soulwinner Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 68 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 318 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 2 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/16/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2004 You also have to look at what greek manuscripts are being used this is what it boils down to! If the manuscript is corrupt hence so will the version, Westcott and Hort are the fathers behind what i believe to be corrupted versions or perversions. I did say it's what I believe and I still am entitled to that if you look at the history of the Vaticanus and Sinaticus which Westcott and Hort used to make their perversions you see the errrors in it and the KJV uses the textus recptus and if you look at Westcott and Hort one would question if they were even saved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salt and light Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 302 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 5 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/04/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2004 Super Jew, As far as Mark 6:20, Mark 9:18, Luke 18:12, Acts 5:30, James 3:2, 1 Cor.4:4, Heb. 9:7 go, I'll have to check the greek, and will get back to you on that, I'll either do it by internet, or borrow my pastor's greek lexicons this Sunday and look up those verses, and as far as Acts 9:7, and Acts 22:9 go, I believe Horizoneast explained that to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apothanein kerdos Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.20 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2004 Super Jew, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulwinner Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 68 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 318 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 2 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/16/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2004 Mr. Super Jew what do you think about Westcott and Hort? I know you think it's a trap I can see it now, but seriously what is your take on the two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salt and light Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 302 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 5 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/04/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2004 Purple Chris, You said, "The word translated as Lucifer in this verse of the KJ is the word "heylel" which means "shining one, morning star." The root of the word is "halal" which means "to shine; to praise or boast." That's the literal translation of the words. The word/name "Lucifer" is from Latin and means "morning star or light bearer." Jesus is identified as the "morning star" in Revelation 2:28, and Revelation 22:16, are those two verses "heylel" in the greek as well?, also, who is Isaiah 14 refering to? Also, 64098 is not an exaggeration, and believe me, I know all about the footnotes. As far as the American Standard bible about "Joseph" and "father', I can't remember which verse it was, my pastor pointed it out to me this past Sunday, and I can't remember which verse it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apothanein kerdos Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.20 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2004 Mr. Super Jew what do you think about Westcott and Hort? I know you think it's a trap I can see it now, but seriously what is your take on the two? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What relevance does that hold to the objections I put forth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purple Chris Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Members Followers: 1 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 44 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/02/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/27/1963 Share Posted December 14, 2004 If the manuscript is corrupt hence so will the version...How is it that someone determines whether an ancient Hebrew or Greek manuscript is corrupt? And I will ask again...did ANY of the KJ translators teach about the KJ what you are teaching? If they did not, how can we say what they didn't? 400 years of use and millions of people's opinions is not good enough to make that claim, is it? When a Pastor who uses KJ preaches or teaches, doesn't he go back to Greek and Hebrew words to better explain the text? Doesn't he make clarifications for words used back then that are used differently today, making things more understandable? Every preacher/teacher worth his salt does, no matter what version they are using. PC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gop_jeff Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Junior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 78 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/14/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/06/1976 Share Posted December 14, 2004 Anyway, Jason (if you're still reading this) like I said, there are a lot of different opinions. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulwinner Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 68 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 318 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 2 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/16/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2004 none at all just asking a question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salt and light Posted December 14, 2004 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 302 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 5 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/04/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2004 Super Jew, Let me ask you a question, Do you think you are smarter than the KJV translators who were the linquistic scholars of their day? There were about 50 men and it took as many as 6 men to translate one book, like the book of John for example. I'm not trying to sound smart, I'm just asking you a question, because I've encountered a lot of so called bible scholars who think they know better than the KJV translators. Right now, I am sitting here and looking at many more corrupt verses from these other versions, also, I started to post this message, and then something came to mind, and thought I would include it. I remember talking with my pastor not too long ago, and he said that in Isaiah chapter 14, the Hebrew is "helel, ben shachar", I think I spelled it right, any way, it is accurately translated "Lucifer, son of the morning". I though I'd throw that in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts