Things to Consider Before Attempting to Correct the King James Bible

  • 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.
Sackcloth-N-Ashes

Sackcloth-N-Ashes

Banned
#101
Oct 25, 2018
2,377
1,198
113
#101
Dino246 said:
Actually, this is demonstrably false. The KJV translators were only aware of documents available in the early 17th century. There have been many classical Greek and ancient Hebrew documents discovered since that time (think Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi library), meaning that the material available to the writers of lexicons (which are compendia of words as used in contemporary literature) is greater than that available to the KJV translators. In other words, we know far more than they did.

So... before you drink any more KJV-only Fool-Aid, do a little unbiased research.
Click to expand...
<0% of this actually happening my friend.
 
Sackcloth-N-Ashes

Sackcloth-N-Ashes

Banned
#103
Oct 25, 2018
2,377
1,198
113
#103
There is a saying that if you throw a rock towards a pack of hounds, you know which one was hit by hearing them yelp.

A bunch of hounds have yelped in this thread it appears.
 
Y

YDo

Active member
#106
Dec 9, 2018
151
60
28
#106
Sackcloth-N-Ashes said:
There is a saying that if you throw a rock towards a pack of hounds, you know which one was hit by hearing them yelp.

A bunch of hounds have yelped in this thread it appears.
Click to expand...
New here. Is this part of the board this full of foolish hounds regularly? Or is it that school's out at this hour and brats like to play?
 
Sackcloth-N-Ashes

Sackcloth-N-Ashes

Banned
#107
Oct 25, 2018
2,377
1,198
113
#107
YDo said:
New here. Is this part of the board this full of foolish hounds regularly? Or is it that school's out at this hour and brats like to play?
Click to expand...
Who knows my friend, who knows. I do not have a problem with the King James Bible, but I do with the King James Bible onlyism it has bred.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#108
#108
I think they should call it the "papal compromise Bible, short for The Anglicans offer tea and cake to the Vatican, by taking out all those pope bashing margin notes from the Geneva Bible," Bible.
 
Y

YDo

Active member
#111
Dec 9, 2018
151
60
28
#111
Locoponydirtman said:
I think they should call it the "papal compromise Bible, short for The Anglicans offer tea and cake to the Vatican, by taking out all those pope bashing margin notes from the Geneva Bible," Bible.
Click to expand...
That would imply King James was a Papist.
He wasn't.
 
Locutus

Locutus

Senior Member
#113
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
#113
King Jims boy's nicked a fair portion of Tyndale's bible to use in their own.
 
Y

YDo

Active member
#114
Dec 9, 2018
151
60
28
#114
Locutus said:
I said it was on the site not the article.
Click to expand...
Well boy-o if that's your hobby don't be offended when someone laughs at you.
You scoured a whole site looking for what you think is a typo. Don't bother to read anything so as to learn something. Just look for something you can laugh at?

Lame. A mile wide.
 
Y

YDo

Active member
#115
Dec 9, 2018
151
60
28
#115
Locutus said:
King Jims boy's nicked a fair portion of Tyndale's bible to use in their own.
Click to expand...
Does anyone take you seriously here? You come off as the resident Jester that performs as amusement for those into bad humor. And as a warning to never ever let unbelievers onto a serious Bible discussion site.
Oh yeah, I'm not going to read you anymore.
Grow up.
 
Locutus

Locutus

Senior Member
#116
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
#116
I scoured nothing - first thing I do when someone posts a link to a site is check the "about" section and do a quick scan.

But then any site promoting the KJV is not worth its weight in white space.

Pass.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#117
#117
YDo said:
That would imply King James was a Papist.
He wasn't.
Click to expand...
You don't have to be a papist to want to end the constant fighting in your country, to make a compromise for peace sake.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#119
#119
preacher4truth said:
Then what are these things on my shelves called "Webster's Dictionary" and "Oxford Dictionary?" Tools of the debble? The objective of these is to overthrow the King Jimmy isn't it? :LOL:
Click to expand...
You shall be burned at the steak as a .......BLASPHEMER!.....

Oh wait it's Anglican so it will be ordeal by cake!
 
preacher4truth

preacher4truth

Senior Member
#120
Dec 28, 2016
9,171
2,719
113
#120
Locoponydirtman said:
You shall be burned at the steak as a .......BLASPHEMER!.....

Oh wait it's Anglican so it will be ordeal by cake!
Click to expand...
As long as it's ribeye steak, medium rare.

I wouldn't blast Pheemy, or whatever her name is, I hardly know her!

I noticed that vulgar now means common, but back in King Jimmy's day it meant common. Oh, the heresy these dictionaries have wrought! I shall burneth them at the fire that shalt never be quenchethed!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.