Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Salty, May 10, 2016.
Lets discuss this one as well
This gets into the Bible before 1611.....
Lie #1. I believe every bible in the vernacular is the inspired, infallible, preserved, and pure word of God in the receptor language, in the derivative sense.
Lie #2. Actually there is.
Lie #3. Actually I have three Hebrew bibles and about 10 Greek bibles.
If he means the very first manuscript penned by the prophets of the OT and the Apostles and their associates in the NT, he is correct. But if he thinks God did not preserve those words in the copies, he denies the preservation he says above that we deny. Ironic isn't it? I assert preservation and he denies it!
Lie #4. There are two Hebrew textforms the Ben Chayyim and the Ben Asher. Some, but by no means all, of the Dead Sear Scrolls reflect a different textform sometimes called the "Septuagint Type Text" or the "Vorlage Text." But the differences are minor. I have three Hebrew texts.
There are 31 that all go by the name "textus receptus" and 27 under the Nestle-Aland banner, and 4 under the UBS name. Then there are the Majority Text of Hodges and Farstad, and two editions of "The New Testament According to the Byzantine Textform" by Maurice Robinson and the late William Pierpont. So, the closer number would be around 65.
Lie #5. The Ben Chayyim text differs from the Ben Asher text in only 8 places that would affect translation.
Lie #6. There are several English versions based on the traditional text. KJV. NKJV, EMTV, LJV, MKJV, KJII, LITV, KJ and on and on.
Lie #6. The NKJV follows exactly the same NT text as the KJV, and although it follows a different printed OT text than the KJV in every place where the texts differ they NKJV committee followed the KJV reading.
I am the one who believe in preservation. You are the one who denied it in your statement above.
So do I, but not in the KJV exclusively.
Will Kinney at his best.
Which is not too good.
Are we getting so bored with a lack of KJVOers here that we have to bring them in via Kinney??? I may just leave the BB if that is the case.
But he's a master of what I call the "hurricane" method of debate: Launch a gust of arguments of varying degrees of validity against your opponent in hopes that he will be blown over by the sheer mass and force of the assault. Most will feel overwhelmed and simply move on. Some will try to answer, but hardly anyone wants to address every single point (life is too short, after all). Any point you fail to refute (no matter how tangental or absurd), of course, becomes proof that you have failed to successfully refute any points, so he wins.