His_disciple3

If it ain't broke don't fix it!!!!!! But let's face it, the system is broke. The disciples never agreed to disagree, they even got up in one another face from time to time, 41,000 different Christians denominations across the world, but wasn't it Christ, Himself that said a house divided can NOT stand. There is not your interpretation of scripture and my interpretation that makes truth. If you teach your way and I teach my way (and they are not the same) in the same church there is only confusion to the ones learning, iron sharpens Iron but for the better;unity not the worse; division. sharpens means for the better/to improve. yeah ok The relationship with God can be an individual one, But His Word is Truth. The truth, the Way and the Life. not 41,000 different truths. If we all have gotten to the point, that we are all right, then we have made a full loop as spiritual history repeats, and everyone was doing what was right in their own eyes!! the Methodist have their interpreted Bible that teaches their doctrine, the Baptist have their interpreted Bible that teaches their doctrine, and the Pentecostal have their interpreted Bible and so on and so on. The foundation is Christ: what has been built on that foundation by 41,000 different teachings is confusion. not truth. Eph 6:13-14 13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. 14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; KJV

:hmmm:well history and archaeology will confirm some of scripture, and this is being reveal as time goes on. Bible says we can see God in the natural things But to know for sure without a doubt. would not be faith. there used to be an old saying" the Word of God says it and I believe it and that makes it true" sounds good but not true, has nothing to do with if I believe it or not, just the simple fact that God said it, is what makes it true. then we have to believe that God said it. but that is for our benefit, not to confirm that it is true. Blessed are they that have seen and believe but more blessed for those that have not seen yet believe, If we could prove That God is, then it would not be of faith. whoa, ye generations of vipers whom seek for a sign. the thing is if God has said it, then there would be no contradictions or lies. now everyone will make this a translational topic, but it should be about truth, for if we have no true Word of God, then God has lied and not preserved His Word, and If His Word contains false information, who will it be that determines what parts are true and what parts are false, but then again If it is the Word of God there would be no false parts. faith cometh by hearing, but how will they hear without a preacher, and if that preacher is not preaching from the true Word of God we are on sinking sand, does faith cometh by hearing truth of is our faith based on that fact that we can not have a true word of God, now many will say we have the true Word of God in the Hebrews and original Greek manuscripts, but not in the English language which makes me very sad For I heard the Gospel in English, which would mean that I do not have the true gospel, for I didn't hear it from the Greek manuscripts!!! I heard it in English but according to the scholars now a days we can't have the true Gospel if we do not have the True Word of God, for Faith cometh by hearing, and the true Gospel we need to hear comes from His True Word, but we can't have His true Word in English so we can't have the true Gospel preached from an English Bible!!!

many will say the closer they get to God the more satan attacks, which sounds good. but not very Bibical : if we submit to God, satan has to flee when one resists him. James 4:7 7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. KJV sounds to me that it may not be satan you are fighting, but that evil spirit of addiction, if it is drinking or drugs please find a good Chritian rehab place for help, the suit of armor someone mentioned in an earlier post speaks of the girt/belt of truth, it is the piece that holds all other pieces of the suit in place, or in other words the foundation of the suit. You have spoken truth, you have a problem that is the first step.

the one thing that the Calvinist have to over look to make scripture fit their doctrine of grace by predestination, is "BY HIS FOREKNOWLEDGE" He doesn't just randomly pick and choose who is in and who is out , but by His foreknowledge of Whosoever will !!!!! Predestination is just as much scripture as free will, or free will is just as much scripture as predestination is, if Paul taught doctrine of grace as the Calvinist says he did why would he say this: 2 Tim 2:10 10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. KJV according to some the elect are elected/predestined before time begin to be in. but Paul clearly says that the elect needs to obtain salvation also!!!!!.

