Search results

Step up and support your assertion with evidence... chapter and verse included.

Being consistent would destroy his position. Either he knows that, and is afraid to deal with it, or he is so deeply deluded that he is beyond human help.

Here we have a shining example of circular reasoning. Since the KJV was essentially translated from the Greek "received text" and the NIV wasn't, your homework assignment can't prove anything beyond the existence of differences.

Just like anyone who has studied Latin in high school can understand the Vulgate. smh...

All irrelevant to the thread topic. Also, they are all BASED ON the KJV wording, aside from Calvin, who is using circular reasoning.

I'm inclined to agree; it makes sense with the following phrase, where the KJV renders them somewhat disjointed.

Agreed, but it did at the time of Erasmus.

This again is not a "major doctrine" (by a long shot!), which is what the thread title addresses. However, since you chose to make the argument, please demonstrate some integrity and answer this question simply and directly: which of these KJV verses is "the faithful witness"? 2 Kings 8:26 Two...

Genesis 3:16 KJV Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Genesis 3:16 NIV To the woman he said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very...

Fine... then let's keep the commentary on differences, not right/wrong. ;)

He was trained as a Catholic priest. Whether he ever presided as a priest is completely irrelevant. ... which were based on Erasmus. You can't escape him.

Here is the problem: you are assuming that the KJV is correct. You aren't interested in an unbiased examination; you are only interested in "proving" the KJV to be the right translation, which you simply cannot do merely by showing differences.

If this is all you were doing, it would be fine, and even helpful. But it isn't, as I will show....

The English of the late 1500's, in which the KJV was written, is different enough from modern English that it is, in places, incomprehensible. So you expect everyone else to be an expert in late-middle English? Utter hypocrisy.

You're new, so how about you answer your own questions. Coming in and acting like you own the place usually invites scorn... and rightly so.

If there is dry humour, is there also wet humour? Or is the antithesis merely moist?

Welcome to CC… Why do you think that you need a wife? That’s a serious question… and I have a second question: What do you offer, that any woman would consider marrying you?

This isn't a "doctrine" issue; it's a practical one. Stop claiming that verses have been "removed" in the new versions; you are attributing conscious bias on the part of the translators, which is only your very biased opinion. Try something a little less combative.

And? You don't know which is correct; you just assume the KJV is correct. All we have here is a difference.

Instead of attributing this to the work of the enemy, apply Occam's Razor. Since the KJV has the phrase repeated, it is likely the one in error... probably from following a manuscript tradition that follows a simple transposition of words. Since the truth is not found in isolation of verses...