There is new information.we don't need another kjv-only thread. these arguments only harm people's faith, and they've been gone over in detail an hundred times here
There is new information.we don't need another kjv-only thread. these arguments only harm people's faith, and they've been gone over in detail an hundred times here
1Co 14:33I agree it's confusing and they should not have divided those names by the testaments, however, the names are 2 translations of the same exact name, making it interchangeable. KJV is confusing, but that doesn't mean it's incorrect.
here is my Post to you several days ago:KJV uses received text, or textus receptus. We are both wrong.
erasmus, creator of the Textus Receptus, which is what the KJV Bible is
Provide proof against the OP then...As I suspected from the outset: This is nothing more than a push for KJV onlyism.
So which Bible version is the word of God? They can't all be 100% true because they contradict each other.1Co 14:33
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
So which version in your opinion is 100% God's word, because they can't all be.here is my Post to you several days ago:
but i am glad to see you now do finally KNOW what i have known and was trying to tell you![]()
Provide proof against the OP then...
This may seem odd to you after all that I have been saying here thus far, but I strongly, and I mean very strongly, prefer the KJV...and that mainly because of the texts that it is translated from. In other words, even though there are poor translations at times into English, I still trust the underlying texts.So which Bible version is the word of God? They can't all be 100% true because they contradict each other.
That's not true. As I've said so far - I hate how complicated and archaic KJV is, but unless you can disprove the mathematical formulas encoded in it, they still stand as a potential sign from God.That doesn't even make any sense. I don't have to disprove your original post to know the goal has always been King James onlyism. All anyone has to do is read the evolution of your posts to see it.
Then why do you support KJV if God is not the author of confusion?1Co 14:33
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
That's not true. As I've said so far - I hate how complicated and archaic KJV is, but unless you can disprove the mathematical formulas encoded in it, they still stand as a potential sign from God.
Just because something is confusing doesn't mean it's incorrect. And you have yet to disprove those formulas.You complain that the KJV language is complicated and archaic, yet based on some mathematical formulas you still thinks it's the one true Bible. That's the very definition of King James onlyism.
Just because something is confusing doesn't mean it's incorrect. And you have yet to disprove those formulas.
They do not "stand" just because you "see" something in them..... they stand only in your mind.That's not true. As I've said so far - I hate how complicated and archaic KJV is, but unless you can disprove the mathematical formulas encoded in it, they still stand as a potential sign from God.
We have all the "signs" of God that are necessary for spreading the word..... it's called "the Word".... it's complete without secret handshakes and special underwear....
Once you understand the Word of God completely, and find it lacking somewhat, THEN you can go look for some mystical, mysterious, hidden code....
She is gonna think you are special.I can't believe you're against special underwear.
So... tomorrow I'm going to the department store... and I'm asking the nice lady for "non special underwear."
I think it's gonna get really weird.
.
I already answered your first question. Again, although I know that everything in the KJV is not perfectly translated from either Hebrew or Greek into English, I do trust the underlying texts. Beyond that, I have done extensive Bible comparisons over the years, and, based upon my research, the KJV is by far the best English translation.Then why do you support KJV if God is not the author of confusion?
You do realize the context of that verse is people speaking in tongues.
Thanks for pointing that out. Given that the KJV is known to have errors, it is excluded from consideration.So which Bible version is the word of God? They can't all be 100% true because they contradict each other.