Search results

When silver is refined in a furnace, the same batch goes in and is refined seven times. That is not what happened with the English translations. The analogy is non-existent. David wasn't writing of the KJV 2600 years in advance. It's a stupid argument and should never be quoted by any...

https://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/psalm-12-under-the-microscope.182464/

Surely you have learned what a 'genetic fallacy' is? If you haven't, now is a good time to go and look it up.

Bring forth the evidence, or don’t speak. Groundless speculation is inappropriate.

Perhaps not. Your doctrine can be rejected simply on the basis that it is your doctrine, not biblical doctrine.

Once again, this thread has degenerated into KJV-onlyists defending their pet translation instead of answering the title question.

Only if you’re stuck in the KJV. See my thread, “Psalm 12 under the microscope”.

More self-congratulation. Unbelievable.

Your opinion has neither authority nor power to do any such thing. Your arrogance is incredible. Christians already have done so. Your opinion has nothing to do with it.

These things were not mere illustrations. People were actually stoned to death under the Law. Read Numbers 15:32-37. If you choose to obey the Law, you must stone those who break the Sabbath. Failure to exercise the punishment due the guilty is also breaking the Law.

I disagree with your comments on the evidence, I disagree with your assertion of motive, and I disagree with your conclusion in its entirety. It's all empty opinion.

Instead of being persistently obtuse, why don't you present the information, that we may examine it. I'm not going hunting for "something" you claim exists but won't specify.

Apparently peachyking doesn't think that you're welcome to your opinion. ;)

Yes; it's clear in the modern translations. It's not watered down at all though.

No, it isn't.

The same can be said of those who hold only to the KJV. It's meaningless and empty opinion. Maybe, instead of spouting all the negativity that you believe about others, you should use it only to fuel your prayers.

You are welcome to your opinion.

He claimed, in essence, that multiple versions lead to confusion, but because the KJV was not the first English version, he is refuting himself. His response does nothing to answer my contention, because my contention is based on logic, not opinions.

You are overlooking the fact that Tyndale's was not the first English version. That credit goes to Wycliffe. You are also overlooking the fact that the verse you infer (Psalm 12:7) does not say that God will preserve His words. It says that He will preserve (either His words or His people)...

As promised... A (very brief) history of the Textus Receptus: (with thanks to Dr. James White and his The King James Only Controversy) Desiderius Erasmus published the first printed Greek edition of the New Testament in 1516. He translated it from a handful of manuscripts that were available...