kanaka

Shawneeda wrote: << Please note that Wescott & Hort did not even believe in Jesus Christ.

RCruise wrote: << In short, all texts can be traced back to two sources: KJV is from the "Masoretic Text" = Old Test.

Jacob51 wrote: << I thought there was olny one KJV bible,whats that other non sense? >> Non sense? There were many editions and revisions of the KJV. How is that nonsense? It is just historical truth. Who told you there was only one KJV Bible?

Shawneeda wrote: << Only the KJV says "washed in the blood", the others, I am told, do not say that.

hereami wrote: << Why do some people find it necessary to attack the KJV Bible? I give people information in regards to new 'versions' so they can make an informed choice, but do not call them names. >> KJV Onlyism is attacked, not the KJV. If you won't acknowledge the difference between the KJV on the one hand, and KJV Onlyism, then you are being argumentive and unreasonable. The most attacked version is the NIV. The site in question here does not "attack the KJV," but only attackes "KJV Onlyism," which is a harmful cult, that divides the people of God. KJV Onlyists are divisive, proud, unteachabole, carnal, and have tongues set on fire of hell. My Bible Versions Poll demonstrates how stubborn KJV Onlyists are. Given a choice in the poll between the 1611 "He Bible" and the 1611 "She Bible," they vote for the misprint edition, and not the corrected edition. You see, the first edition, the "He Bible," had a misprint in Ruth 3:15 that erroneously said, "and he went into the city." So later in 1611 they came out with the so-called "She Bible," which corrected the error in Ruth 3:15. But King James Onlyists are so quick to react without thinking, that they vote for the "He Bible." They really ought to be humbled and embarrassed, but instead they attack this Bible Versions Poll instead.

Enoch&Elijah wrote: << And Revelation 22:18 and 19 and in other places in the Bible God tells us Not to add or subtract From his Word. >> Then the KJV and NKJV and the Textus Receptus are bad, because they have a lot of versed ADDED to the Word that were not originally written by the apostles.

Martyr said: << we will have some wackos in here saying, "the U.S. is under attack, but I am going to turn the other cheek." >> Martyr, this post of yours is shocking to me. I don't want to be one of whatever you are.

Just a few observations, trying to keep it objective, and keep it to what Christians all around the world can have unity of the Spirit on, and not just Americans: 1. Saddam Hussein is indeed a maniac.

Elect wrote: Hmm, I guess you mean like the "1611 She edition," versus the "1611 He edition." I don't see how it matters that there are so many KJV editions listed. Since there is only one of them that people are reading, the Scrivener edition. People who like the KJV should vote for that one. They sure aren't reading the 1611 KJV. A lot of people are tired of seeing people say they favor the "KJV 1611" and that sort of thing. I think the poll is good for exposing the ignorance and foolishness of the "1611 King James Only" position. Nobody is against the King James Version I don't think. Someone mentioned that it doesn't have the New English Bible. That was replaced by the Revised English Bible, which is on the list.

Check out this Bible Versions Poll on another web site.