Yet the King James is simply an edited version of the other English versions as well. The NIV has not had verses dillibertly omitted, the ommisions happen because they do not appear in other versions. The "missing" verses are written clearly at bottom of page. There is nothing wrong with the NIV, what is wrong is the cult of Kings James only. By the way I have nothing against the King James Bible and I use it, but I also use the NIV and other versions to get the real picture and meaning of the passages, which you can not do with a single translation.
Why the king james?
- Thread starter Blain
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
This is only valid if those verses were actually part of God's holy word. If you take the manuscripts as the standard, you can't consistently hold this, because the KJV doesn't fare any better when held to the same standard.
... And you seem to think that, despite my stating clearly not to make unwarranted assumptions about my views, that it is perfectly acceptable to do exactly that. What have I written which leads to these ridiculous assumptions? You don't know me, so keep your ignorant opinions of me to yourself. Focus on the issue.
What I do think is perfectly acceptable is to question your logic when it appears faulty, to question your sources when they appear erroneous or biased, and to question your views when they seem narrow.
"You must be catholic." Wow... and you accuse me of calling you names?
Bring it on. Quote me where I called you any name other than, "sir". Quote me where I denied any fact (not merely your opinion).
Well, since you believe as you do, why do you waste your time here? Are you somehow not set in your preconceived notions? Are your preconceived notions somehow more valid than anyone else's? Sensible discussion involves respect, and you have not shown me any. You claim to have studied this issue at length; it would do you well to recognize that you're not the only one who has done so.
I have read every recent post of yours in this thread. Again you make an unwarranted assumption, and you imply improper behaviour on my part. Just because you post something doesn't mean it's the truth, and nobody is obligated to accept what you have written.
... And you seem to think that, despite my stating clearly not to make unwarranted assumptions about my views, that it is perfectly acceptable to do exactly that. What have I written which leads to these ridiculous assumptions? You don't know me, so keep your ignorant opinions of me to yourself. Focus on the issue.
What I do think is perfectly acceptable is to question your logic when it appears faulty, to question your sources when they appear erroneous or biased, and to question your views when they seem narrow.
"You must be catholic." Wow... and you accuse me of calling you names?
Bring it on. Quote me where I called you any name other than, "sir". Quote me where I denied any fact (not merely your opinion).
Well, since you believe as you do, why do you waste your time here? Are you somehow not set in your preconceived notions? Are your preconceived notions somehow more valid than anyone else's? Sensible discussion involves respect, and you have not shown me any. You claim to have studied this issue at length; it would do you well to recognize that you're not the only one who has done so.
I have read every recent post of yours in this thread. Again you make an unwarranted assumption, and you imply improper behaviour on my part. Just because you post something doesn't mean it's the truth, and nobody is obligated to accept what you have written.