John 3:15-18 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. KJV

the rapture is not an resurrection but rather a taken up, for at 1 thes.4 we which are alive are taken up, there is those that are asleep and those that are alive both taken up, which Rev, say the Bride is ready before the first resurrection! also the armies or warriors He brings back with Him to the battle are the tribulation saints and they reign with Him during the 1000 years . Matthew 27 gives an account of many of the Saints was raised when the veil was ripped at His death, But the first resurrection according to scripture was that this event, nor would it be the pre-trib event

we could just TRIM our post a little maybe even put some silver and gold on it

three basic principles given to the people of God, Three were before the law, keeping the Sabbath, tithing and circumcision, these three were also given during the law. but to the nation/people who is not under the law, the new testament Church. the Sabbath is up for debate, circumcision was proven from scriptures not for the new testament Church, but most will bound us still under the commandment/law to tithe. well the ones that will say we must tithe for we are commanded forget the part of the Sabbath law was not to travel over 8000 cubits (a Sabbath's day journey) a little over 1.333 miles. but then praise someone in the Church because they travel so far to make it to church every sunday(first day of the week not seventh) I guess they also over looked the fact if we keep one part of the law we must keep the whole law, or if we break one part we have broken all the law!!! it was also wrong under the commandment of God for a priest/ leader of the flock to shave their heads, trim the corners off their beards, but how many cleaned shaven preachers will get up Sunday and tell their flock that they must tithe. again I say if we keep one part of the law we must keep all the law!!

Izzel, Did Jesus condone Adultery when he did not order the stoning of the Woman caught, you have to know to whom is being spoken to, and in your reference he was speaking to the scribes and Pharisees, to whom was still under the law! the law was for stoning, but the law was for the Jews. there is no proof that the woman was Jewish, which actually she could not have been, for if she was then the law would had obligate her to be stoned.

ok once again I will from scripture show the Pre-Trib rapture. but really with all honesty know that it may not change anyone's mind. Dan 12:1-2 12 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. KJV Note here that two kinds of people are raised the saved (to everlasting life) the lost (to shame and everlasting contempt). But at this separate event in scripture only those that are asleep in Christ are raised!!!! nothing about the lost being raised here. 1 Thess 4:13-18 13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words. KJV now we can find the order of end times in the end of scripture, but before I show this let me say this, the Church will not be with Jesus when he comes back for the battle of the end time. for how many kings or warriors, ever take their wife(Church/Bride) to battle with them? now some will try and say that revelation is not wrote in chronological order, but when John says and this happens and then this happens that my friend is in chronologica order!! Rev 19:6-8 6 And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. 7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. 8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. KJV the marriage( the bride is in her white linen) is come but the next scriptures will show this is before the first resurrection, how is the bride there before the first resurrection? duh! by the Pre-Trib rapture/taken up. Now these scripture are still not the time that Daniel spoke of, but is yet the end of the tribulation But before the thousand year reign: Rev 20:1-6 20 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. 4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. KJV Note here those that were beheaded and had refused to take the mark of the beast, this is the great tribulation saints the ones that endured. very much crushing the doctrine that none will be saved during the great tribulation( Rev 7:14 14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. KJV) then after the thousand year reign when have the second/last resurrection: Rev 20:7-15 7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, 8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. 9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. 10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. 11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. 13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. KJV Now I need to pull one more nail out what man has put in the coffin as They have tried to kill truth from scripture Concerning the Pre-Trib rapture. some will ask if the pre-trib rapture is true bible doctrine, why was it not taught til so long into bible history? very good Question and one that one be adressed with another question. If we are indeed saved by grace through faith and not of works why was it not preached until much later even after the pre-trib rapture was taught. before that we needed the seven sacraments(works) in order to be saved.

no for Most that I have read or know of, says their opinion on the issue. I searched the web out of the first ten that I read 9 said that Aramaic, only one said greek. but further study shows that neither can be factual, that the Greek manuscripts date around 66 ad, but study also shows that Aramaic and Hebrew was the language for the Jews and greek was for the Romans/gentiles. scripture was not for the gentiles til after the Gospels or until peter saw His dream and that the gentiles was also showing the signs of receiving the Holy Ghost.

Post #58, #60 and #62 all notes that Aramaic was the language spoken and written, the Bible says that the Gospel was for the Jews first then after God blinded them so that the gentiles could be grafted in. one of my references said that the Jews mainly spoke Aramaic in the first century. if the Gospel was for the Jews to begin with, and we really can't know what language Matthew, Mark, Luke and John recorded their notes and letters, then it would make very much sense that the gospel was first recorded in Hebrew or the Aramaic language. Greek was for the Romans/gentiles, with even some of the latter parts of the dead sea scrolls being written in Aramaic, spring forth as the first parts of the new testament written as well in Aramaic then when the Gospel was taken to the Gentiles it would be needed for a Greek translation. but seeing that the Scholars(on both sides) say that they think and no one really knows, I think to further continue to say you know or that I know is just ignorance on either side! why should we continue on with your knowledge that the Greek was the original language for manuscripts seeing that no one can really know!!! But your answer was answered you either accept that answer or you refuse it. after the OP it has not been questions from you but rather statements against the Word of God. you can't know what language, but fact is that for 400 years the KJB was the Authorized English version. to try and tear it(The Word of God) down, you might as well take a KJB and just rip it up or even burn it. again we had truth in a English translation, ok let's update the language, But to omit or add verses, to give Jesus Christ and lucifer the same name, to take the Blood out of scriptures. to have two men killing the same giant is not the proper way to update the Holy Word of God. I said Truth is what this should be about so for you to say you know what language John wrote His letters in, or for me to say is not truth just guess work.

Fruitfull, the Bible clearly states that if we break one law we have broken them ALL. If we keep one law we have to keep them ALL. let's look at some other laws. the law of the Sabbath, original stated that no one was to leave their place on the Sabbath, their place being interpreted as their Home. this was then decided that place meant their city and not their home, so that people could go to the temple on the Sabbath, so the priest added a distance( 2000 cubits) that could be traveled on the Sabbath, Then one Priest said well if they can travel 2000 cubits to go to the temple then they may need another 2000 cubits to make it back home. ( 4000 cubits total) then on toward the new testament and cities growing larger. they added another 4000 cubits to make a Sabbath days journey 8000 cubits. now 6000 cubits is a little over a mile, so a Sabbath days journey would be over 1 and a 1/3 of a mile .now that was the last time the law was changed . so if you travel over that distance on the Sabbath to go to your temple/church, then you should not cast stones at people with Christmas trees, for you to have broken the law. now one more, assuming the church you attends preaches against Christmas trees, does the Pastor or leader of said church, shave the beard or head? for that too would defile a priest before God so I can see a well shaven preacher at your church preaching not to put up a Christmas tree, being well shaven or clean shaven would be a sin for a priest/ leader of a flock. in the eyes of God. note also here a woman couldn't be the leader unless they had a beard that is!!!! Lev 21:4-5 4 But he shall not defile himself, being a chief man among his people, to profane himself. 5 They shall not make baldness upon their head, neither shall they shave off the corner of their beard, nor make any cuttings in their flesh. KJV the law was not given as bondage but to teach( as a schoolmaster) that All stand in the need of the mercy and Grace of God!

I noted that several of those references said that it was also the written language for that time. I have gave reference from scriptures and from other sources, all I have from you guys are playing on words written not spoken, I guess you know if you dig deep enough, you will find out someone's true motive. your true motive of this thread was not to find the truth of the use of Easter in scripture, but only to start another translational division thread. I should report you, for you didn't intend to ask a question but rather use another thread in question form to start attack on the 400 year old AUTHORIZED English translation Bible. maybe some true moderator will see that this thread should have never been put in the Worthy Q&A http://www.levitt.com/essays/language This guy is a strong believer that all the new Testament was written in Greek but then goes on to say that no one can really know what language the new testament was original written in. He even goes on to give this strong argument that Matthew wrote of his Notes and letters in Aramaic then they would had to be translated into Greek. I love the way he writes a very Long paper on the original new Testament manuscripts being in Greek, Then says that no one can really Know!!!!! so he lays claim that he knows what language the new Testament was original written in. then says "we truly do not know" excuse me Sir, to say you truly don't know why make a statement that can not be known as truth or fiction, to cause confusion maybe??????

If this is not enough, I can post some more!!!!!!! to try and play on words such as spoken but not written: is really reaching for something. it reminds me of the way someone else or should I say something else, tried to play on words in Chapter 3 of Genesis, and again in Matt 4:, in the wilderness with the temptation of Jesus. of course I could be wrong here, but most folks I know if they speak English they write it down in English. save(except) the Doctors who are required by Law to write in Latin sometimes.

If this is not enough, I can post some more!!!!!!!

