Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: George W. Bush,the_doc, all
#17: "1 Timothy 2 KJV"

Quote I heard: "If the King James version of the Bible was good enough for Jesus, I guess it must be the best one to use." :)

http//www.aomin.org/Marrs.html

http//www.aomin.org/kjvo.html

69 posted on 09/08/2001 12:33:26 PM PDT by Matchett-PI (Ahhhhhhhh ... the simplicity of the simple. :))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: Matchett-PI
"If the King James version of the Bible was good enough for Jesus, I guess it must be the best one to use." :) You're right. If it was good enough for Jesus...

Okay, now you've convinced me. No more peeking at that NASB translation ever.

You do, by the way, oversimplify the debate. I suggest you abandon any reading of the ridiculous modern "advocates" of the KJV (Riplinger!) and instead examine the work of some real scholars like Dean Burgon of Chicester. They will, if you are interested, lay out the real case against the Bibles based upon Rome's Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, pointing out their obvious corruption and many revisions as well as the real conflicts between them although the textual critics entirely ignore the glaring differences between them. These manuscripts are in such disagreement with one another that no real unity can exist between them, not a problem in the Byzantine family of the received text. The history of how these manuscripts were discovered should alone make you a little more wary of these claims. And the real background and beliefs of Westcott and Hort, the translators of the modernist Greek text, makes it very clear they were not Christians in any way that anyone on this thread would accept. And that is provable from their own writings and papers and the organizations they founded.

The King James does have some minor flaws, all outside key doctrinal teachings. These minor errors are well-known and easily learned. One cannot say that for the Tower of Babel that is the publishing industry of modernist Bibles. You're welcome to Rome's manuscripts if you're comfortable with such things. When it comes down to choosing the manuscript stream of the Greek Orthodox church versus the church of Rome, I'll take the manuscripts of Byzantium, ordinary and textually unexciting as they are to modern "higher" textual critics.
77 posted on 09/08/2001 1:20:47 PM PDT by George W. Bush (arrogance a mile high and an inch deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

To: Matchett-PI
The most exact literal translation of the Bible is still going to be misunderstood unless the reader has been granted understanding. If the reader's prayers for understanding have been answered, even the most confusing, convoluted translation of the Bible will enlighten him.

Christ was lifted up by Satan to look down on creation and tempt him to rule over it.
Christ was lifted up by man to suffer and die on the cross.
Christ was lifted up by God our Father to take his rightful place in Heaven and prepare the way for us to come home with Him.

78 posted on 09/08/2001 1:20:53 PM PDT by ValerieUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson