King James Bible Debate!!!

[anitarose]

In my school, we can use whatever translation we want, but in the tests, the Scriptures HAVE to be in KJV. that's the requirement.

you just had midterms, kitty? I have FINALS next week...hard to believe this term is almost over. I'm praying that I have the funds to go onto the next term....

Anita & Chikachu

[John R Nolan]

LOL!!! Yeah, this little Kitty's going to Bible Institute at her church and just had a midterm tonight that only took like 15 minutes LOL

But seriously, I've been learning so many things in this class.. I had never known about Aleph (Sinaiticus) and B (Vaticanus) or even Westcott and Hort.. not to mention the Nestle Aland Greek Text.. and then the "M" that stands for "Majority texts" in the Nestle Aland that represents about a hundred manuscriputs.. I also never knew that all the new modern versions are based off of the work of Westcott and Hort... this can be proven not only by the book Westcott and Hort (W-H) wrote, but also in the fact that the same verses are missing, bracketed or footnoted(to say they shouldn't be there), etc... nto to metnion that in the Vaticanus, the last 12 verses in the book of Mark are left out... The Vaticanus was discovered, oh, approxiamately 1450 A.D. and was kept in a musuem from there... until a man somehow copied. But anyways, I find it interesting that because it was written on vellum, that priests would start the next book in the next column, however, there is an entire blank column between Mark and Luke, and just enough space for the verses of Mark 16:9-20! So cool!!!!

Not to mention, they say that the newer versions are based on the most reliable manuscripts, but because it is based off the work of W-H, which is based off of only Aleph and B, they are only based off of two manuscripts. That is becuase W-H dismissed anything that was "Syrian"/ Byzantine/Textus Receptus(Recieved Text)... so cool!!!!

[kittylover0991]

LOL!!! Yeah, this little Kitty's going to Bible Institute at her church and just had a midterm tonight that only took like 15 minutes LOL

But seriously, I've been learning so many things in this class.. I had never known about Aleph (Sinaiticus) and B (Vaticanus) or even Westcott and Hort.. not to mention the Nestle Aland Greek Text.. and then the "M" that stands for "Majority texts" in the Nestle Aland that represents about a hundred manuscriputs.. I also never knew that all the new modern versions are based off of the work of Westcott and Hort... this can be proven not only by the book Westcott and Hort (W-H) wrote, but also in the fact that the same verses are missing, bracketed or footnoted(to say they shouldn't be there), etc... nto to metnion that in the Vaticanus, the last 12 verses in the book of Mark are left out... The Vaticanus was discovered, oh, approxiamately 1450 A.D. and was kept in a musuem from there... until a man somehow copied. But anyways, I find it interesting that because it was written on vellum, that priests would start the next book in the next column, however, there is an entire blank column between Mark and Luke, and just enough space for the verses of Mark 16:9-20! So cool!!!!

Not to mention, they say that the newer versions are based on the most reliable manuscripts, but because it is based off the work of W-H, which is based off of only Aleph and B, they are only based off of two manuscripts. That is becuase W-H dismissed anything that was "Syrian"/ Byzantine/Textus Receptus(Recieved Text)... so cool!!!!

*cough* yes?

[John R Nolan]

LOL!!! Yeah, this little Kitty's going to Bible Institute at her church and just had a midterm tonight that only took like 15 minutes LOL

But seriously, I've been learning so many things in this class.. I had never known about Aleph (Sinaiticus) and B (Vaticanus) or even Westcott and Hort.. not to mention the Nestle Aland Greek Text.. and then the "M" that stands for "Majority texts" in the Nestle Aland that represents about a hundred manuscriputs.. I also never knew that all the new modern versions are based off of the work of Westcott and Hort... this can be proven not only by the book Westcott and Hort (W-H) wrote, but also in the fact that the same verses are missing, bracketed or footnoted(to say they shouldn't be there), etc... nto to metnion that in the Vaticanus, the last 12 verses in the book of Mark are left out... The Vaticanus was discovered, oh, approxiamately 1450 A.D. and was kept in a musuem from there... until a man somehow copied. But anyways, I find it interesting that because it was written on vellum, that priests would start the next book in the next column, however, there is an entire blank column between Mark and Luke, and just enough space for the verses of Mark 16:9-20! So cool!!!!

Not to mention, they say that the newer versions are based on the most reliable manuscripts, but because it is based off the work of W-H, which is based off of only Aleph and B, they are only based off of two manuscripts. That is becuase W-H dismissed anything that was "Syrian"/ Byzantine/Textus Receptus(Recieved Text)... so cool!!!!

[kittylover0991]

LOL!!! Yeah, this little Kitty's going to Bible Institute at her church and just had a midterm tonight that only took like 15 minutes LOL

But seriously, I've been learning so many things in this class.. I had never known about Aleph (Sinaiticus) and B (Vaticanus) or even Westcott and Hort.. not to mention the Nestle Aland Greek Text.. and then the "M" that stands for "Majority texts" in the Nestle Aland that represents about a hundred manuscriputs.. I also never knew that all the new modern versions are based off of the work of Westcott and Hort... this can be proven not only by the book Westcott and Hort (W-H) wrote, but also in the fact that the same verses are missing, bracketed or footnoted(to say they shouldn't be there), etc... nto to metnion that in the Vaticanus, the last 12 verses in the book of Mark are left out... The Vaticanus was discovered, oh, approxiamately 1450 A.D. and was kept in a musuem from there... until a man somehow copied. But anyways, I find it interesting that because it was written on vellum, that priests would start the next book in the next column, however, there is an entire blank column between Mark and Luke, and just enough space for the verses of Mark 16:9-20! So cool!!!!

Not to mention, they say that the newer versions are based on the most reliable manuscripts, but because it is based off the work of W-H, which is based off of only Aleph and B, they are only based off of two manuscripts. That is becuase W-H dismissed anything that was "Syrian"/ Byzantine/Textus Receptus(Recieved Text)... so cool!!!!

uh... this isn't meant to sound cruel but.. uh.. "board troubles"?

[John R Nolan]

GOD IS GOOD

Edited October 21, 2006 by John R Nolan

[John R Nolan]

Praise the Lord

Edited October 21, 2006 by John R Nolan

[John R Nolan]

Divide and conquer is the law of Caesar, and is rooted in Babylonian political and religious history

In the Garden, in the beginning, when GOD first started dealing with the human specie He created, He gave them His Word

Then, along comes the spider, well, actually it was the Beast, and sat down beside HER, (not him) and told her he had a more modern, updated, revised and interpreted version of GOD'S Word which would, if used, give Eve the opportunity to be "as GOD" Gen.3:1-6

Because Eve was not in the original creation, she was taken out of the man, where all other species were created male and female, she was not perfect and was able to be deceived

Remember, Adam was not deceived, 1 Tim.2:14, he sinned wilfully, giving his life to save his wife, as Christ gave His Life to save His bride

It's interesting that the beast could talk, could reason, and was capable of beguiling, deceiving, seducing Eve, who was he?

He must have been an upright creature, as, when GOD cursed him he was, from that time forward, made to crawl upon his belly and have dust for his meat

Having tried quite a number of alternate versions, in which was found considerable, human, interpretation, updates etc., and variations, after a lot of prayer one was led to return to the K.J.V.

Of all the Bibles available, this writer believes the K.J.V. is the only GOD inspired translation. It is the only one which is proven by numerics to be beyond the ability of man to write.

If any reader would like to check out the writings of Ivan Panin on the net, you will be able to get all necessary information on this matter

One contributor commented on the publishing houses not being Christian, and not being too concerned about the accuracy of translation, additions or subtractions, but in the bottom line, how many they can sell and for how much profit; I'm with him on that

If GOD provided a faulty manual for all Christians from 1611'til the 1950's, then He is answerable for a gigantic deceipt, and I don't think He, being GOD, could do that

"I AM GOD, I change not" Mal.3:6; "It is impossible for GOD to lie" Heb.6:18; it is the devil who is a liar and the father of them

In the final analysis it is up to each individual to chose the SWORD they will use to defeat the enemy, this writer prefers the old, proven one

Another worthy translation to examine is the LAMSA Bible, which is translated from the Aremaic, and yes, it is good to cross reference with other translations as some of the old English words have different meanings now; E.G. the word house, to us is a residential dwelling, yet the reference to "in My house there are many mansions" Jn.14:2 actually refers to lineage, as in the House of Tudor, or the House of Kent and there are other such examples

God bless you Kitty, I reckon the cream is in the K.J.V.

Edited October 21, 2006 by John R Nolan

[John R Nolan]

Deliverance

Edited October 21, 2006 by John R Nolan

[Floatingaxe]

In our Leadership classes I am in right now, we did a module on the bible, and we were taught that of all versions, the most accurate versions were the new American Standard and the New International Version.

I was surprised, but I believe it.