Is the King James Bible Infallible? King James Onlyism Exposed.

[kayaker]

"Scriptural," you muze, little bible corrector/rejector/agnostic? Well, drone, if you would just identify this "desert mirage," "theoretical" "scripture," I'll give you the honor of discussing this with me...

I have in my hand the true, sure, sound, certain word of God, for English speaking people. I believe every last word of it, and do not submit it to my correction. I submit to its correction.

Uhhh, I think this is the place where you 'fess up. WHICH "true, sure, sound, certain word of God, for English speaking people" durn you correct yourself with, then? Got a Canaanite harlot in the closet? ROFLOL! If'n I ain't made it clear that I prefer the KJV, AND the reasons for it... then you STILL ain't listening! Forget conversation, which you've added utterly nothing to but naysaying. Do you shove those pages in yourn ears (Matthew 13:14 KJV, Matthew 13:15 KJV)? That's probably why Matthew 13:12 KJV doesn't make any sense to you.

That is the difference between me, a bible believer, and you, a bible corrector.

The Holy Spirit is the Bible Corrector, you'll realize that when you meet Him again... studying God's Word instead of thumping It in one hand, and pointing your long boney finger up in the air at others who do. So you're an alleged Bible believer, then (John 8:30 KJV)? Do you ever read it? Which one, btw! Do I even need to ask, ROFLOL! Then how about considering Jesus and His Father were TWO witnesses to Jesus' divine paternity in John 8:17, 18 in SAINT John, Jay Dubya. Witnesses do testify, do they not? How 'bout rendering up them TWO Divine testimonies in SAINT John between John 8:17, and John 8:47 KJV then, Jay Dubya. Make Simon proud to suggest you have Biblical wisdom. We agree Jesus isn't a liar, but that does sorta leave you a few rungs short of the "truth" then, doesn't it (John 8:32 KJV, John 8:33 KJV)? Your wisdom is evidenced by the lack thereof, evidenced by your lack of Scriptural dialogue, too. That's 'discussion' to you, since you don't bring forth any fruits worthy of repentance (Luke 3:7, 8), OR Biblical wisdom.

So, what's with your attitude, dude? Did you have a failed relationship as a choir boy? But, you think you have infinite knowledge discerning good and evil, then? Do snakes talk (Genesis 3:4, Genesis 3:5 KJV)? You seem quite mesmerized with yourself! Well, since you have no Scriptural argument... do you mind if I put you on TOL's most ignorant list? Please forgive me that I'll not reply to your narcissistic posts... I've had better Bible conversations at the local redneck saloon.

kayaker

 

[kiwimacahau]

The KJV is a dated translation from dated, secondary sources. If you want to use it, knock yourself out but there are better.

 

[john w]

Uhhh, I think this is the place where you 'fess up. WHICH "true, sure, sound, certain word of God, for English speaking people" durn you correct yourself with, then? Got a Canaanite harlot in the closet? ROFLOL! If'n I ain't made it clear that I prefer the KJV, AND the reasons for it... then you STILL ain't listening! Forget conversation, which you've added utterly nothing to but naysaying. Do you shove those pages in yourn ears (Matthew 13:14 KJV, Matthew 13:15 KJV)? That's probably why Matthew 13:12 KJV doesn't make any sense to you.



The Holy Spirit is the Bible Corrector, you'll realize that when you meet Him again... studying God's Word instead of thumping It in one hand, and pointing your long boney finger up in the air at others who do. So you're an alleged Bible believer, then (John 8:30 KJV)? Do you ever read it? Which one, btw! Do I even need to ask, ROFLOL! Then how about considering Jesus and His Father were TWO witnesses to Jesus' divine paternity in John 8:17, 18 in SAINT John, Jay Dubya. Witnesses do testify, do they not? How 'bout rendering up them TWO Divine testimonies in SAINT John between John 8:17, and John 8:47 KJV then, Jay Dubya. Make Simon proud to suggest you have Biblical wisdom. We agree Jesus isn't a liar, but that does sorta leave you a few rungs short of the "truth" then, doesn't it (John 8:32 KJV, John 8:33 KJV)? Your wisdom is evidenced by the lack thereof, evidenced by your lack of Scriptural dialogue, too. That's 'discussion' to you, since you don't bring forth any fruits worthy of repentance (Luke 3:7, 8), OR Biblical wisdom.

