Side comments on the "William & Myself" thread...

One Book to EACH nation! If many Books to each nations, ask yourself, WHICH is MOST ACCURATE BOOK that God gave you for your own language -- ENGLISH?

 

God is not the author of confusion, So if he is not the "Author" then!works were finished He gave it only to whom He wanted at the right time which happens to be in 1611 the AV to further prove you are wrong if you use MV's Why take away from the Word when it wasnt broken in the first place? Malachi 3:6, He also Told Moses not to change one word, MV's change like chameleons! Wuold you prove that MV havent taken away from HIS WORD?

 

Would you prove that the KJV hasn't added to or taken away?

 

Unbelievable claim - it takes nothing to disprove it. There are hundreds, if not thousands of languages without the Bible. Forf example, there is no good, reliable translation of the Bible in the Irish language.

The KJV changed several words from the Geneva Bible. How do you know it was not wrong to do so.

BTW - this thread is past page five and has nothing to do with the title of the thread, it will therefore be closed no earlier than 0830 EDT today.

 

Well I Agree to disagree, No one verse could prove that God wrote only one Book: The Whole BOOK is your proof. Read it! All others will are like the blind leading the blind!

 

Mesdeaf said:

William S. Correa said:

Yet those who follow the KJVO myth follow nothing but confusion! If we follow your statement to its logical conclusion, then we must assume you think Jesus was in the wrong when He quoted OT Scripture and it wasn't just exactly as it was written. Sir, your idea is just as preposterous as the KJVO myth itself. Jesus wasn't wrong when He quoted Scripture a bit diffferently. And He, unlike those who follow the KJVO myth, was not trying to twist Scripture to give it a meaning different than what was originally intended. Jesus was citing Scripture alright, but He was doing it in such a way that His listeners would understand. This is what the so-called "modern versions" to today - they pass Scripture on in a language and usage that is more easily understood by today's people. You're right when you say God is not the author of confusion - and the KJVO myth is based on nothing but error and confusion.

 

William S. Correa said:

Comparing the so-called "modern versions" to "the blind leading the blind" is blasphemy against the Holy Bible, the word of God.

 

Not from the Textus receptus, out of 162 refrences 0 have been changed all others are 80 to 90% changed, ommited, deleted, and no others can compare or stand up to the KJB. Remeber the wheat and the tares, I really cant give you only one verse, but I can give you PROOF, If it takes me till my last breath I will prove MV's are wrong in taking away God said "If you add" He would add the plagues of the book if you "take away" he also would take away your name out of the Book of life:If the true Word is in your heart then your safe from the wrath to come only because of their beleif on the Lord Jesus Christ.In Christ's name I pray. The warning is there and Man continues to listen to himself.

 

Comparing the so-called "modern versions" to "the blind leading the blind" is blasphemy against the Holy Bible, the word of God. </font>[/QUOTE]Who made you judge? let GOD be true and Everyman a liar as it is written. If you dont have a KJB Ill pray for you!

 

Unbelievable claim - it takes nothing to disprove it. There are hundreds, if not thousands of languages without the Bible. Forf example, there is no good, reliable translation of the Bible in the Irish language.

The KJV changed several words from the Geneva Bible. How do you know it was not wrong to do so.

BTW - this thread is past page five and has nothing to do with the title of the thread, it will therefore be closed no earlier than 0830 EDT today. </font>[/QUOTE]we need Scripture! Proof! I have given proof and all you do is delete it. OK let the wheat grow amungst the tares.

 

Did I? You are 100% wrong because you rejected Romans 16:26. YOU DENY that God is interested in having His Words translated accurately into the languages of every person in this world. </font>[/QUOTE]Here's a problem. Oftentimes the first Bible translated into a language is not very accurate. A KJVO advocate might say that the best Bible in Japanese is the Motoyaku ("Original Translation"), which was the first complete Bible in Japanese. It was translated from the KJV with reference to the TR, Chinese Bible of Morrison, etc. However, it was a lousy translation which I wouldn't use even if it were in print. Just one example: "wine" in the KJV was sometimes translated as sake ("rice wine," a very powerful drink). So in Japan, an MV is a much better translation than the supposed "KJV type" translation. Which would you use? </font>[/QUOTE]How much POISON is in rat poison? the devil never "ADDS" to the Word he "TAKES AWAY" from it;he knows that people who have read the KJB )If they studied it) if something was added they would know it wasn't there: So he always takes away from the word, he is a thief and a liar and a murderer from the beggining! </font>[/QUOTE]You refuse to answer my questions man-to-man. But let me get this straight. Are you actually calling a Japanese translation of the Word of God (which I assume you have never read nor can you read) "poison?" Unbelievable! I sincerely hope you are not an IFB like me. If you are, I'm embarrassed.

Let me tell you, some Japanese folk just heard for the very first time the Gospel today in my church from the Word of God. And I am absolutely thrilled that God gave me the opportunity. And the Bible translation I used, though not a perfect translation, was not poison but the sweet Word of God. </font>[/QUOTE]No but Out of respect for the Japanese people, NO MAN COMETH TO THE FATHER EXCEPT BY HIM (Jesus) and if some one translated His words Fine But if the did it to print more bibles then we have a problem.

 

Ed, do you know how a redneck divorce and an Oklahoma tornado are alike? When the storm stops blowing, somebody's done lost a trailer1

Ed
Ed

 

Comparing the so-called "modern versions" to "the blind leading the blind" is blasphemy against the Holy Bible, the word of God. </font>[/QUOTE]Keith, I agree, basically! And I don't toss the word 'blasphemy' around often.

In His grace,
Ed

[ April 17, 2006, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

 

Mr Correa - you err when you claim that your copyrighted "proof" was deleted - I simply brought your post into complaince with copyright laws - the links are still there.

Per previous warning this thread is closed at 0847 EDT