Please note here this also says written as well as spoken!!! http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj20e.pdf THE LANGUAGES SPOKEN BY JESUS Aaron Tresham* ARAMAIC The classic presentation of the view that Jesus spoke primarily Aramaic was provided by Gustaf Dalman, who concluded that Jesus knew some Hebrew and Greek but usually used Aramaic.7 That Jews spoke Aramaic after the Exile is rarely disputed; even portions of the OT are in Aramaic (see Daniel and Ezra).8 Those who see Aramaic as the primary language of Jesus assert that Aramaic dominated Israel even after Greek had become the lingua franca of the Greco-Roman world.9 Archaeological finds have confirmed the continued use of Aramaic in Israel. Literary documents in Aramaic from the first centuries B.C. and A.D. were found at Qumran. While the documents in Aramaic are in the minority, they show that Aramaic was at least a literary language at the time. Ossuary inscriptions show that Aramaic also continued as a colloquial language in the first century A.D. A contract in Aramaic dated A.D. 56 was found at Murabba’at. Finds at Masada can be dated A.D. 68-73. These include an Aramaic invoice written on an ostracon, along with an inscription on a storage jar and an inscription of ownership on a vessel.10

http://history.answers.com/language/the-languages-of-jesus What was the Primary Language of Jesus's Day? The historical Jesus of Nazareth lived at the height of the Roman Empire. Its official language was Latin. However, despite the fact that Latin was the language of the Empire, people who lived in different regions routinely used their own native tongues. In the region in which Jesus lived, Aramaic was the dominant language.

During and before the time of Jesus, there wasn’t just one version of Aramaic being used in Judea and beyond. Some Aramaic was official and formal. This is preserved, as you would expect, in official documents and inscriptions. please take note that this says Written as well !!!!!!! also that this guy said: I am standing on the shoulders of many fine scholars,

http://www.gotquestions.org/language-Jesus-speak.html Question: "What language did Jesus speak?" Answer: While Jesus very likely spoke Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, Aramaic was likely the language Jesus spoke the most. The Gospels record Jesus speaking numerous Aramaic words: talitha koum (Mark 5:41); ephphatha (Mark 7:34); eloi eloi lama sabachthani (Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34); abba (Mark 14:36). Historians, archaeologists, and cultural anthropologists are almost universally agreed that Aramaic was the common or colloquial language in Israel during Jesus’ time. Aramaic was very similar to Hebrew, but with many words and phrases that were borrowed from other languages and cultures, especially Babylonian. Hebrew was spoken primarily by the scribes, teachers of the law, Pharisees, and Sadducees, the “religious elite.” Hebrew was likely often read in the synagogues, so most people were probably able to speak and understand some Hebrew. Since Greek was the language of the Romans, who had power over Israel during Jesus’ time, Greek was the language of the political class and anyone who wanted to do business with the Romans. Greek was the universal language at that time, so, the ability to speak Greek was a highly desirable skill. Some, however, refused to speak Greek out of resentment toward their Roman oppressors. When Jesus spoke with Pontius Pilate, it is possible that He spoke to him in Greek, although Pilate, as the governor, likely would have been able to speak Aramaic as well. Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/language-Jesus-speak.html#ixzz2xWNQROvz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Aramaic of Jesus) It is generally agreed that Jesus and his disciples primarily spoke Aramaic,[1] the common language of Judea in the first century AD, most likely a Galilean dialect distinguishable from that of Jerusalem.[2] The towns of Nazareth and Capernaum in Galilee, where Jesus spent most of his time, were Aramaic-speaking communities. See also: Cultural and historical background of Jesus Aramaic was the common language of the Eastern Mediterranean during and after the Neo-Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian, and Achaemenid Empires (722–330 BC) and remained a common language of the region in the first century AD. In spite of the increasing importance of Greek, the use of Aramaic was also expanding, and it would eventually be dominant among Jews both in the Holy Land and elsewhere in the Middle East around 200 AD[3] and would remain so until the Arab conquest in the seventh century. According to Dead Sea Scrolls archaeologist, Yigael Yadin, Aramaic was the spoken language of Jews until Simon Bar Kokhba tried to revive Hebrew and make it the official language of Jews during the revolt that he led (132-135 AD). Yadin noticed the shift from Aramaic to Hebrew during the time of the Bar Kokhba revolt. In his book "Bar Kokhba: The rediscovery of the legendary hero of the last Jewish Revolt Against Imperial Rome" Yigael Yadin notes, "It is interesting that the earlier documents are written in Aramaic while the later ones are in Hebrew. Possibly the change was made by a special decree of Bar Kokhba who wanted to restore Hebrew as the official language of the state"(page 181). In the book "A Roadmap to the Heavens: An Anthropological Study of Hegemony among Priests, Sages, and Laymen (Judaism and Jewish Life)" by Sigalit Ben-Zion (page 155), Yadin said: "it seems that this change came as a result of the order that was given by Bar Kokhba, who wanted to revive the Hebrew language and make it the official language of the state." . Josephus wrote: I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language, although I have so long accustomed myself to speak our own tongue, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness; for our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of many nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoothness of their periods; because they look upon this sort of accomplishment as common, not only to all sorts of free-men, but to as many of the servants as please to learn them. But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our laws, and is able to interpret their meaning; on which account, as there have been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this learning, there have yet hardly been so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains. —Antiquities of Jews XX, XI . In the first century AD, Aramaic was a widespread language. This is supported by the testimony of Josephus.

