doginventer
[ - ] doginventer [op] 0 points 1 weekMay 6, 2024 04:39:04 ago (+0/-0)