KJV Versions.

Possible yes, certain, no. Should the evidence that Bois did not mention it be given any weight, when he mentioned something else in those places?

 

So you initially thought or hoped it might be the Bible?

I think that is Luke (Luke 11:2-4) rather than Mark. Not aware of it being in Mark.

 

My bad-I goofed. It's in Luke. But the differences are there.

 

I'm human-I goof, same as anyone else. But some make more than others.

 

Are you bothered by the differences?

 

Not really. They're 2 accounts of the same event by 2 different men.

While a cop, I was asked once, "If you received 4 accounts of the same incident from a rocket scientist, a news reporter, a schoolteacher, & a homeless person, which one would I believe?" I replied, "All of them, but I'd give the most weight to the one that best matched the evidence I'd discovered myself."

 

That explains a lot about you! You don't really care about what may be the truth, you just agree with those that agree with you, and ignore what others may think!

 

I see you've never been a cop, where a wrong decision (not about shoot-don't shoot) could ruin an innocent person's reputation, home life, etc. for the resta one's life.

 

That has NOTHING to do with what you posted......

And, truthfully, I shudder to think that you were ever a cop!

 

Opinions on this likely vary, but I do not think this is the same time or same event. Even if it were, I am not bothered by the differences. Matthew's record is part of the sermon on the mount, while Luke's record is in answer to the disciples' entreaty, "Lord, teach us to pray."

I think all of us understand that there are different perspectives of the same event -- such as what the guy on the left saw and the guy on the right saw. However, I think that explanation falls a bit short when we are talking about scripture given by God.

 

I think the overall process that was used by these translators were guided by God to keep His inspired Words perfectly preserved. Not that each translator as an individual are perfect or inspired themselves.

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” 2 Tim 3:16

 

I haven’t demanded that anyone believe a, b or c. You are misunderstanding if you think that. However, I’ve shared some things I believe and have answered those responses that were directed to me (without demand).
If you don’t find what I’ve shared to be any kind of reason as to why I think the KJB is inerrant and modern versions are not, then so be it. Who knows to what lengths of proofs would be satisfactory to you or anyone else.

 

Define "overall process". What about when the overal process shows other earlier bibles have a better reading than the KJV? Have you ever compared the earlier versions that make up the KJV?

 

Cops are trained to find & discern evidence; most non-cops are not.
And I'd shudder to know that you were ever a "Christian" teacher.

 

All four of the "Gospels" differ in their accounts of the same events. Their writers were people, same as us.

 

Same can be said by other translators. The AV men were no more special than others were/are. They had the backing of the govt. of Britain plus that of the state church, thus ensuring the distribution of their finished product, which was printed by the royal printer.

 

You've been shown that the KJV (NOT "KJB") is NOT inerrant, & you haven't been able to disprove any of those facts. The thralldom to the KJVO myth evidently prevents you from believing the truth. I hope the HOLY SPIRIT shows you differently, as, apparently, mere men can't get thru your KJVO firewall.