Do you own a King James Bible? If so, go read Rev 22:14 and tell me what it says. Or find an online one. Don't know a JadenS. You are becoming quite the false accuser, bearing false witness, does this make it 3 or 4 times in the last 2 days?? Actually if we take it word wise it is much more. Pretty sure you do not a repent, thinking "past" meant future, I could be wrong, but I will be standing there right beside you on judgement day and all will be bright and clear and the truth will be known.
Maybe in the mean time you should read what I have written about the veil being rent and going through a priest to talk to God. Go back as many months as you want.
Not only my confessions, but also my prayers go straight to God, I am sure He hears them.
Okay, Please FORGIVE ME for JUMPING THE GUN, and falsely Accusing you. It is yet another UNKNOWN error that the KJV so-called Translators transcribed from the 6 older English versions with KNOWN ERRORS, when they did an admitted PARAPHRASE into the ENGLISH that King James spoke. So even the KJV missed a few of the KNOWN ERRORS.
The Original Preface of the 1611 KJV
The Translators To The Reader
. . .
as though they made a Translation to serve their owne turne, and therefore bearing witnesse to themselves, their witnesse not to be regarded. This may be supposed to bee some cause, why the Translation of the Seventie was allowed to passe for currant. . . .
he holdeth the Authours thereof not onely for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some respect: and Justinian the Emperour enjoyning the Jewes his subjects to use specially the Translation of the Seventie, rendreth this reason thereof, because they were as it were enlighted with propheticall grace. . . .
. . .
This is the translation of
the Seventy Interpreters, com- monly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gen- tiles by written preaching . . . It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correc- tion;
. . .
{ KNOWN ERRORS in the Septuagint } . . . that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men;
but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to add to the Original, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sense thereof according to the truth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greek Translations of the Old Testament.
. . .
. . .
(and Saint Jerome affirmeth as much) that
the Seventie were Interpreters, they were not Prophets;
they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea,
sometimes they may be noted to adde to the Originall, and sometimes to take from it {.KNOWN ERRORS.}; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sence thereof according to the trueth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greeke Translations of the old Testament. . . .
. . .
But now
the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interprets nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine.) [S. Augustin. de doctr. Christ. lib 2 cap II].
Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. . . .
. . .
There were also within a few hundreth yeeres after CHRIST, translations many into the Latine tongue: for this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the Gospel by, because in those times very many Countreys of the West, yea of the South, East and North, spake or understood Latine, being made Provinces to the Romanes. But now the Latine Translations were too many to be all good, . . . Now the Church of Rome . . . Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the peoples understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confesse,
that wee forced them to translate it into English against their wills. . . .
. . .
. . .
but let us rather bless God from the ground of our heart, for working this religious care in him, to have the translations of the Bible maturely con- sidered of and examined.
. . .
the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place. { KNOWN ERRORS } . . .
. . .
Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfited at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if
we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, doe endevour to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade our selves, if they were alive, would thanke us. . . .
. . .
to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this meanes it commeth to passe, that whatsoever is sound alreadie (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours farre better then their autentike vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly,
being rubbed and polished; also
if any thing be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the originall, the same may bee corrected, and the trueth set in place. . . .
. . .
Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay
wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest {poorest} translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet)
containeth the word of God,
nay, is the word of God. . . .
. . .
Yet before we end, we must answere a third cavill and
objection of theirs against us,
for altering and amending our Taanslations [sic]
so oft; wherein truely they deale hardly, and strangely with us.
{ The very same thing you do to MODERN Translations. } For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe over that which hee had done, and
to amend it where he saw cause? . . .
. . .
But the difference that appeareth betweene our Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that wee are specially charged with;
let us see therefore whether they themselves bee without fault this way,
(if it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and
whether they bee fit men to throw stones at us: But it is high time to leave them, and to shew in briefe what wee proposed to our selves, and what course we held in this our perusall and survay of the Bible.
Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, (for then the imputation of Sixtus had bene true in some sort, that our people had bene fed with gall of Dragons in stead of wine, with whey in stead of milke,
but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeavour, that our marke. . . .
. . .
{ That makes it a PARAPHRASE and not an actual Translation from the original languages. }
Only KJV, and NKJV that ERROR copied for Older English Versions.
And prehaps the Young's Literal Translation, who interpret the VERSE THIS WAY:
Revelation 22:14 (YLT)
14 `
Happy are those doing His commands that the authority shall be theirs unto the tree of the life, and by the gates they may enter into the city;
ALL OTHER VERSIONS, based on older manuscripts, interpret the verse this way:
Revelation 22:14 (NASB)
14
Blessed {means Happy} are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city.
I have a suggestion for you, PLEASE put the VERSION behind the VERSE NUMBER like I DO, it prevents confusion.
Sorry for my mistakes again.
...but can they see it...that is always the problem.
