Search results

Sure you were.... You're still saying "cut" when I mentioned that I'm using a Bible program. You can't "cut" a static text in such a program.....I bet you're a "developer" of some type. Yep. Ego..... Fraud? Good thing what you think doesn't matter. I don't post to get "likes"...... That is...

I know what is and what isn't and why. I don't accept some English monarchy has an exclusive on the Scriptures.

I know you are. It is a mistake. A mistake that misleads.....

I'm combative? You're not paying attention. "Director" at a "state" agency. That is your issue. You're not an IT Professional. You're just some "suit" without any technical skills yourself. I don't have a single person working for me that knows more than I do about anything I manage. I'm not...

I don't source them. Most of them are petty and silly.

Heb 4:8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

Were you there? or are you getting that from the internet.... :) See how that works.....

You can't deny the facts of history. What did I get wrong?

"You" isn't difficult at all. However, there are several difficult places in the KJV. How about Hebrews where Jesus is referenced instead of Joshua. How many people have you heard make that silly mistake?

What "king" might that be? Where anything is accurate and true to the source, it can rightfully be said to be Truth.

I'm glad to see you're changing but you haven't changed enough.... ;)

James owned the ArchBishop. It didn't matter exactly what the translators did. The ArchBishop approved the final copy. There are no surviving witnesses to what the committees did. The KJV wasn't popular at all when it was released. It was all but forgotten. If James hadn't banned the printing...

Yes. I said. You could have said .... You say....and it would have meant the exactly same thing.

I'm with you here but I've never seen you say such a thing before. That is why I'm skeptical.

The LXX was much more than a translation. Even though translation was part of the effort. The LXX represents a significant witness to a varying OT canon than what comes to us from any other Hebrew source. It isn't accurate to compare the LXX to a very late English translation claiming...

You don't know but it must be true..... Typical KJVOisms....

So you actually recognize the validity of the LXX? I'm skeptical......

Did you forget what the monarchy of England did to this country? How many Americans did the English monarchy kill believing that an English "King" was rightfully "the servant of God" over all Americans? The KJV is a product of the "Church of England" wherein the "King" leads all men both in...

Mark is lying. "You" is understood in both a singular and plural based upon context. In fact, the KJVOists would have you believe that the word "you" isn't found in the KJV. It is. THOUSANDS of times.

Oh the irony..... Timothy used the LXX. KJVOist like yourself, deny the very existence of the Greek OT.