Search results

They are not lies. You are rather in denial that they happened. Here is one source you can see some changes in. https://www.bible-researcher.com/canon10.html

No. They have modern meanings now. They are used for a totally different purpose than in 1534. Changes. Updating.

But those printer errors had to be updated to get them out. Also there were textual changes, for good and/or ill. Updating in many ways. I would say for the better. But not always perhaps.

Correct. You can read the verses however you want. With, and without the words. The best of both ways to read. If you think the words are original and belong you can read every word right in the Text. If you think they don't belong do not read the words in (parenthesis). The best printed Bible...

This has nothing to do with the Critical Text or modern Bible translation. This all happened in the early 1500s. I will give you a picture of the facsimile so you may see for yourself.

Wasn't the KJV constantly updated? Had they not done much updating there would not be a PCE KJV now would there?

Read the chapter with, and then without the words in (parenthesis) . Then you will have looked at the evidence for yourself. You can believe whatever you want. But don't be afraid to look at both readings.

It's a no brainer for the time period. Erasmus didn't have the Comma Johanneum in his first or second edition. But under pressure from the Roman Catholic Church put it in his 3rd edition. Tyndale used Erasmus's 3rd edition for his 1526. I didn't check that edition, but a facsimile of his most...

The Comma is in Tyndale's Bible. But the Comma Johnneum is in parenthesis so the reader can read the text without the CJ. From a 1534 facsimile. This Jesus Christ cam by water and blood. And it is the sprete that beareth witness / because the sprete ys truth. (for there are thre which beare...

Didn't you read what others posted?

Correct . Stephanus did not contain the extra words that Beza took from the Latin. The words don't belong according to the Greek.

The NKJB used Stephanus Textus Receptus, it is to be remember that the KJV used Stephanus TR, Bezas TR, and Erasmus's 5th edition. Stephanus and Beza was also based on Erasmus 5th edition.

It's in between the Old and New Testament. Right smack dab in the middle of the 1611 Bible.

Where was it then if not in the Bible of 1611? Pray tell?

According to post number 2, they translated it with different renderings.

In the 1611 The 1611 editions, and countless ones afterwards, the Apocrapha is smack right dab between the Old and New Testaments. In-between the covers of the KJV.

If I am hand copying a King James Version by hand and make a mistake, the copy that I made will have a mistake in it. If I am Typesetting a KJV and make a mistake, it will have a mistake in it. If you and I are copying a Greek New Testament Manuscript by hand and we make a mistake in copying...

She is a false witness. You of all people should not read her. She will lie to you.

You mean love. It was an error in the KJV. Love, not RC Charity is the correct translation. You may for some unknown reason prefer charity when even the 1611 Translators translated it love as elsewhere..

Sorry about that. I'll try one more time.