Search results

Respectable Bible translators never accepted all extant manuscripts as having equal weight, value, or accuracy in any translation of the Bible.

You draw wrong conclusions from my statements which cause you to rest content with a shallow understanding of the entirety of the facts underlying the KJV translation.

I can read commentaries, concordances, and interlinears, but wisdom comes from God, not education, so nobody is benefitted from education if they do not seek and obtain wisdom from God.

Here is the context fond in that verse in Jeremiah 8: 5 Why then is this people of Jerusalem slidden back by a perpetual backsliding? they hold fast deceit, they refuse to return. 6 I hearkened and heard, but they spake not aright: no man repented him of his wickedness, saying, What have I...

The NKJV did not use italics every time it added words to the translation that were not included in the original text. The NKJV did, however, add confusing marginal notes making reference to variant readings in flawed texts, giving the reader the impression that flawed texts and readings are to...

Everyone has his own beliefs and makes his own choices. Having personal beliefs does not mean those beliefs are unjustified. I am not alone in my beliefs. This is taken from the Trinitarian Bible Society Constitution: III. This Society shall circulate the HOLY SCRIPTURES, as comprised in...

I honor the Textus Receptus Greek, not later rewrites.

Even if it could somehow be said the Textus Receptus and the Sinaiticus agree 98% of the time, the disagreements are so troubling to me that I don't care to use any version of the Bible associated with the questionable text...

I don't agree that the corrupted manuscripts promoted by Westcott and Hort in their revised Greek are in major agreement. They are not. I referred to Burgon's book "The Revision Revised" for detailed comparison between the Textus Receptus and the flawed manuscripts promoted by Westcott et al...

I should explain that detailing the evidence on which I am persuaded to believe the manuscripts Westcott and Hort used in their revision of the Greek text were some of the most corrupted manuscripts in history would require hundreds or thousands of facts and months of discussion. Let me just...

No flesh and blood can enter heaven. That means that the unsaved are under the course, but that does not mean God is holding anyone accountable for sins of ignorance. Nevertheless, sinners must get saved to go to heaven and God draws all sinners to Himself because He is not willing that any...

John Burgon was contemporary with Westcott and Hort when W&H purposed to rewrite the Greek Text, using flawed texts such as Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Burgon critiqued their results and offered his excellent observations in the 1881 book "The Revision Revised." I offer pages 15 and 16 of that...

Most modern versions have been tainted by Westcott's flawed Greek text. God is not in that sort of perversion preservation.

You seem to think when people die it is because they deserve to die or they die for the sins of others who deserve to die. Where did you get the idea that babies only die because they or someone else deserves to die? God was not exaggerating when He said all humans are born in sin.

God does not condemn the children for the sins of the fathers any more than He saves the sons of fathers who get saved because the fathers get saved

You seem stuck on the idea that there is only one type of death in the Bible. I don't agree.

I am not following your argument. Adam died as soon as he ate the fruit. He was not immediately buried because his death was not physical but spiritual. When an innocent baby dies it is physical, not spiritual. Have you put these two facts together yet? I am not seeing it if you have.

If the KJV wording is too difficult for some, they have lots of other versions to choose from. Consider The KJV wording of John 2:19: KJV Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. NCV Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will...

The proper interpretation of original sin is that all babies are born in sin because of the sin nature passed down from Adam, but no baby is under the wrath of God reserved for sinners who cold-heartedly reject the Light God so freely bestows on them by His Spirit when leading them to believe on...

If you claim God punishes humans for sins they did not commit then you either do not understand God or you do not understand the punishment of God and its causes and purposes.