So, what's with your attitude, dude? Did you have a failed relationship as a choir boy? But, you think you have infinite knowledge discerning good and evil, then? Do snakes talk (Genesis 3:4, Genesis 3:5 KJV)? You seem quite mesmerized with yourself! Well, since you have no Scriptural argument... do you mind if I put you on TOL's most ignorant list? Please forgive me that I'll not reply to your narcissistic posts... I've had better Bible conversations at the local redneck saloon.

kayaker

"the Bible...word of God...Bible"-you

Still not able to identify this mystical, theoretical, "the Bible...word of God...Bible," that "is given by inspiration," toots? Why is that? A fascinating clinic, Jim, on bible agnosticism.




As I suspected:not a peep to..


Where can we get a copy of the true, pure, certain, sound......"the Word...Scripture"(your words)today? Does it have a name? Identify it. Name that "is given by inspiration"(not "was") scripture, that you can press to your heart, and claim, "This is the pure, true, certain, sure, sound..............word of God...I believe every word of it."


" prefer the KJV, AND the reasons for it... "-bible corrector/agnostic


I know-you are not a bible believer. So, what's the problem, toots? We agree.

"Do snakes talk (Genesis 3:4, Genesis 3:5 KJV)? "-bible corrector

=Since I, bible corrector, do not understand the book, it is wrong, not me, and I will correct it, correcting an uncorrectable LORD God, as I am the final authority, not the book. Your doctrine determines what the book should say, and what it is. If it does not agree with your doctrine, or you don't "get it,"you correct it.

We know. Define "bible believer."

"The Holy Spirit is the Bible Corrector, "-you

What a mess. How convenient-cliche from another website. No scripture says that-made up. No, you are, correcting any/every alleged bible, correcting the objective words. The punk-ette does not even know the difference between objective revelation, given by objective words, and interpretation/illumination/understanding.


Have a seat, Frau D. Kayaker.

Watch the emotional mutterings, snorts, grunts, to continue. This bible corrector/agnostic hates the fact that bible believers are men/women, who have the spine/backbone to stand up for their convictions, for what we believe. We understand the concept of AUTHORITY, because we understand the Holy Bible is a book about AUTHORITY. And watch the continued emotional rants from a babbling bible agnostic/critic, who can only hurt herself on these boards, by appealing to the scriptures, to prove, that we no longer have the scriptures.

Real sharp are these bible correctors/agnostics.

 

[dialm]

Which city, Jericho? LOL! Well... the spelling of the name of the wife of Booz is quite significant. One spelling puts a harlot in the 'name' of Jesus, while the other spelling does not. Furthermore, Rahab & Co. were not initially permitted into the congregation following the conquest (Joshua 6:23 KJV). The Septuagint maintained the Greek spelling of Rahab referring to the harlot of Jericho in the OT, and in the NT regarding Paul's and James' references, AND the Greek Septuagint noted the spelling distinction of RaChab in Matthew 1:5 KJV. I've checked over the timelines, and it appears the closest I can get is Rahab being about 60 y/o when her life span overlapped with Salmon's. Their hooking-up to sire Booz seems pretty unlikely considering the fertility component.

Indeed Dial, there is a striking parallel with Joshua and Jesus (did I get those names mixed up?)! We are blessed beyond imagination! Do you have any OT Scripture that suggests a harlot is an acceptable wife of an OT priest, then? I've already addressed Tamar, the put-away-wife who played the harlot being contrary to Leviticus... God personally slew Judah's two elder Canaanite sons. That oughta be a pretty solid indicator no Canaanites would be in the lineage of Jesus, as was Judah's wife (Genesis 38:1, 2, 1Chronicles 2:3). Such union was contraindicated in Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3, that Joshua reiterated before the conquest of Jericho in Joshua 3:9, 10. So, I don't think Joshua would have approved of a Canaanite in Messiah's ancestry.

However, there was a door for Ishmaelites and Hittites to enter the congregation of the Lord being the third generation Edomites in Deuteronomy 23:7, 8, 9. But, I don't hear them becoming spouses of priests. Solomon's folly should bear reflection on this case; cost him a kingdom!

kayaker

Wasn't Jesus rejected by the nation over nothing?

If they did that to me I probably wouldn't care what they thought of my pedigree. Or my choice in a wife.

