praise_yeshua
Well-known member
There is no Scriptural support for the KJV.... Chapter and verse please?
Modern translations/ scriptural support ?
- Thread starter Leatherneck0311
- Start date
There is no Scriptural support for the KJV.... Chapter and verse please?
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
I have seen the same response to other posters that have answered your questions. Basically deny they answered , challenge the person with “ you never answered the question “ , and insults. Have a great day.
Provide the number of the post where you yourself actually and truthfully gave me what a reasonable person would genuinely say is a real answer.
If you cannot find a post of your own, then provide the author and number of the post in the thread where you believe/imagine I have been answered, so that I and everyone can see what you are referring to.
Because otherwise, your post above is as fraudulent and false as a 3 dollar bill, and you are doing something that I've had JWs and Mormons do - Say a bunch of stuff that actually and truthfully does not answer something I've asked about or challenged them on, and then say, "I answered your question/challenge. I'm not going to go over all that again."
Do not go down the road of using the tactics of a cultist.
What I'm saying here is not a difficult thing at all - Since you know where the responses are that genuinely and truthfully answer me, there should be no problem in referring me to them. They should be easy for you to produce. I'm sure you won't mind quoting yourself.
It's time now for you to back up your claim, or deliberately avoid and be exposed as a fraud...and possibly worse. Your response to this post will tell which.
Last edited:
Our Lord's God
Well-known member
Do you mean this one?
And he summoned the crowd with his disciples, and said to them, "If anyone wishes to come after me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wishes to save his soul will lose it, but whoever loses his soul for my sake and the Gospel will save it. For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul? For what will a man give in exchange for his soul? For whoever is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.”
And the Vulgate had similar problems,from what I hear!
(Greek Version Only?
) --Rich
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
And the Vulgate had similar problems,from what I hear!
(Greek Version Only?
--Rich
Absolutely! The primary difference being a translation vs a reproduction. Jerome basically justified his efforts in the Vulgate over one verse he considered to be superior. Even then, there have always been issues with reproductions. Just to a lesser degree.
I noticed the other day that Greg Boyd had written a book on how "God inspired imperfection".....
I'm like.... Geesh. What a misnomer.
God can't help but be PERFECT. What is.... revolves around our failure compared to His perfect. When I see mistakes. I see them for what they are. Sin. Failure.
My opinion is far different than Greg Boyd or the KJVOist. The mistakes we see should force us to SEEK GOD FOR THE ANSWER. Notarbitrarilyy declare a winner so we can be lazy. Seeking God involves getting to know where we failed.
Most of the time, I can't even have an reasonable discussion on the matter because even the supposed "experts" don't really know what they claim they know.
Truth7t7
Well-known member
Modern translations NIV, NASB, ESV, ETC are supported by the Greek Text (Novum Testamentum Graece) this Greek Text was created by Adulterers Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, and Homosexual Union Supporter And Jesuit Roman Catholic Cardinal (Carlo Maria Martini)
Kurt Aland divorced his wife Ingeborg and ran off and married his college student Barbara Nee Ehlers, being 22 years her senior
Did God Use Adulterers And Homisexual Union Supporters To Preserve His Words In The Greek Text (Novum Testamentum Graece)?
Adulterers Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, Carlo Maria Martini, Are Corrupt Trees, And The Novum Testamentum Graece Is Their Corrupt Fruit
Matthew 7:17-18KJV
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
You fail to demonstrate that Matthew 7:17-18 support your human KJV-only reasoning.
kiwimac
Member
What a load of fetid dingoes kidneys.
T-bird1971
Member
For the 10,978,197,431st time ... it's not so much about the translation, as the text(s) from which the translation occurs.
Your repeating an assertion does not make it true. Your assertion is not true of KJV-only reasoning. KJV-only advocates will condemn and attack English translations made from the same multiple original-language texts from which the KJV is made.
KJV-only advocates will be just as negative or even more negative and critical of the NKJV based on the same texts than as they are of translations based on the Critical Text.
T-bird1971
Member
And the same goes for your critical text camp .... repeating assertations regarding the critical text while ignoring it's obvious deficiencies is rather hypocritical. The bottom line is that it's one or the other, it cannot be both.
I am not a member of any so-called "critical text camp." It is not my camp so your statement would bear false witness. I have not advocated nor recommended the Critical Text nor any English translations made from it. I do not make any assertions advocating the Critical text.
You can appeal to a fallacy of false dilemma or the either/or fallacy, but that does not indicate that your reasoning is sound.
The KJV was translated from multiple, textually-varying original-language texts, and in addition translations based on textually-different sources such as the Latin Vulgate of Jerome were consulted and influenced the making of the KJV. The printed Textus Receptus Greek NT editions had some readings added from an edition of the Latin Vulgate of Jerome. The Hebrew-Latin and Greek-Latin lexicons used by the KJV translators had Latin definitions for original-language words of Scripture that often or even usually came from the Latin Vulgate of Jerome. The KJV translators also borrowed many renderings from the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament translated from the Latin Vulgate of Jerome.
Does the KJV itself suggest that it can be "both--and" instead of "either--or" since the KJV has readings and renderings from both so-called streams of Bibles? How can you assert that it is a matter of text since the KJV has some readings and renderings from the claimed "corrupt" text?
I very much doubt Hollner's claim is true - I believe it is much more wishful thinking on his part.
Did God use a Monk , Eramus, enslaved to Rome heresies to give us the word of God?
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
Yet YOU cannot find even one RCC tradition in the KJV. God used a donkey so if He used a monk it would NOT change the fact that the KJV was translated from the majority texts and the minority texts were rejected by the early church and reformers because the Minority text is corrupt.
I cannot find RCC theology in Nas/esv/Nkjv either!
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
Sure you can they say being saved instead of are saved. FYI, being saved is RCC doctrine which the early church and reformers rejected.
Are we not in the process of becoming more sanctified though?