Is it intellectual dishonesty...

And you still deny Divine preservation.

It's God's "hippo" and we're still flying around the Throne crying, "Holy! Holy! Holy!. ...and his train filled the temple.

BTW, "muddy water" has the very nutrients of life, but your "clear" water has formaldyhide, lead,arsnic, and stricnine to kill and flouride to try and brighten up that which is dead.

IOW, our AV 1611 KJB comes from the Spring, yours comes from modern technology, an all too eventful death to all who partake of it's deceptive practices substanciate by the capitalistic practice of marketing. We can't be bought, we're NOT FOR SALE!

 

No. The printers did that and I believe we should correct printers errors, yall don't. Yall rather call satan proper. God does not. But now God does refer to the Lake of Fire properly.

Maybe yall should call ransom to your defense, he believes in mocking worship by saying things like, "hail satan!"

 

Ok, let's reason.

We all agree that there are printer errors in the 1611 KJB. Right?

What is the difference between printer errors and copyist errors?

The only diff. is printer errors are made using a machine (printer) and copyist errors were made using a writing utensil.

Now what is the big difference between the two tools (machine vs. writing utensil) to print words, besides speed?

An error is an error.
If there is one error in the 1611 KJB, be it printer, or textual, then it is false to call it
"inerrant", which means without error.

If there is one error in the 1611, then it is not "perfect".

Common sense dictates this.

QS, before you say something,
I'm only talking about the 1611, not the 1769.
I realize you feel God corrected all the mistakes in the 1611 by the year 1769.
I'll get to that later, but can we all agree on the above.

To say you use a 1611, when you don't makes you a purveyor of false statements. AKA liar.

 

I'm glad you finally realize the fact that it's the Lord's doing and it is marvellous in our eyes.

"Except a corn of wheat die..."

Thank You Dear Jesus! For giving your life a ransome for many, that we might have that which is Precious and Pure in our unholy hands.

AV 1611 KJB, the RIGHT place to dig!

 

Yeah? the serpent tried the same thing with Eve, and uh, LOST! Jesus came along and "bruised his head" </font>[/QUOTE]What??? Satan didn't try to get Adam and Eve to read a faithful translation of the word of God. He did not encourage them to ask questions in order to find out the truth. He questioned God's truthfulness (which you have done by asserting that God didn't preserve his word in modern translations) and he questioned God's goodness (which you have done by asserting God is not good enough to give us his word in our own language).

Yeah, I suppose if you're out to kill, corrupt and destroy, you should go for the Root. </font>[/QUOTE]That doesn't make any sense. I am not out ot kill, corrupt and destroy. These are the simple facts, whether you like it or not.

I didn't shoot down anybody. Again, the facts are the facts, whether you like it or not. You have to conform your own position to the truth, not ignore the truth because it contradicts the position you would like to hold.

 

tiny, good to see you're consistently doting about unlearned questions. We have NEVER triesd to substanciate any printing, sir tiny. Also in the Correct MSS there are no errors, that is why it's called the "Received Text". The RT is not limited to just a handful of fallable men to "print" the Bible, but is secured in the multitude of witnesses, uh, the Masoretic Hebrews, and the churches of early New Testament type begun by the Holy Spirit and through the obedience of Paul, along with other Christians, not Romans and Assyrians.

Oh, and thanks for calling me a liar. I still love you!

 

Yeah, ya did. Now we are faced with what are actual facts, uh ,those established in Truth throughout history and not CHANGED by erroneous and deceptive practices known to all who know better as the w/h greek text. Amazing they used their "geek greek" to re-define Hebrew by first corrupting the Greek. Uh, FACTS, Lurry.

 

I haven't got a copy of the Nkjv, but have heard it's more dangerous than all others.
-------------------------------------------------You heard wrong. Before condemning it, you should get the truth about it. If you don't have the truth, then wisdom would lead us to stay out of the discussion about it, unless to ask questions to increase information.