Would you?

 

[kayaker]

The KJV is a dated translation from dated, secondary sources. If you want to use it, knock yourself out but there are better.

I appreciate the notion, Kiwi... Such is quite easily said. I've provided Jewish, Catholic, and Protestant translations and respective renderings of Genesis 4:23 KJV, Genesis 4:24 KJV, including the biblehub parallel. In case you might not have figured it out yet, those are two VERY pivotal verses greatly impacted by translation! So, throw some meat on the table, then. It's easy to kick back and make token gestures speaking about better translations from afar. Step up to the plate and toss your "better" translation of Genesis 4:23 KJV, Genesis 4:24 KJV, along with your rendering. That's what I find interesting on TOL. And, I'm not being Scripturally challenged. So, I'm talking about UFC, not aloof Monday morning quarterback tea parties.

kayaker

 

[john w]

The KJV is a dated translation from dated, secondary sources. If you want to use it, knock yourself out but there are better.

"The Greek" is dated. Every "modern version" is "dated"-that is the nature of languages.


I don't "use" it-I believe every word in it.


Tell us that "scripture" that you believe. Where can I get a copy?

"For I am a man under authority..." Mt. 8:9 KJV


When bible believers speak about we we believe, everyone knows xactly where we are coming from. And you? "Well, uh, urr, I kinda like this version, but not this....I also use this version, but prefer....."

Fascinating. Jim. The word "believe" does not even enter the discussion.

And I like/prefer ice creme......

 

[john w]

Uhhh, I think this is the place where you 'fess up. WHICH "true, sure, sound, certain word of God, for English speaking people" durn you correct yourself with, then?

Made up. I've spoken openly/"plainly," for years on TOL. Everyone, that pays attention, to the greatness of my posts, over the years, knows exactly what I believe, and why. Ask the neighborhood about me.

 

[kiwimacahau]

"The Greek" is dated. Every "modern version" is "dated"-that is the nature of languages.


I don't "use" it-I believe every word in it.


Tell us that "scripture" that you believe. Where can I get a copy?

"For I am a man under authority..." Mt. 8:9 KJV


When bible believers speak about we we believe, everyone knows xactly where we are coming from. And you? "Well, uh, urr, I kinda like this version, but not this....I also use this version, but prefer....."

Fascinating. Jim. The word "believe" does not even enter the discussion.

And I like/prefer ice creme......

Because I was not speaking of belief. I was speaking of the translation into English of the Bible. The KJV is dated, it sources were far newer than the ones we have access to today and portions of it were direct transcriptions from Latin. If you wish to use it, use it. All English translations of the Bible, done by reputable bible scholars (yes, there's that word) are the Word of God.

 

[Nazaroo]

yay King James!

The last Protestant King, and gifter to the English speaking peoples a great Bible.

Every king and religious leader since was neither.

I left the Anglican church when they took the Common Book of Prayer out of the pews,
and then took the Bible out of the pews,
and put homosexuals in the pulpits.

The Church of England was at its zenith in 1850.

Then it disintegrated when homos took over Oxford and Cambridge.

The Cambridge Five

 

[john w]

If you wish to use it, use it. All English translations of the Bible, done by reputable bible scholars (yes, there's that word) are the Word of God.

slower: "use"

I believe every word.

 

[kiwimacahau]

'Use' and 'Believe are not antonyms.

 

[john w]

Forgive me, Father. I've committed the sin of taking the Lord Jesus Christ's words literally, "...It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." The stuff keeps falling out of these bible correctors' brain, does it not?-"I could think of things I never thunk before...if I only had a brain..."

Now listen, pay attention, bible correctors-Every word of God that you or I or any else needs to live by is found in "the volume of the book"-one book. Can you dig that? Did you "get" the "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by..." part? Well? Or, did you conveniently skip over that so you could make out God to be a liar, and say that God would give us every word He ever spoke, or that He would subjectively talk to each of us through telepathy? He said He'd give us every word, written down, Scripture, that we'd need to live by, and He promised He would preserve them for us-every word, written down.

Where is this pure, true, sound, certain "is given by inspiration" scripture(written)? Where can we get a copy?

