26 Feb '17 10:18>
This post is unavailable.
Please refer to our posting guidelines.
Originally posted by MarshallPriceNot really sure about what you're driving at.
As an unbeliever, I place no divine value in The Bible. But I understand that many people do and I have no qualms with that in and of itself.
In any case, if I were to believe a book was divinely inspired, why wouldn't I want it preserved? If I were to believe that it was the word of God, I would want it to be as preserved as possible. The means of ...[text shortened]... d be secondary to the content, which would be the word of God.
Just my two cents on this bit.
Originally posted by SuzianneIn principle I agree, but how the scriptures are preserved isn't a matter of inspiration per se. It has more to do with the method of preservation than by direct inspiration.
If man can be inspired to write the words down, other men can be inspired to preserve it.
Originally posted by FMFNo.
Aren't [b]all Bibles (that are in English) the "Word of God in English"?[/b]
FMF: Aren't all Bibles (that are in English) the "Word of God in English"?OK, so which Bible are "the Word of God in English" and which Bibles are not? You have already claimed, specifically, that the KJV is the Word of God in English. Are there any other versions that are too? Which versions of the Bible, by contrast, are not "the Word of God in English" in your view?
Originally posted by josephw
No. Change the words and the meanings change. It's a copyright issue. Modern translations require that they contain a percentage of difference to obtain a copyright. It's about the money.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSome education ?
Some education is sorely needed.
Although none of the extant Greek New Testament manuscripts contain the Tetragrammaton, scholar George Howard has suggested that the Tetragrammaton appeared in the original New Testament autographs,[9] and that "the removal of the Tetragrammaton from the New Testament and its replacement with the surrogates κυριος ...[text shortened]... ngs of the Church Fathers".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton_in_the_New_Testament
" ... It is not for you to know times times or season which the Father has set by His own authority.
But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth." (Acts 1:7,8)
"We do not want this man to reign over us." (Luke 19:14)
Originally posted by FMFYouTube
OK, so which Bible [b]are "the Word of God in English" and which Bibles are not? You have already claimed, specifically, that the KJV is the Word of God in English. Are there any other versions that are too? Which versions of the Bible, by contrast, are not "the Word of God in English" in your view?[/b]
Originally posted by sonshipSubstituting the usual emotionalism that has led to an abject ignorance among Christians, Its ok you don't need to study, just shake your tambourine and clap your hands, pathetic!
[b]Some education ?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhereas knocking on doors handing out what is basically a religious comic book and trying to convince people that if they join your pernicious religious organisation they will be able to play with the hand drawn lambs and tigers on the front cover...is the apotheosis of apostolic mission work?
Substituting the usual emotionalism that has led to an abject ignorance among Christians, Its ok you don't need to study, just shake your tambourine and clap your hands, pathetic! ....no happy clappy tambourine prancing about for us, just pure waters of life and Biblical truth.
Originally posted by FMFIt's not that.
You suggest that not all versions of the Bible are the "Word of God" and yet you are unwilling to give any examples of versions that are not?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSubstituting the usual emotionalism that has led to an abject ignorance among Christians, Its ok you don't need to study, just shake your tambourine and clap your hands, pathetic!