Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Excellent choice, I do declare!!Originally posted by baptist4u:
I want to thank all who have given me advice on the NASB. After hearing from both sides I believe that I will continue to study my NASB with the full confidence that it is the most literal translation.![]()
He forgot to add:biblebelievers.com
I have been to their site about the KJV only stuff, and much of it is deceptive and half truths, and some is not even half truths.there is much of value at biblebelievers
The incredible thing is that this author didn't seem to see KJVOnlyism in violation of any of his markers for a legalist. I thought this one was particularly interesting:Originally posted by am ha'aretz:
brother neal,
there is much of value at biblebelievers. for example, try this article on legalism:
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Morton_legalism-liberty.html
VI.
Pharisees teach their man-made traditions as God's eternal laws.
Why do you always say "bye" and then never leave??Originally posted by KING JAMES AV 1611:
Bye
Because I have a desire to see God's word defended against attacks.Originally posted by KING JAMES AV 1611:
Larry why do you stay when asked to leave?
By comparing it to a version that did not exist for the first (almost) 1600 years of church history. How is that an honest comparison? the truth is that unless you hvae the originals, you cannot know what was omitted and what was added. I could make a post and show all the places that the KJV added to the word of God in violation of his direct command.Originally posted by KING JAMES AV 1611:
I don't think you know what honest is larry.That post is truth and exposes the deceit of that version.
I am not confused in the least. The Bible that we are talking about here is the New American Standard Bible. Check the title page of any edition you would like to (either the 77 or the 95). The NASV does not exist. It is an NASB, by title.You are confused about the alphabet.v is v and b is b you cannot reconcile them.
I am and have been for years.Get with the program!
How am I confused, deceived, or spouting falsehoods?? I have done none of the above. You have yet to demonstrate one false thing that I have said.Originally posted by KING JAMES AV 1611:
Yes you "am and have been for years" deceived ,confused,spouting falsehoods,trying to tear down the KJV,rejecting truth,...etc
Thanks for asking. In the post from "posted March 01, 2003 12:30 PM" I said the following:Originally posted by KING JAMES AV 1611:
When did you ask? Where? I did not see that.No don't try that old one.huh? who?
Oh that's your line,sorry
Here is the link to it so you can read the whole thing if you wish: The page containing Larry's original questionBut your long list of "omissions" raises the question, "What were they omitted from?" Did you suddenly find the originals so that you know what the original manuscript said? That would be the only way you could know these were omitted.