Search results

Which English version was the 'God-authorized' version before 1611? And why and how was it de-throned?

Pretty much as I expected - totally dodged the questions. Also, I never said anything about "changed doctrines" being a problem or not; so projecting on me an argument I never made only makes you look desperate. But, I'll ask again - what method of translation is 'inspired'? Please post...

For the KJV-onlyists: I'm curious as to what method of translation is 'inspired' and what's your biblical support for such a method? And what do you do with the alternate translations provided in the original 1611 KJV? Are they inspired?

Logic is a necessary given in any form of debate or dialogue. You cannot argue against logic without using logic, and is therefore a self-defeating argument. Logic is like 1 + 1 = 2; it's axiomatic.

No, because all translations require some level of interpretation and the Bible doesn't define how to translate itself. Even the NT writers weren't consistent, they used both the LXX and the Masoretic translations at times.

Not sure 'human' would be a necessary term; but it wouldn't surprise me if some forms of life were discovered on other planets at some point. There's no biblical reason there couldn't be.

To the OP - election does not equal salvation. All Israel was 'elect', but not all of them were devoted Yahwists. Election is corporate not individual.

Looking forward to good conversations! tharkun