Subj : Re: I am third
To   : Bogomips
From : jimmylogan
Date : Mon May 19 2025 02:52 pm

-=> Bogomips wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Bo>   Re: Re: I am third
Bo>   By: jimmylogan to Bogomips on Sat May 17 2025 08:02 pm

> I agree 'modern interpretation' is a problem, but why do you say the
> Bibles were written less than 100 years ago, and how to satisfy man?
>
Bo> The reason being, there are newer versions that leave out scripture
Bo> that is originally in the KJV. It is my belief that a person can read
Bo> whatever they like, but if your going to teach, make it the KJV

I have had MANY discussions about this very topic recently...

I don't knock ANYONE for wanting to study the KJV themselves,
but to insist that it's what should be TAUGHT and nothing else?
That I don't agree with...

Can you give an example of scriptures left out? And when you say
left out of the KJV, you realize that things like the NIV are NOT
translations OF the King James, but go back to the original
languages...

And one more question - and I'm being totally serious about this -
why KJV and not 1611? Or Tyndale? They were "English translations"
before the modern King James (and no, not talking about what is
called the New King James.)




... AAAAA - American Association Against Acronym Abuse
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
� Synchronet � Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

You are viewing proxied material from bbs.kd3.us. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.