I know Sam Gipp. He has visited with me in my church office. The problem is he can't read Greek!Here brother TCassidy, consider this,
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!
I know Sam Gipp. He has visited with me in my church office. The problem is he can't read Greek!Here brother TCassidy, consider this,
Wow. What about the words of the Father, or the Holy Spirit?
Because the earliest manuscripts did not have this passage. Scholars believe that it was later added In the form of a note to bring clarification. Ending at verse 8 is a cliff hangar. Eventually, the note mistakenly found its way into the texts.Why would you question that passage?
I am going to have to disagree with you. I believe the bible is without error of fact. The history of the bible is factual history, the prophecies of the bible are factual prophecies, and the promises of the bible are factual promises.But no doctrine has been compromised as a result of any of these errors.
Again, I disagree. If we look at all the manuscript evidence, including the two most famous of the Alexandrian manuscripts, we see the evidence for including the passage is overwhelming.Because the earliest manuscripts did not have this passage. Scholars believe that it was later added In the form of a note to bring clarification. Ending at verse 8 is a cliff hangar. Eventually, the note mistakenly found its way into the texts.
No, the KJV is among the most accurate translations we have today, as long as you understand the English. (And I'm not KJVO.)
Very good. So God's words are all preserved to this very day then. Thank you.
Why then would you exclude Psalms 12:6-7 KJB from such a list, when it is perfectly clear?
Where are they [the preserved words of God]? Who has them? Are they available to all, in the hands of the common persons, or only in the hands of the scholar and the academic with access to ancient and dusty fragments in an old foreign language, that no one today actually speaks?
John 7:17 KJB - If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.
Are they in one place, or all over the place? If scattered, how do we know which ones are His words, from those which are not?
In the days of Jesus and Paul, did they need to locate the 'originals' of Moses, David, Asaph, Jeremiah [by Baruch], Daniel, etc? Did they need to consult fragments, or did they simply quote from the presently [then] preserved words of God that they hand in/on hand?
We all know, older is not equative to more accurate.
We all know that majority is not always the truth.
We all know about those who seek to corrupt God's words, even as the serpent from the beginning, by adding and subtracting therefrom.
The reason brother TCassidy that you cannot see the "third" time, is because your Concordance/Lexicon, etc rules over your plain English Bible.
Brother, look at those 'notes' on the page, it supports what I have said, for the 'marginal note' says at Psalms 12:6-7:Psalm 12:6-7 is excluded from that list because V7 is about PEOPLE, as I explained earlier. The AV makers believe that themselves, as I pointed out by posting their footnote. OTOH, you believe the false doctrine about it because it's found in Dr. Wilkinson's book.
REB :
When she became his wife, Othniel induced her to ask her father for a piece of land.
She dismounted from her donkey, and Caleb asked her, 'What do you need?'
Agreed. MSS evidence is overwhelming for this [Mark 16:9-20]. It shows the NIV's bias in discarding all the evidence in favour of its Sinaiticus [aleph], Vaticanus [.B.], and even at that point is used deceptively by not divulging that full evidence.Again, I disagree. If we look at all the manuscript evidence, including the two most famous of the Alexandrian manuscripts, we see the evidence for including the passage is overwhelming.
In fact, if we look at Vaticanus we see that the scribe even left room for the last 12 verses because he knew something was missing from the text he was copying.
View attachment 1996
Is he your brother [in Christ]? He, and I can read English [KJB] just fine [without getting into what he or I knows of Hebrew or Greek, or any other language for that matter].I know Sam Gipp. He has visited with me in my church office. The problem is he can't read Greek!
Feel ya'. Red letters - Klopsch. I think it was one of those helpful ideas, though in certain instances this day, it is being used against Jesus, ie Matthew 24:15 KJB in modern printings. Jesus said all of the words in the text. Yet, in certain printing, they do not 'red' the "whoso readeth, let him understand', and make it look like Jesus never said it [when He surely did, contextually], but that some 'scribe' wrote it later etc, which then takes away the force of the need to read Daniel carefully.(note: responding to my post about lady who only accepted words in red)
I talked to her for about 10-15 minutes - she was dogmatic about the red-letters - and would not budge- seems as though that was the only thing that was discussed. I finally told her - that we were not getting anywhere and I politely left.
But Christ Jesus [and His word in English, KJB] is my instructor. Jesus is the Master, the Teacher.Sir, Doc Cassidy is a GREEK INSTRUCTOR. I believe he knows both modern Greek & Koine Greek better than you do.
I don't believe in your strawman definition of KJVO. I keep telling you that.Once again, One Baptism -
BY WHAT AUTHORITY do you believe the man-made KJVO myth? It's not found in your KJV, neither in the text, nor in the translators' extratextual material.
Without any AUTHORITY, all your pro-KJVO arguments are only hot air.
Your FAILURE TO ANSWER this question, which I've asked you thrice now, indicates you're stumped & clueless about why you're KJVO. Your continued failure to answer will reduce your credibility to zero.
I would disagree. I have several examples of "doctrinal" error in the modern versions, including the NIV. But this thread is tired already.Yes! I know that may be a a tough pill to swallow. But no doctrine has been compromised as a result of any of these errors. We can praise God for that!
What translation are you using?, the WEB? Does your English Bible ever translate ποιμαίνω as "feed", "feedeth":, etc? What does your Jude 1:12, or 1 Corinthians 9:7 say?...No, it supports my English bible. ...
I noticed. They do not even use their same argumentation [which they use against the KJB] against their own 'version/s'. The sword of Goliath or of king Saul, can only injure themselves....Some folks Absolutely DO hate the KJV.
...