Search results

Thou sayest.

Like I said, Paul considered the septuagint God's holy word. Septuagint, abbreviation LXX, the earliest extant Greek translation of the Old Testament from the original Hebrew. The Septuagint was presumably made for the Jewish community in Egypt when Greek was the common language throughout the...

I don't know because I was not born back then. No doubt it was a referral system. They had not internet for applying or advertising.

Timothy was reading a translation(septuagint) that Paul called the holy scriptures.

2 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: Mary or Jesus?

How does the 1611 translation into English cause England to rule America?

Amen, praise God for giving us His pure word in the last days and not leaving us stranded in limbo with the modern translators.

I have no problem with pre-1611 versions, except they were not translated via the election system. The KJV was, so it is perfect. The revisions are not changes. The modern versions are changes because they use a completely different group of manuscripts from a garbage can. These modern...

Copies... 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

My point, it is accepted by Paul that copies also qualify as God's pure word, not just the original autographs.

The OT was accurately copied in the 1st century and considered God's pure word by Paul(to Timothy).

...emotional reaction...

Therefore, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are worthless manuscripts. They display horrible penmanship, and have been subject to many correctors. They disagree with the vast majority of manuscript evidence, and even among each other. Your Bible comes from this group.

They were thrown out as I posted. Read it.

The author concludes... In these last days, Satan is doing everything in his power to prepare men for the great deception of the Antichrist. As Sinaiticus has been exalted in the public’s eye by the Codex Sinaiticus Project, I would not be surprised if Vaticanus is also exalted and placed...

Therefore, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are worthless manuscripts. They display horrible penmanship, and have been subject to many correctors. They disagree with the vast majority of manuscript evidence, and even among each other. They are false witnesses of the Word of God. The text found therein...

Why would one of the top Bible scholars of his day make such remarks of manuscripts considered the “oldest and best” by others? Burgon had personally examined these two manuscripts, and noted that their text differed greatly form that of 95% of all manuscripts. When examining the Gospels as...

Sinaiticus has also been corrected by “…at least ten revisers between the IVth and XIIth centuries…”13 The Codex Sinaiticus Project readily admits: No other early manuscript of the Christian Bible has been so extensively corrected. A glance at the transcription will show just how common these...

Read the article, not pound your fist on the keyboard.... Tischendorf gives his personal testimony: It was at the foot of Mount Sinai, in the Convent of St. Catherine, that I discovered the pearl of all my researches. In visiting the library of the monastery, in the month of May, 1844, I...

I gave you the info and you responded without reading it. Typical multiversionist. Also, they are attributing to the hundreds of new sects of Christendom that have their own custom made biased "word of God".