The King James Bible

[trofimus]

Josephus, a 1 century person, described him in his book Halosis:[/I]"…a man of simple appearance, mature age, dark skin, small stature, three cubits high, hunchbacked, with a long face, long nose, and meeting eyebrows, so that they who see him might be affrighted, with scanty hair (but) having a line in the middle of the head after the fashion of the Nazireans, and with an undeveloped beard."[/FONT]

4 1/2 feet tall, hunchbacked, and probably not "handsome".

Josephus never described the appearance of Jesus Christ.

You should verify your sources.

 

[pckts]

Josephus never described the appearance of Jesus Christ.

You should verify your sources.

Oh he didn't?

Can you verify your source that says my sources are wrong?

And laura_charlotte you too, you always seem to be lingering around to criticize in general statements without any evidence as well.

 

[trofimus]

Oh he didn't?

Can you verify your source that says my sources are wrong?

The only mention Josephus did about Christ is very famous and frequently debated as possibly added later by Christians:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.
Flavius Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3, 3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

 

[pckts]

The only mention Josephus did about Christ is very famous and frequently debated as possibly added later by Christians:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.
Flavius Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3, 3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

"Josephus, a 1 century person, described him in his book Halosis"

What is your source or logic that this book attributed to him does not have this account in it?

Wikipedia is your source?

 

[Joseppi]

All translations are the work of men. Even the most careful men make mistakes. None are without error.
Only the original text are without error.
I prefer the KJ, but have and use several translations.
All this debate is a waste of time if you ask me.

You are presenting the philosophy of unbelief. In your loser mentality everything is the work of men and doomed. But you prefer the best error ridden book you like?

 

[Joseppi]

Joseppi,....you have to keep in mind that the Hebrew and Greek texts determine the translations, not the other way around.

The.Holy Bible is complete and evidence of how the Holy Ghost accomplished the task is not available. You know why? Because God, who is the only one that knows precisely what he authored, has shut men up to faith in his work not the labors of incompetent and ignorant carnal minds.

 

[Joseppi]

AMEN. While we don't see eye to eye on many issues, we agree on this bolded statement.

Well of course, unbelief always relies on consensus with man as a means of supplanting faith.

 

[trofimus]

"Josephus, a 1 century person, described him in his book Halosis"

What is your source or logic that this book attributed to him does not have this account in it?

Wikipedia is your source?

Halosis is not a work by Josephus. - The Works of Flavius Josephus


====

What is your source? This question?

https://www.quora.com/Has-any-ancie...-crucified-during-the-reign-of-Pontius-Pilate

Its as useless as using some thread in Christian Chat as a proof of something historical.

 

[Joseppi]

Since you are still relatively new around here, I'll let you in on a secret: you didn't start the thread, so you don't get to dictate what is or is not "off topic".

I don't want to be in your club or cult.

Prove it. Quote ANYONE who has made such a claim... in those exact words, so that there is no evidence of misrepresentation on your part. Give evidence of the "success" of those tactics when compared with other tactics.

I told everyone what I am going to do, Lord willing.
So you can worwill the phony bibles and all the translation work of your buddies and pretend their momentous works but I know better.
And when you present something other than philosophy we'll see what it is you really believe.

Prove it. Your opinions are absolutely worthless without supporting evidence.

The test is comparison with the Holy Bible. You can't get around that simple common sense approach.

What a ludicrous and arrogant statement. Not everyone who contributes in this thread has English as a first language, let alone 16th-centrury English! Further, at least one contributor is an advanced student of biblical Greek who finds the KJV difficult.

Advanced? Well let that person present the fruit of their translation efforts and see.

 

[pckts]

Halosis is not a work by Josephus. - The Works of Flavius Josephus


====

What is your source? This question?

https://www.quora.com/Has-any-ancie...-crucified-during-the-reign-of-Pontius-Pilate

Its as useless as using some thread in Christian Chat as a proof of something historical.

I'm not going to play post google source with you, especially after claiming I used quora for mine.


And what of the black Egyptian artwork, mummies, and sculptures? And the biblical accounts the jews and egyptians were identical in appearance? How do you deny those strong pieces of evidence?

You will believe whatever you want to maintain your current limited understanding. Explain the black artwork and mummies and the Bible claiming Jews and Egyptians were identical in appearance.

 

[Joseppi]

Ok, then:
Amos 5:26 (masoretic text - KJV):
'But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your god.'

Acts 7:43 (KJV):
'Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan

The KJV has obviously messed up these verses.

