My KJV Debate with Jeffrey Dollar

[tharkun]

See the links previously provided

 

[Dino246]

If you watched the debate, you would see "my list of false doctrines" I gave. In fact, I gave a different list to you many times before, but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. But a few posts back, I did give a few of them again here.

If you want a more detailed analysis: At the 23 minute and 17 second mark of my debate, you can see the doctrinal section of my slides that show you the differences between the Modern Bibles and the KJV that I believe are very serious.

You didn't read my post very carefully. I'm not interested in blather about "Modern Bibles", and I'm not interested in a list of various issues in various translations. If you have evidence of "errors" (clear, blatant, and multiple) in ONE SPECIFIC TRANSLATION, then please share. Otherwise, I'll have to conclude that you're just spewing empty rhetoric and have nothing with which to back it up.

 

[fredoheaven]

See the links previously provided

could you have a new one? Or are you willing to document Genesis 1:1? What are your thoughts why Kjb is in error? Thanks

 

[tharkun]

The error in Gen 1:1 is documented in one of the links provided previously. Did you even look at the links?

 

[NightTwister]

That's not a good argument...

Romans 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Romans 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

It's a great argument. You just don't like it.

Your eisegesis doesn't work either. Those verses have nothing to do with what I said.

 

[Dino246]

It's a great argument. You just don't like it.

Your eisegesis doesn't work either. Those verses have nothing to do with what I said.

With respect, don't waste your time with him. He will throw one bad argument after another, and when refuted, he will sidestep instead of admitting that he's wrong...

like every other KJV-onlyist I have ever encountered.

Then in a few months, he'll throw the same refuted argument again, because he doesn't learn.

 

[fredoheaven]

The error in Gen 1:1 is documented in one of the links provided previously. Did you even look at the links?

Umm, a snippet view of the link you provided just give a snippet opinion and no documentation so far for any heberw grammatical rules. So my snippet view on the article of Genesis 1:1 is incorrect.. It is because the Heb word is plural it demands to be plural in the English language. A linguistic feature of majesty or intensity was not discussed which simply mean Hebrew translation to English is dependent on the context.

 

[NightTwister]

With respect, don't waste your time with him. He will throw one bad argument after another, and when refuted, he will sidestep instead of admitting that he's wrong...

like every other KJV-onlyist I have ever encountered.

Then in a few months, he'll throw the same refuted argument again, because he doesn't learn.

I think it's important to call out idolatry.

 

[Mem]

I think it's important to call out idolatry.

Of all the available bible versions, I'm trying to understand why God would choose to name His 'purest' translation after a homosexual king.