having a tree with silver and gold and worshipping a tree with silver and gold is a big difference I hope some learn that difference, for by the same condemnation you judge so will you be judged by! as well as there is a bigger difference as to being under the law and being under Grace, I to hope that some can learn the difference before it is eternally too late. Gal 5:1-4 5 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. KJV

lookinhforanswers, I was not present in the Gospel days, so all I can do is go by what most Bible scholars and historians say. Hebrew and Aramaic, was the languages Jesus used. if there was some more I either forgot them or haven't heard of them. Here is an article, that does not mention Aramaic but note it says that greek was the language for the non-Jewish people, which I believe would imply that the Jewish people would not use greek, thus we would have to fall back on their original language being Hebrew, so this would imply that John the disciple. being a devout Jew, 1st,2nd,3rd John, the Gospel according to John and revelations would have been recorded in Hebrew then translated later to greek manucripts( or from Hebrew to Latin then to Greek) . which would thus mean according the to Kjb critics that a translation can not be inspired, would also have to agree that the greek manuscripts would not be inspired, but wouldn't that mean that God has not preserved His Word as he promised,( and this just could not be), seeing that there is no Hebrew manuscripts from the New Testament times. if this is true then we may all be in trouble!!!! this would also be my counter to your website. note here that Hellenism ( Greek influence or the "Greek only' on religious works or writings) that your website would suggest is open to debate among scholars, and I believe scripture telling us, Jesus was speaking Hebrew while on the Cross or either the disciples recording what he said in Hebrew, would make your website a little less believable!!!!!

No Shiloh, I am trying avoiding the fact that you are claiming claims that I have never said ( putting words into my mouth). Where did I say that the KJB was the only Bible that contain the truth, they all have some truth( however scripture is the one that said "a little leaven will leaven the whole lump"), but as I have said I am referring to the KJB verses the new modern day translations ( any version, which includes all versions after the dead sea scrolls were found), I am not, nor have I ever referred to it being superior over any Hebrew and Greek manuscript, nor any translation prior to the KJB, I have only referenced the Bishop and Geneva Translation, to show why the KJB came about and to dispute some false claims given in here. Nor have I ever referred to the KJB as the only English translation. But what I have said is I believe it is the best, and if we are to feed the flock as Jesus told Peter to feed His flock, Then His flock deserves the best and not the second or even third best! also I have said that if we do not have an infallible word of God in English then who determines what is fallible and what is infallible? I have tried not to make my comments about translation, but about truth, but I will defend to truth that they should be no schism in the Body of Christ, and believe with all my heart as they did shortly after the KJB, they(Church leaders and scholars and yes King James) agreed that only one Bible should be used in the churches. to avoid strife, division and confusion in the Church. which neither Strife, Division or confusion is of God, I Thank God that our Spiritual Forefather's had enough spiritual discernment to see where two or more translations( that don't agree) used in the Church could cause such problems, just too bad our spiritual leaders can't see that today!

Willamina in response to your post: Believe me, with all my heart as a Christian, if the thee's and the thou's was all they changed I would not be here in defense of the truth. For we would still have the truth