Now... when will you develop the integrity to act on those words?Well then, the KJV is corrupt and cannot be trusted.![]()
Now... when will you develop the integrity to act on those words?Well then, the KJV is corrupt and cannot be trusted.![]()
yea, no help, no hope. Anyway, KJB is no error in this matter. Thanks anywayI'm not needing "help", but thanks for the effort.
I pointed out this contradiction again because it is so patently clear and completely undermines John146's argument. One day, he might even admit it.
Bahahahahahahahahaha!yea, no help, no hope. Anyway, KJB is no error in this matter. Thanks anyway
the application rings true to the analogy that the sure word of prophecy shed light and not the unsure one which critical text follows. The bottom line it's either a sure word of God we handle or not. That's anyone's choice.That's a gross misuse of the text and has nothing to do with the context.
Umm, those were explained on the seeming contradiction. ThanksBahahahahahahahahaha!
What colour is the sky in your world? Are you so brainwashed that you can't see the contradiction?
Thats a word salad.the application rings true to the analogy that the sure word of prophecy shed light and not the unsure one which critical text follows. The bottom line it's either a sure word of God we handle or not. That's anyone's choice.
Now... when will you develop the integrity to act on those words?
Just kidding, the KJV is the holy preserved words of God in the English language.
This is not only blatantly false but slanderous. Do you seriously believe that a Bible which has been around for over 400 years and held in high esteem by all Christians contains forgeries, and no one has raised this issue? If this were true it would not even be a Bible. So you are only on "Level 1" as far as knowing anything about this matter.I like the KJV also its well translated except for some really crucial forgeries. King James and those involved were trinitarians and altered some very valuable scriptures.
This is such a straw man argument that it is hardly worth addressing. Did you know that very soon after the completion of the Bible, it was already being translated in multiple languages, and that the Syriac Peshitta was already in circulation in the 2nd century? And all translations since 1611 were primarily based upon the KJV and/or the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts? And that even the Jewish Publication Society at the beginning used the King James Bible as their translation of the Tanakh because of its excellence? And that the Trinitarian Bible Society prints all kinds of translations which strictly correspond to the KJV?What about the English-speaking world before the KJV? Are you saying they were without His holy preserved word?
This is such a straw man argument that it is hardly worth addressing.
What about the English-speaking world before the KJV? Are you saying they were without His holy preserved word?
KJV is a good translation, but KJV only is mistaken. I like the NKJV and use it often. NKJV is not 100% Perfect either, but good.
God was preserving his word from the beginning. That doesn’t mean it was always available to everyone. Throughout most of the OT, his word was only available to one nation.