Read the King James Bible only. The New-age Bible translations have perverted God's Holy Bible by omitting verses, deleting key words and phrases in order to diminish God's power, confuse Christians and redefine what sin is. See the link document for details. God bless you.
(files.catbox.moe)
🗣️ DISCUSSION 💬
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (262)
sorted by:
Well the translations such as the NIV, ESV, etc. are made from Greek to English when translating the NT, so in what way are they then based on the translation of W&H?
Read the linked document at https://files.catbox.moe/d7igm7.pdf especially the chart at https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/The%20King%20James%20Bible/kjb_chart-large.gif (in the lower right corner) which indicates that most of the changes and omissions in the W&H 1881 Greek to English translation were carried forward into the modern translations. Look for the missing words, phrases and verses that I refer to in the document - you won't find them in the modern translations (whether that is because they were based on the W&H translation, or the same corrupted manuscripts, or whether it is simply a coincidence that the same words, phrases and verses are missing - you decide.
But I am finished with this discussion with you. God bless.
It's always interesting when someone pushes out a particular dogma and then shuts down discussion once that view is challenged! The Marxists use the same tactic.
It's always interesting when an atheist who hasn't read the linked document tries to argue with you indefinitely, shows their ignorance on the topic at hand and then tries name-calling when they know they don't have the facts on their side. Run along little Bible troll - I've wasted all the time with you that I care to. I'm here to reach souls for Jesus not argue with atheists. God bless you though.
God's inspired and preserved Word is certainly not dogma, but asserting that the only way English speakers can access God's inspired and preserved Word and expecting others to simply accept that belief or be condemned is the very definition of dogma.
No one called you a Marxist. It was simply noted that the tactics used by Marxists to avoid scrutiny were also being used by you to avoid scrutiny.
The fact that I have read the linked document and have some challenging questions about it seems to be the source of your discomfort. Comments made in this discussion and in the linked document suggest that you may not have a strong understanding of the translation process.
For example, why is "Jehovah" not used in current translations? Can you explain why "omnipotent" is a better translation than "almighty"? Are you able to make a distinction between "abominations" and "detestable practices" and explain why one is a more appropriate translation than the other for the verse cited in the linked document?
I would have expected that if you were at all concerned with the well being of my soul, that you would have all the time in the world to answer my questions, but it seems as though you are simply more interested in your dogma and would prefer not to have it examined too carefully lest it be found wanting.