Favourite Bible Translations

[John146]

None of those hold water. The first is merely an opinion of exclusivity not supported by evidence, the second is already explained by the footnotes that accompany the text and which are part of the translation, and the third is covered by the explanation to the second.

The text of the NASB contradicts itself...

And translations can be the inspired word of God...

 

[Dino246]

Wow, my KJV has been wrong a this time, for 409 years, only to have Adulterer Kurt Aland, his Adulterous wife Barbara Nee Ehlers, And homosexual union supporter, and Roman catholic Jesuit cardinal, bring the truth in their created Greek text (Novum Testamentum Graece) that supports all new bible versions

The only response appropriate to this c**p is:

King James was a homosexual too.

 

[John146]

Yawn. We've been through this. Please don't repeat already-refuted arguments.

Can't be refuted, it's biblical. There are translations all throughout the Bible that are inspired. Facts. We should never put more emphasis on the originals than God. If God thought the originals were necessary, then He would have made sure they were preserved.

 

[Truth7t7]

The only response appropriate to this c**p is:

King James was a homosexual too.

King James Didn't Translate, even if your claim was true

A Masterpiece, The King James Bible and its translators, all confessing Christian's, scholars beyond comparison!

For a closer look at the King James Bible and its translators, check out the attached link

 

[Dino246]

The text of the NASB contradicts itself...

And translations can be the inspired word of God...

Why do you repeat yourself?

Yes, translations can be the inspired word of God, but that is not the same thing as claiming that the words of the translation are inspired by God. You're playing games with equivocation.

 

[Scribe]

Or...

-the KJV is the word of God (besides, we don't have the original)
-the NASB contradicts itself
-does one put trust in the text or the footnotes?

Since footnotes are often showing another acceptable English translation (i.e. Call themselves by the name of the Lord in Gen 4) we do trust in footnotes. We want the best translation from the original language to the English and that sometimes requires a footnote explaining when for example english words are added to complete a sentence but were not in the original.

 

[Dino246]

A Masterpiece, The King James Bible and its translators, all confessing Christian's, scholars beyond comparison!

Yawn.

Irrelevant. Not evidentiary. Holds no value in this discussion.

 

[John146]

Why do you repeat yourself?

Yes, translations can be the inspired word of God, but that is not the same thing as claiming that the words of the translation are inspired by God. You're playing games with equivocation.

Both are true and can be seen throughout Scripture.

 

[John146]

Since footnotes are often showing another acceptable English translation (i.e. Call themselves by the name of the Lord in Gen 4) we do trust in footnotes. We want the best translation from the original language to the English and that sometimes requires a footnote explaining when for example english words are added to complete a sentence but were not in the original.

We've got it in the words of the KJV. No footnotes needed.

 

[Truth7t7]

The text of the NASB contradicts itself...

And translations can be the inspired word of God...

The NASB is supported by the corrupt Greek text, created by adulterer Kurt Aland and his Sodom and Gomorrah team

Adulterer Kurt Aland, his Adulterous wife Barbara Nee Ehlers, And homosexual union supporter, and Roman catholic Jesuit cardinal (Carlo Maria Martini), bring the truth in their created Greek text (Novum Testamentum Graece) that supports all new bible versions

A Masterpiece, The King James Bible and its translators, all confessing Christian's, scholars beyond comparison!

For a closer look at the King James Bible and its translators, check out the attached link

 

[Dino246]

Can't be refuted, it's biblical. There are translations all throughout the Bible that are inspired. Facts. We should never put more emphasis on the originals than God. If God thought the originals were necessary, then He would have made sure they were preserved.

You're claiming that I'm trying to refute a biblical argument; I'm not. I'm stating that your equivocal use of "translation" and "inspired" has been refuted.

 

[Dino246]

We've got it in the words of the KJV. No footnotes needed.

Then why were there footnotes in the 1611 printing?

Really, you need to do your homework instead of displaying your ignorance.

 

[John146]

Then why were there footnotes in the 1611 printing?

Really, you need to do your homework instead of displaying your ignorance.

Dont know, don’t care. Footnotes are not a part of scripture.

 

[Dino246]

The NASB is supported by the corrupt Greek text, created by adulterer Kurt Aland and his Sodom and Gomorrah team

Adulterer Kurt Aland, his Adulterous wife Barbara Nee Ehlers, And homosexual union supporter, and Roman catholic Jesuit cardinal (Carlo Maria Martini), bring the truth in their created Greek text (Novum Testamentum Graece) that supports all new bible versions

A Masterpiece, The King James Bible and its translators, all confessing Christian's, scholars beyond comparison!

For a closer look at the King James Bible and its translators, check out the attached link

Repeating your own posts in their entirety demonstrates a lack of thought, making you look foolish.

 

[Dino246]

Dont know, don’t care. Footnotes are not a part of scripture.

Your ignorance on this matter is astounding.

 

[John146]

Your ignorance on this matter is astounding.

But I will not stand before God explaining why I didn’t believe He preserved His words in the English language.😉

 

[KJV1611]

Joh_14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

How does someone keep God's words when that someone can't even decide which words should be in the bible and which ones shouldn't be in it? Someone explain how that works.

 

[throughfaith]

"It" is NOT feminine in English!

Like I already noted, the CONTEXT clearly shows that Israel is in view. It would have been redundant to specify Israelites in verse 16. Nobody is going to be confused if they read the verse in context. It's only when you remove it from its context and try to interpret it independently that you are in danger of error, and it really doesn't matter anyway, because if you're discussing gentiles, there is no veil of the Law to be removed!

Nobody who knows anything about biblical interpretation takes a single verse and treats it as though it is the whole doctrine on anything, yet that is exactly what you are claiming.

In our bible study all those that were reading ' Anyone ' ,argued that it was ' Anyone ' and not just Israel .

 

[Truth7t7]

Repeating your own posts in their entirety demonstrates a lack of thought, making you look foolish.

Repeating the creations of Adulterer Kurt Aland, his Adulterous wife, Barbara Nee Ehlers,and Roman Catholic Jesuit Cardinal (Carlo Maria Martini) in the creation of their counterfeit Greek Text
(Novum Testamentum Graece) that supports all new bible versions

God don't use Adulterers and Homosexual union supporters to preserve his Greek Text, who you kidding, big smiles!

A Masterpiece, The King James Bible and its translators, all confessing Christian's, scholars beyond comparison!

For a closer look at the King James Bible and its translators, check out the attached link

 

[Scribe]

We've got it in the words of the KJV. No footnotes needed.

The KJV included marginal footnotes. You should read up on that before you comment further.