What are the KJOists going to do?

I'm not even going to tell you what it is. It's English, so it should be obvious. Have fun! </font>[/QUOTE]I get a couple of words but not enough to make since. I guess I'm not spiritual enough. I guess this is something the modern versions refer back to, I see now why their corrupt.

 

I don't understand it, so, what are you saying?

 

Why do you feel you have to lie about me?

 

I don't understand it, so, what are you saying? </font>[/QUOTE]He's saying that it is stupid to charge someone with not being spiritual simply because they don't read and comprehend an older version of English.

If MV users are not spiritual because they cannot read and understand the KJV well then you are certainly not spiritual since you cannot read the English version above.

 

I see. So, when I call a persona a liar for lying, that makes me a KJVO because they do the same thing?

And when KJVOs get married, and I am married, that makes me a KJVO because I do the same thing KJOVs do?

And when I drive a car, it makes me a KJVO because KJVOs drive cars?

Wow! You are really hallucinating! I am the one who holds their feet to the fire demanding answers they either will not or can not give!

Really? By that are you implying that I rail insults against the Alexandrian text type, or are you saying that I rail insults against those who defend the Alexandrian text type, and you are trying to imply something which simply isn't true?

Look, Craig, I am sorry you nose is so far out of joint, but to accuse me of being KJVO is insane. And your reasons for making such a silly accusation are equally insane! Cool off! Take a break! Your emotions are obviously out of control!

li·ar (lº“…r) n. One that tells lies. (American Heritage Dictionary) You know. Like you did when you accused me of being KJVO.

 

Uh, Craig, you said "look up the word “liar”" - not "lie." Your error. (Again.)

 

NASB is incorrect to add on Jude 1:25 and change on Rev. 22:14.

 

Ah, thalamic responses abound!



HankD

 

So, the NASB is WRONG for including the words "through Jesus Christ our Lord" but the KJV is CORRECT for including those words in several passages?

Aren't you the one who says the "modern versions" detract from the Deity of Christ by taking out the words "Jesus" "Christ" and "Lord?" Is this more KJVO double standard?

Also, I am sure you are aware that the KJV has Jude 25 too? Oops!

What I find interesting about Jude 25 is that the Majority Text (Byzantine) seems to lack the phrase "through Jesus Christ our Lord" but it is contained in several Alexandrian manuscripts. Aleph, B, A, C and, with a variant, p72 all contain the longer reading. However, if "the shorter reading is to be preferred to the longer" why was the longer reading included in the Critical text here? Aren't longer readings supposed to have resulted from a conflation or a mythical redaction of the Byzantine text?

As to Revelation 22:14, Aleph, A, 1006, 2020, 2053 read "wash their robes." This reading is also in some Old Latin texts, the Latin Vulgate, some Coptic texts, some Ethiopian texts, and is quoted by Fulgentius (4th century), Apringius (6th century), Ps-Ambrose (6th century), and Haymo (7th century).

046, 1, 94, 1611, 1854, 1859, 2042, 2065, 2073, 2138, 2432, all read "keep his commandments." Not to mention some Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian texts, and it is cited by Tertullian (3rd century), Cyprian (3rd century), Tyconius (2nd century), Andrew (6th century), and Arethas (10th century).

As so many ancient manuscripts are missing the final page of Revelation (including B), the jury is still out, but of those manuscripts with the final page intact, and taking into consideration the older Church Father's citing the passage, it seems the preponderance of the evidence favors the "keep his commandments" reading.

Split decision.

 

MVs added this phrase on Jude 25. Skan, are you JW?

 

How do you know they added it? Did you read the textual apparatus I posted?

No Askjo, are you? It is the JWs who WILL NOT UTTER THE PHRASE "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" and it is the JW bible that leaves that phrase out. So, if you want the phrase left out too, then you want the same thing the JWs want.

 

How do you know they added it? Did you read the textual apparatus I posted?

No Askjo, are you? It is the JWs who WILL NOT UTTER THE PHRASE "Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" and it is the JW bible that leaves that phrase out. So, if you want the phrase left out too, then you want the same thing the JWs want. </font>[/QUOTE]Click here:
Will's comment on Jude 25
Schmuel's comment on Jude 25.

 

Who cares what Will Kinney thinks, or Schmuel either, for that matter. I had enough of their blather when I was on that group.

Askjo, if you want to enter into this type of discussion, you're going to need more than 'countrybumpkin' spin from a couple of KJVO's 'good ole boys'.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

I don't understand it, so, what are you saying? </font>[/QUOTE]He's saying that it is stupid to charge someone with not being spiritual simply because they don't read and comprehend an older version of English.

If MV users are not spiritual because they cannot read and understand the KJV well then you are certainly not spiritual since you cannot read the English version above. </font>[/QUOTE]I don't think I ever said that they were not spiritual. Where did this come from?

 

Why are you there?

 

I bring my own ammo, Askjo, not a bunch of links to people who only show their 'willful ignorance'.

I come armed with my beliefs, backed up by the scriptures. I come ready to pray, praise, or make war, as the situation warrents. I come ready to be challenged, to learn, and to be ready to look at my own convictions if need be.

Mainly, I am willing to enter the fray on my own, with only the knowledge of God's truth, not a bucket of KJVO 'spin' and the official "Ruckman/Riplinger/Gipp/Hyles Quote Book" in my back pocket.

Really, Askjo. You ought to try thinking for yourself every once in a while. But, then, you couldn't be KJVO anymore...

In Christ,
Trotter

 

I am not one of them.