"The Lord has given me a pastor after His own heart..."that's" who I heard it from. I only listen to people I trust."

 

so i guess it all boils down to that. lost n misleading shepherds. how sad.

 

I understood Sister, forever un-settled will probably not ever.

 

Which manuscript is this correct one? Because, as everyone who knows anything about this subject knows, there are no two manuscripts that are completely identical. They all differ. So which one is the "correct" one? And how do you know that is the "correct one"?

Remember what I said earlier, about not talking about stuff you don't know about?? This is a case of that ... The TR is not the TR because it has no errors. It is the TR because it is the text received by the churches. There is a big history behind it that you don't know. Study, don't say ridiculous things like this.

 

This is of great concern to me, because a man who is a pastor has a grave responsibility concerning the truth. The truth is that the NKJV is a good and faithful translation. Any comments to the contrary are simply untrue.

 

Perhaps, but the KJV translators had ample time and revisions to correct the capital "S" in "Satan" had they thought it was improper which apparently they did not, it stands to this very day.

So according to your own yardstick they gave place to "Satan" as "proper".

This impropriety in the translation of the Bible you put your stamp of approval upon. This seems to me to be duplicitous of you to say the least.

BTW one shouldn't use the fact that the miniscule MSS don't use upper case for "satana/satanas" because they didn't use upper case for "theos" (God) either. I know that you know that all the letters of miniscules were lower-case.

HankD

 

KJB translators were, uh, translators. I have never seen where they actually printed the Bible. You got any credible source to ascertain they did?

Thus printers choice of lettering, not translation. BTW, scribes don't translate, they copy. Ask rsr about that one, but he has tried his hand at translation when not really qualified.

Another BTW. Even since the printers added "proper" grammatical use to the type does not change the Word. Even w/o the use of captial letters the Word of God is not hindered in the AV 1611 KJB. Try it sometime, context always kills error.

When I die, I want to die like my grandmother, who died peacefully in her sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in her car. -Author of the AV 1611 KJB; known, not confused.

 

Once again QS you have skillfully skirted the issue.

Here is a question:

Fish or cut bait!

Do you put your stamp of approval on ANY Bible printed by ANY publisher that uses a capital "S" for the word "Satan"?

HankD

 

Uh, F A I T H. Something w/h lacked, including all their followers.

Now please explain to everyone the differences between what you're calling the Textus Receptus, The Majority Text, and then the Receieved Text.

BTW, Textus Receptus is received, only those who don't receive it dispute it. uh, Lurry.

So you say I need to study, oh well, now I suppose you could incite me to do more, but let's leave the alexandrian influence out of the Garden and we'll avoid sin. Give me untainted source, I will commit to study, but I really don't believe you can or will.

 

I approve of what the Lord has approved. I don't approve of printer error. I will contact Bearing Precious Seed and Local Church Bible Publishers and see what we might come up with to correct the printer error. It will be costly, want to contribute? The Bible cost Jesus His Life, and along with the lives of many others, we still have the Word of God in our AV 1611 KJB (1769) for those who prefer the corrections in spelling and punctuation, not the changes as in Ed's 1873.

http://www.bpsmilford.org


http://www.biblebelievers.com/bookshop/index.html

BUT, when the passage is clear by context, I leave the "worms" aside and eat the fruit. I couldn't do that with any mv, they like to substitute apples for oranges. Oh yeah, yall like to say "That's apples and oranges", but some of us know the difference, duh!

 

James 4:12
There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?

You should have said “in my opinion” then it’s only an opinion, the way you stated it means that you have judged them (IMO).

What about Luke 4:8 of the KJV where “Satan” is capitalized, does the Lord approve of that?

How many flies does it take to spoil the ointment?

And yes, let me think about this, I might agree with you concerning the spelling of “satan”. Get it set up and I will probably contribute.

HankD

 

Oh, like Acts 12:4?

HankD

 

Thanks, and thanks again for ,uh, "cutting your own throat". All you had to do was agree, you didn't have to go to extremes.