-------

On the other hand, look at the consistency in the Bible I use:

Am 5:26:
καὶ ἀνελάβετε τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ Μολὸχ καὶ τὸ ἄστρον τοῦ θεοῦ ὑμῶν Ραιφάν

Acts 7:43
καὶ ἀνελάβετε τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ Μολὸχ καὶ τὸ ἄστρον τοῦ θεοῦ Ῥομφά

-------

==> while your KJV is obviously changed significantly, my Bible has only one word added (the word is "your", changing no meaning).

Then you will come with your KJV only nonsense, saying how corrupted Bible I have. Please, think.

I don't read foreign languages.

 

[trofimus]

I'm not going to play post google source with you, especially after claiming I used quora for mine.

As you wish, but in that case, you will have nothing.

BTW, Halosis is a part of so called Slavonic Josephus from middle ages. Its not considered to by authentic. Search.

And what of the black Egyptian artwork, mummies, and sculptures? And the biblical accounts the jews and egyptians were identical in appearance? How do you deny those strong pieces of evidence?

Similar to your "work" with Flavius, partly incorrect, partly wrongly applied, partly misunderstood.

 

[Joseppi]

Proverbs 18:17 says, "The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him."

He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbor cometh and sesrcheth him.

So, get to it to searching.

 

[trofimus]

I don't read foreign languages.

I know, but you can just compare letters and see they are the same. My Bible is much more preserved than yours.

 

[SovereignGrace]

The.Holy Bible is complete and evidence of how the Holy Ghost accomplished the task is not available. You know why? Because God, who is the only one that knows precisely what he authored, has shut men up to faith in his work not the labors of incompetent and ignorant carnal minds.

Sooner or later you're gonna hafta play another song. Your needle's stuck and your record's warped.

 

[Joseppi]

You can cut and paste someone else's arguments all you like but if you are going to call other translations Satanic understand you are attacking the work of The Holy Spirit. Are there not better things for Christians to do? Celebrate the KJV if you like but there is no need to do it by attacking and slandering the Word of The Lord.

I don't think fearmongering is going to work for you.
The Lord doesn't respect the false bibles and all the lies in them.
How absurd it is of you to think that God is going to defend a false bible assertion that a son of one of the gods saved anyone.

 

[pckts]

As you wish, but in that case, you will have nothing.

BTW, Halosis is a part of so called Slavonic Josephus from middle ages. Its not considered to by authentic. Search.


Similar to your "work" with Flavius, partly incorrect, partly wrongly applied, partly misunderstood.

Similar to all of your responses when you have no ground to stand on, entirely generic and indirect.

The statues, artwork, and mummies are black, the bible clearly states the jews and egyptian are identical in appearance.

You have nothing to say to that, so you reply with meaningless nonsense.

 

[Joseppi]

and i didnt cut and paste someones else argument, it seems you are looking for a fight so i will kindly dismiss myself

They hate truth Talitha and love corrupt bibles.

 

[trofimus]

son of one of the gods saved anyone.

You mean "elohim"?

Elohim is plural. In my language, we have an adequate word to translate it - "božstvo", which has some plurality in it, but is singular in form.

I do not know how English can translate "elohim" - neither "god" nor "gods" are good terms, because they leave something out. Maybe "deity"? I do not know.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

i have read the NIV and NKJB and ESV , and came to know thatthe same printing company who print the satanic bible prints the NIV. they also implant intentionally interpretations with a different gospel in it. it is a very long list of many wrong sections, where it shows salvation by Jesus christ they dropped that partand another example for wrong interpretation is in Daniel 3:25 NIV says He said, “Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.”
while the correct verse is in
kjv 25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
2 completely different agenda , don't you think?
let's look at another one :1 corinthians 15:47
Good News Translation
The first Adam, made of earth, came from the earth; the second Adam came from heaven.
New International Version
The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven.
King James Bible
The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
can you agree there are 3 different gospels here?
i think it all depends if you look at the bible just a science fiction book or as a well of water for the dying of thirst soul, and i find it astonishing to find much antagonism when the kjv is being mentioned, i thought this is a pro KJV chat..so sorry for charging in like that but i can give you some references for more twisted verses.

i didn't say it is satanic. where did you get that from

See above.

and i didnt cut and paste someones else argument, it seems you are looking for a fight so i will kindly dismiss myself

You came in here swinging. You started out not with praise of the KJV but with a vicious attack on a translation I have been reading for years. You didn't expect any comeback over that? And now you're offended.

Let's start again. Forgive me for being harsh.

Let me make it clear. I don't hate the King James Version. But it isn't my favourite translation because it is outdated English.
You are more than welcome to read it and love it with no interference from myself. Long may it be printed and distributed.

The only problem I have is the movement to establish The KJV as the ONLY reliable English translation of the word of The Lord God of Israel. The signature of God is on other translations as well.