How many here believe the literal Word of God in the Bible

my understanding is that some what of you say and, what i have said in the past is a erroneous assumption. Some is based on the Latin text of Jerome and to be precise that is different then Textus Receptus.,,Such is the case with Simon that is called Niger and the name lucifer by the way they should have remove the word ni*** in the latter additions

The derogatory term has two "g's"

That would be saying that scripture is the same as transcriptions of scripture. We are discussing translations.

Absolutely question it, test it, study it and see for yourself.

I took your question to mean do you believe the Bible is literally the Word of God.. Meaning do i believe that the Bible is a Message from God.. So i selected Yes..

On the other hand, The Bible uses a lot of symbolism in the message delivery.. This is more often used in the books of prophecy.. The Book of Revelation and the Book of Daniel probably being the best example of this.. So i don't believe there will be a literal multi headed beast with many horns and eyes rising up out of the earth, that scripture is a symbolic representation of an end times great empire..

Because the further back we go, as we find older manuscripts and fragments, nothing of significance has changed. Of course you can argue that somewhere between the 1st and 3rd centuries the New Testament took a quantum leap; someone removed or changed important doctrines. It can be argued, but based on the evidence, that's not what we find.

KJO advocates argue that it is the only uncorrupted version out there; however, even the Textus Receptus doesn't differ that significantly from Siniaticus or Vaticanus. That is, in ways that will lead a person astray and keep them from being saved and living a Godly life. Modern interpreters have corrupted the Bible more than any ancient manuscripts.

Those people are not Christians.

No, Scripture is not God.

I believe in the one true God. I believe what He has done, and I avoid speculation about what He “could” do. I see no evidence that God inspired any translations of Scripture.

The corollary is that you believe in an inferior god who is limited by the translation you use.

Whether the Holy Spirit is with you is not the issue.

Duh!,,,what is not of god?,,,Even evil is of god.

I see this thread has been hijacked by KJV Only cultists.

Over five thousand differences...

Significant differences? Or typographic differences?

Nothing enough to make a critical difference.

But I perceive you are KJV only so I won't waste my time. You strain out gnats and swallow camels. Too hard-headed to even make a dent.

That is exactly what I did. I find it a marvelous translation full of poetry and beauty. I find it reflects the thought of the majority of Christians in 1600 that was anti-semitic so I make allowances for this flaw. It is one of the main translations I check as I study, and usually use the KJV when I memorize scripture.

sounds Catholic: vaticanus. I assume the name is much younger then the text

Please read more carefully. I stated, "Scripture is not God"; I did not state, "Scripture is not of God."

yea??? will pardon me all to heaven!