Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you were unable to prove it before and I doubt you are able to prove it now. You could not even tell us what its based upon and what original manuscripts were available to the translators. You cannot read Hebrew or Greek and have no way of determining the accuracy of a single word.

Why should I tell you what you already know? You're being obtuse. Any serious student of the Bible knows what manuscript evidence there is and where it comes from, and from which manuscript evidence each modern translation is derived.

What? Do you think it's all a big secret, and only the Watchtower has access to the most reliable manuscripts? You're goofy! I have at my finger tips at least 8 different translations and a dozen more if I want, and dozens of commentaries, concordances, Greek and Hebrew dictionaries and a host of other reference materials besides.

The NWT is about the worst translation I've ever seen, based on the Greek New Testament produced by Westcott and Hort who translated from corrupt texts. It's no wonder how and why the Watchtower has been able to corrupt the doctrine of the Word of God, especially when it comes to the identity of Jesus Christ!

http://www.chick.com/reading/books/157/157_08a.asp


"Greek Text: In the late 19th century, scholars B. F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort compared existing Bible manuscripts and fragments as they prepared the Greek master text that they felt most closely reflected the original writings. In the mid-20th century, the New World Bible Translation Committee used that master text as the basis for its translation."

Taken from the official J.W. website.

It gets worse the more one digs into the history of Westcott and Hort and the corrupt manuscripts they used. The Watchtower has been duped by a couple of frauds and is a purveyor of heresy.

Originally posted by josephw
Why should I tell you what you already know? You're being obtuse. Any serious student of the Bible knows what manuscript evidence there is and where it comes from, and from which manuscript evidence each modern translation is derived.

What? Do you think it's all a big secret, and only the Watchtower has access to the most reliable manuscripts? You're goo ...[text shortened]... ipts they used. The Watchtower has been duped by a couple of frauds and is a purveyor of heresy.

It has nothing to do with the New World translation or the Westcort and Hort base text, you stated you could prove the King James is the most accurate version, you have yet to prove anything other than you have not the slightest idea what you are talking about. Tell us how you know its the most accurate translation and tell us what base texts its based upon. You made the claim, here it is again,

if you'd like, I can prove the KJV is the most accurate, and in keeping with the most reliable manuscript evidence available - josephw

so I want you to prove it and tell us how you came to the conclusion. If you refuse then we can only base our estimation of the truthfulness of this claim and any others you make based on the evidence that you are able or unable to provide.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It has nothing to do with the New World translation or the Westcort and Hort base text, you stated you could prove the King James is the most accurate version, you have yet to prove anything other than you have not the slightest idea what you are talking about. Tell us how you know its the most accurate translation and tell us what base texts its ba ...[text shortened]... this claim and any others you make based on the evidence that you are able or unable to provide.

You're being ridiculous. It has been proven to you repeatedly from the scriptures that Jesus is God and you still maintain He's somebody else based on the flimsiest scriptural evidence. You're so confused I doubt I could prove to you that you're you! You should become a Mormon and think you're an incarnated angel. Maybe you'll remember what you name was before you became robbie!

Why should I get bogged down in an argument with someone who ignores the truth, providing you with evidence you'll only disregard?

Go peddle your heresy to some poor beleaguered Catholic who doesn't know anything about the Bible.

Originally posted by josephw
You're being ridiculous. It has been proven to you repeatedly from the scriptures that Jesus is God and you still maintain He's somebody else based on the flimsiest scriptural evidence. You're so confused I doubt I could prove to you that you're you! You should become a Mormon and think you're an incarnated angel. Maybe you'll remember what you name was befo ...[text shortened]... peddle your heresy to some poor beleaguered Catholic who doesn't know anything about the Bible.

Here is your claim

if you'd like, I can prove the KJV is the most accurate, and in keeping with the most reliable manuscript evidence available - josephw

Now we know that you don't know what you are talking about and can dismiss this and any other claims you make as untruthful. Thank you for demonstrating that you have make the most opinionated and arrogant claims without a shred of evidence.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Thank you for demonstrating that you have make the most opinionated and arrogant claims without a shred of evidence.

Hey! I thought that was me?

No, wait a minute, it was FMF...

No, it was Proper Knob...

No, actually it's just your stock "talk to the hand 'cos the cultist ain't listening" stance which you present to anyone who disagrees with you.

Originally posted by divegeester

No, actually it's just your stock "talk to the hand 'cos the cultist ain't listening" stance which you present to anyone who disagrees with you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taking a standard stance with anyone who disagree with you, you mention.

Like this?

There is no way you can cut it sonship, your interpretation of eternal suffering is, even from a theist perspective, illogical, absurd, horrifically unjust, psychotic in design and abominable morally.

Originally posted by divegeester
Do you find that accusing males, whom you take a dislike to, of being homosexuals helps ease the pain of being a complete tool?

Seems like he is "overcompensating"

Originally posted by sonship
[b]
No, actually it's just your stock "talk to the hand 'cos the cultist ain't listening" stance which you present to anyone who disagrees with you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taking a standard stance with anyone who disagree with you, you mention.

Like this?

There is no way yo ...[text shortened]... ve, illogical, absurd, horrifically unjust, psychotic in design and abominable morally.

[/b]

This is not a "stock response" which I use with every poster who disagrees with me about anything. Trying to pretend it is, is just dishonest sonship.