Why no attention to the horrible translation of the NIV and others yet crickets ?

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
Absolutely silly. The KJV translators used the Vulgate. It wasn't "Locked away"..... Geesh.
Nonsense, the KJV used the TR which is the largest portion of the Majority text. FYI, in the RCC for hundreds of years if you were a common person and caught with a bible you were tortured, put in jail and many were killed by the RCC just for having a bible.
 
Last edited:

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
Most KJVOist will now admit that there are Vulgate renderings in the KJV. Why are you holding out against all the evidence to the contrary?

Its ironic you want to focus on the RCC banning some bibles and ignore the fact that King James did the exact same thing.......

What you ignoring this?
Seems you ignore that the RCC murdered folks for just having a bible. I admit that the KJV was translated from the TR which is part of the majority texts.
 

RiJoRi

Well-known member
What do you expect to happen if someone bans a book from being printed? Do you expect it to thrive?
Well, knowing human nature, yeah, it would thrive as everyone says, "Banned? Why? I gotta see this for myself!"
And printers in Holland would pick up the $lack - or would that be "s£ack" in the supply.

--Rich
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
You know that isn't what I was talking about. There are Vulgate readings in the KJV.

Have you ever studied English? Latin has unmistakable influence upon English. Often times, Latin words that have found their way into English are used in translation.

No matter how you try, you can't reject Latin influence upon the KJV.

Tell you what. I'll prove it if you go line by line with me in discussion. You up for it?
I know the drill your sources are right and any sources that contradict your opinions are wrong.
 

RiJoRi

Well-known member
The KJV STOLE from the style of the Geneva Bible. You wouldn't have verses, study notes and etc in any later works if it were not for the Geneva Bible. Some KJVOist claim all this was original to the KJV but they lie. The KJV wouldn't have been anything without its plagiarism of the Geneva.
non sequitur, P_Y! While I have great respect for the Geneva guys and their work, I think - considering how convenient verses, etc. are - someone would have come up with them sooner or later!
As to "plagiarism," I don't know what the laws - if any - were. Look at the intro to the Lord of the Rings - JRRT has some nasty things to say about a US company that - legally - printed his work without so much as a "may we?"
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
non sequitur, P_Y! While I have great respect for the Geneva guys and their work, I think - considering how convenient verses, etc. are - someone would have come up with them sooner or later!
As to "plagiarism," I don't know what the laws - if any - were. Look at the intro to the Lord of the Rings - JRRT has some nasty things to say about a US company that - legally - printed his work without so much as a "may we?
Post removed replied to the wrong post. Sorry.
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
The KJV STOLE from the style of the Geneva Bible. You wouldn't have verses, study notes and etc in any later works if it were not for the Geneva Bible. Some KJVOist claim all this was original to the KJV but they lie. The KJV wouldn't have been anything without its plagiarism of the Geneva.
How can you STEAL a word for word translation copied from manu-scripts? Stop drinking the kool aide.
 

Shoonra

Well-known member
The KJV may well have imitated the style of the Geneva Bible but it certainly didn't duplicate its text.
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
Nonsense, the KJV used the TR which is the largest portion of the Majority text. FYI, in the RCC for hundreds of years if you were a common person and caught with a bible you were tortured, put in jail and many were killed by the RCC just for having a bible.

You have already been rebuked with facts on this issue. Why you continue to say things that are factually wrong, is not something I understand. At the end of the day, all you have is your word. Considering reevaluating your stance.

What do you think about the KJV using words that don't appear in any NT manuscripts? Is that acceptable to you? What's the point of having manuscripts if translators don't use them? Or if the translators add to the text. You accuse modern bibles of omitting verses, how can you support adding to it?

A plain case of double standards.
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
Nonsense, the KJV used the TR which is the largest portion of the Majority text. FYI, in the RCC for hundreds of years if you were a common person and caught with a bible you were tortured, put in jail and many were killed by the RCC just for having a bible.

You have already been rebuked with facts on this issue. Why you continue to say things that are factually wrong, is not something I understand. At the end of the day, all you have is your word. Considering reevaluating your stance.
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
The KJV isn't a word for word translation from a single collated source of manuscripts. Choices were made from available information. The plagiarism of the Geneva came from the style, presentation and often word for word break of the translation into verses.

I'm not the one drinking the "kool aide". You are. I once drank the "kool aide" you're drinking. I know KJVOism well. I once was a KJVOist. The arrogance of self worth blinded me. Most KJVOist remain that way for just a few reasons. None of which has anything to do with the Truth. Many just can't admit they were wrong.
Your confused it isn’t self worth it is actually dependence on and trusting God big difference.
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
So you trust that God had to have...... hand delivered a perfect English translation to your door step......

Do you realize just how arrogant that makes you?

You want to believe God has done something for you that He obviously hasn't done for countless human beings before.......You believe YOU are so important. Yep. That is pride.

You can call it "trusting God" if you want. Remember, the Pharisees did the same thing yet sought to murder Jesus Christ and his apostles.

The very idea that some late early modern English translation from an arrogant despot King James had to have been the handy work of God is ridiculous at so many many levels.

Man is always blaming God for their own choices.
Lol, nope I never have claimed what you said. I believe the KJV is still the most accurate translation. As a young Christian when I was reading through my bible and ran across Easter I called my pastor to ask about Easter ,and he said it was the result of an over zealous scribe. The TR has always been hated by Rome and since the first printing of the KJV have tried to destroy the KJV. I know enough about West off and Hort to not trust their work, and before you accuse anyone you might ask them, lol.
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
Modern translation are not based upon Westcott and Hort. It is very hypocritical of you to point at the sins of some and ignore the sins of others involved with the KJV. Tell me, what sins do you prefer from your translators and king?

Easter is ridiculous. I can solve your problem with Easter in just a few lines.....

Did you know that Easter and Passover are celebrated/calculated based upon two different criteria? I bet you didn't. I bet you don't know that the "West" celebrates Easter at a different time than some in the East? I bet didn't know what either.....

Did you know that Easter can happen BEFORE Passover at times..... and at times Easter can happen after Easter. It varies. Don't take my word for it. Look at the last 100 years of celebration and see for yourself....

You shouldn't listen to KJVOists.

Rome doesn't care about the KJV. Never has. Rome does care about the canon. That canon is represented in many different ways predating the KJV. You're entirely too focus on conspiracy nonsense. Rome this. Rome that. How about YOU?

You've purposed ignored Vulgate readings in the KJV because of your silly bias.
You do as God leads you and I will do the same.FYI, James was no friend of the RCC just more re writing of history.
 

kiwimac

Member
Lol, nope I never have claimed what you said. I believe the KJV is still the most accurate translation. As a young Christian when I was reading through my bible and ran across Easter I called my pastor to ask about Easter ,and he said it was the result of an over zealous scribe. The TR has always been hated by Rome and since the first printing of the KJV have tried to destroy the KJV. I know enough about West off and Hort to not trust their work, and before you accuse anyone you might ask them, lol.
You know nothing about Westcott and Hort.
 
Top