Search results

Lots of revisions [1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626. 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640. 1644, 1650. 1652, 1655, 1657, 1698] for an inerrant Bible, eh, @Logos1560?

Oh, there’s the wicked Bible as well. It’s a double standard. The same standards they hold the modern versions to, they give a pass to the KJV and come up with some off the wall reason why it’s not an error. A non-error error, only a KJVO can come up with that. And notice they call it the King...

Oh, you’ve ripped my heart out and threw it on the floor!

Errors cannot in any way, shape, form, or fashion mean inerrant. Inerrant = incapable of being wrong. Oh the hypocrisy!

Imagine that, an inerrant Bible that has footnotes to alternate readings.

Oh, you mean the KJV that’s had more revisions than you can shake a stick at?

I don’t have to have a perfect translation to trust a perfect Savior.

I can say the exact same thing about my NASB.

Yeah, I caught my faux pas too late and couldn’t correct it. I stated it in a later post.

If the KJV is inerrant, then there should only be the 1611 version.

And just out of curiosity if you don’t believe there is such a thing as an inerrant Bible, which one do you happen to think is the best one to use even though it probably is not 100% true? The best bible to use is the one you can best understand and the Lord blesses you with. If its the KJV...

I am at work (shhhhhh! I work night shift in a hospital lab) and the computers have a filter on them and I cannot view that link right now. Good Lord willing I will look at it when I get home this morning.

I don't think there is any bible in any language that is free from error, so no, there are no perfect translations, imo. The autographs are the ones who are error free, not the copies of copies, of copies, of copies... I notice you put the King James Version on a pedestal by calling it the King...

Well, first off, Adam, and then Eve, were not created as babies, but as grown adults able to procreate. Same with the earth, IMO. Plus, do you not think the flood did some lasting damage to terra firma? I cannot help but believe in Pangea. Africa looks like it could be slid into North and South...

I meant to say only one version got that verse wrong. They did not kill Jesus and then hang Him upon the cross. His death was via the cross.

The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross.[NASB 1995] The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree.[ESV] The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.[KJV] The God of our ancestors...

Jesus heard that they had put him out, and finding him, He said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” He answered, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?” Jesus said to him, “You have both seen Him, and He is the one who is talking with you.” And he said, “Lord, I believe.” And he worshiped...

I think the difference is Van is making it a requirement to believe in the Trinity before they are saved, provided I’ve understood him correctly. That is not taught in the Bible that I know of. However, I do believe in time the person will come to grasp the Trinity as a proof of salvation.

There is no death prior to Adam, as that is clearly attested to in the scriptures.

There's too much speculation in all of the gap theory. I think you are making more of "created" and "made" than is there. God created everything we see, and do not see, from absolutely nothing, the Latin phrase ex nihilo. It was from creation He made everything. That is why those two words are...