Search results

1. 3,000 people got saved in 1 day at Pentecost, and then it says people were added daily. Act 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. The early church had a lot of people. For you to say they had no political...

What more can they get?

double post

Thank you. I do appreciate that.

I find offense at your flippant use of the Lord's Name. His name is holy and ought to be respected more than that.

I find that most woman really do not enjoy talking about theology or deep doctrinal things. I would be totally comfortable talking about spiritual conversations with woman though.

We've already discussed those and there are perfectly good explanations for why those read the way they do. They are not goofs, you just think they are. King James onlyism is based on God's promise to preserve his word. Modern Translation philosophy is based upon unbelief and lack of...

There is an extremely high degree of probability that this was a typographical error, where the Bishops’ text was retained by the typesetter without the translators’ emendation being taken, consequently corrected in 1613. First of all, let us realise that what the printers printed is not...

Response from Elisha Weismann: It is ironic that for 1800 years there was never a need for a "consensus of scholars" when every orthodox church knew and used the texts in majority, and rejected those in the minority and shorter readings. Only in the 19th century and beyond has a new...

From Steven Avery: Actually the situation with Jonathan Borland is far worse, it is a pot and kettle thing. Jonathan is the chief net apologist for the one-dimensional theory of Maurice Robinson that all that counts is the majority of Greek mss. Other evidences, the historic Latin line, the...

1:I edited the OP. 2:http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_05.asp

Can a Translation be Inspired and Infallible? Seminarians and bible agnostics say No, but the Bible says Yes. Whom are you going to believe, God or unbelieving men?? I am frequently told by modern bible version proponents that no translation can be inspired and that only the originals were...

Seriously do you guys pay attention? :BangHead:

I did not list that for Mark 16. The numbers are for Readings in General that agree with the readings of the KJV vs Readings of the NIV. I was responding to Rippon's quote of Yeshua saying that the CT/MT/BZt text were superior to the TR by posting evidence from the Uncials that support KJV...

Why won't you answer the simple question? That's not very rational.

And is each translation as infallible as the other?

Answer the OP.

And where can I get a copy of this infallible inerrant pure bible?