kjv against the rest. Is it as bad I as I am led to believe?

Documented when being compared to inferior translations and textual lines, you mean.

 

By the way, I hope it makes you feel good when you cause people to doubt the Bibles in their hands. What a public service you provide. That of tearing down another's faith. Not that you have to worry about that with me though.

 

No, look at them carefully. Most of those are differences between the Oxford and Cambridge editions of the KJV. Obvious errors which in some cases make the meanings totally opposite from each other.

 

No worries. I'm the king of brain freezes.


That said, it's clear that the litmus test you setup rejects the KJV as being solely Word of God. The Reina-Valera has been in consistent use since 440 years, and it is the world's most commonly used translation in the world, with the possible exception of the Chinese Union translation.


Your first concention was that the KJV is the sole Word of God because of its longevity. Since the Reina-Valera translation (first published in 1569) has a greater longevity than the KJV, then by your own standard, you must reject the KJV as Word of God, and accept the Reina-Valera as the Word of God.

Your second contention is its use by missions is evidence for the KJV being the Word of God and others not being the Word of God. Yet the Reina-Valera is singlehandedly responsible for millions of missions and conversions from the 16th century to the present, and is today the most widely used Bible in the world of any language. By your own standard set forth here, you must reject the KJV as Word of God, and accept the Reina-Valera as the Word of God.

 

Genesis 49:26
thy progenitors (1769, 1791, 1795, 1798, 1810, 1812, 1821, 1828 Oxford) [1790, 1824, 1833 Cambridge] {1817, 1824 London}
the progenitors (1792 Oxford)
my progenitors (1762, present Oxford)

This is an example.
How can thy progenitors and my progenitors both be right?
They are both translated from the same text.

 

Well, I guess you gotta pick one then!

By the way, I have an Oxford. I checked. Seems to be a good one. Works for me and my family and my church.

 

That is the whole point. You have to pick one of them. Then the other is in error. The only MSS that is error free were the MSS that came from the hand of God to the prophets and the apostles. No translation can be error free or infallible. That is an impossibility since man is fallible and makes mistakes, just as the KJV translators made many of them.

 

Just one quick question Refreshed. Do you prefer your Oxford KJV rendering of 1 John 5v12 over the 1611 KJV rendering of the same verse?

 

I'll have you know, I downloaded the 1611 e-sword module just to answer this question. There should be no doubt as to my willingness to go the extra mile .

Given the choice, I'll have to go with the one in my Bible. A "Son of God" rendering.

 

No, but because we celebrate easter as the commemoration of His Resurrection.

The Passover at BEST commemorates the death of a sacrificial lamb to be eaten with bitter herbs.

Maybe you would like to give more credence to a shadow of things to come rather than give due reverence only Christ is worthy to get.:type:

 

Thank you.

 

I like your tag line. I'm glad you don't have the same feeling toward God's preservation of His saints as you do with the preservation of the scriptures. That which God promises to preserve will be preserved. I, personally am looking forward to having my new body. There aren't going to be any mistranslations in that...or are there?

 

the ONLY reason is because you love to attack your brethren with this and REFUSE to let discerniong men disassociate with Ruckman unless it meets your criteria.

Thus you have become a law unto yourself.

I say this will all due respect in that you'll realize what you're doing and turn away from such slandering of people.

 

Which doesn't change the fact that the Koine Greek word "Pascha" is translated "passover", not "Easter". And most Christians don't celebrate Easter, which is a Pagan celebration, they celebrate Resurrection Day, which falls upon the same day as the pagan Easter day.

 

[off topic]

 

Easter is a celebration of the heathen fertility goddess "astarte," from which the name "Easter" gets its name. It is not a Christian celebration. Our church celebrates Resurrection Sunday. Easter was unknown until much later--about 900 A.D. It was not known among early believers. It is entirely a heathen festival.
Since when do rabbits give offspring via eggs?
All the rites associated with Easter are pagan, and have pagan origins.

That in itself should tell you that it is wrong translation. Pascha, the Greek word, in every other case (all 28 of them) is always translated "Passover," which is the only correct translation of the word.

 

You are very welcome. Could you imagine having to bring all this stuff up when we are witnessing to folks? Instead, I can read them over and over again, Wonderful Word of Life! I can tell them they can have confidence that they have the Word of God, and that he speaks to us through his Word. I don't have to point them to a shelf full of lexicons and manuscripts and say, "take your pick!"

 

But you did take your pick. Could you tell us why you chose that rendering please?

 

I believe God has preserved His Word today, just not in a translation, not in the KJV.

 

Where then? Where can the common man find the Word of God?