Oops....you let the LORD God's words fall to the ground, "bible believer"-bible does not really mean "book," now does it? 1 Samuel 3:19 KJV

Bible correctors are the prime examples of what happens to a man/woman who is steeped in mysticism, Buddhism, agnosticism....a baseless faith, grounded in a powerless book, manifested in sophistry,speculation, subjectivity, senseless "arguments," so that he/she cannot think straight on "the bible issue," and goes insane. It's called anti thinking.

 

[john w]

'Use' and 'Believe are not antonyms.

Pay attention-I believe every word.

 

[kiwimacahau]

Forgive me, Father. I've committed the sin of taking the Lord Jesus Christ's words literally, "...It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." The stuff keeps falling out of these bible correctors' brain, does it not?-"I could think of things I never thunk before...if I only had a brain..."

Now listen, pay attention, bible correctors-Every word of God that you or I or any else needs to live by is found in "the volume of the book"-one book. Can you dig that? Did you "get" the "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by..." part? Well? Or, did you conveniently skip over that so you could make out God to be a liar, and say that God would give us every word He ever spoke, or that He would subjectively talk to each of us through telepathy? He said He'd give us every word, written down, Scripture, that we'd need to live by, and He promised He would preserve them for us-every word, written down.

Where is this pure, true, sound, certain "is given by inspiration" scripture(written)? Where can we get a copy?

Oops....you let the LORD God's words fall to the ground, "bible believer"-bible does not really mean "book," now does it? 1 Samuel 3:19 KJV

Bible correctors are the prime examples of what happens to a man/woman who is steeped in mysticism, Buddhism, agnosticism....a baseless faith, grounded in a powerless book, manifested in sophistry,speculation, subjectivity, senseless "arguments," so that he/she cannot think straight on "the bible issue," and goes insane. It's called anti thinking.

Pay attention-I believe every word.

I am happy to hear that but your belief is NOT what I was writing about. The question is not "Do you believe the KJV is infallible" but "Is the KJV infallible." It is not, only God is infallible whereas the KJV is a dated translation of God's Words in English. Further you ask

Where is this pure, true, sound, certain "is given by inspiration" scripture(written)? Where can we get a copy?

; I answered that ANY translation into English done by reputable scholars is the pure, sound, true, inspired scripture.

As for:

Bible correctors are the prime examples of what happens to a man/woman who is steeped in mysticism, Buddhism, agnosticism....a baseless faith, grounded in a powerless book, manifested in sophistry,speculation, subjectivity, senseless "arguments," so that he/she cannot think straight on "the bible issue," and goes insane. It's called anti thinking.

That is rubbish of the first water. No one is 'correcting the bible;' because the KJV is not the standard by which English translations are judged.

 

[john w]

I am happy to hear that but your belief is NOT what I was writing about. The question is not "Do you believe the KJV is infallible" but "Is the KJV infallible." It is not, only God is infallible....

" It is not, only God is infallible...."


False dichotomy-unscriptural:

1. How did you learn, that "God is infallible?"


2.Romans 9:17 KJV
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.



Exodus 9:16 KJV
And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.


Genesis 21:10 KJV

Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.


Gal. 4:30 KJV
Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

Thus, what scripture says, the LORD God says. The scripture makes no such distinction.


Thus, I, once again, demonstrate, my genius, by studying carefully the book, and providing you, chapter, and verse, to refute your, "Well, this is what a website taught me" humanism.

And what do we get from you? "Well, in my opinion......"


"whereas the KJV is a dated translation of God's Words in English. Further you ask ; I answered that ANY translation into English done by reputable scholars is the pure, sound, true, inspired scripture."-you

Observe, the deception:


" done by reputable scholars "


You decide who are "reputable scholars?" Who does? Other scholars?


By that "argument," every translation/version is the pure, sound, true, inspired scripture, as you could not object to anyone elses' assessment of who these "reputable scholars" are. Go ahead, and try.


Clueless.

As for: That is rubbish of the first water. No one is 'correcting the bible;' because the KJV is not the standard by which English translations are judged.

Made up. They are correcting any/all bibles/versions/translations.


Name that infallible source authority, the infallible standard, by which the KJB/others are corrected.

"only God is infallible...."

Made up-What saith the scriptures, about the scriptures?:


"How forcible are right words! but what doth your arguing reprove?" Job 6:25 KJV

"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all them that trust in him." 2 Samuel 22:31 KJV



"And the woman said to Elijah, Now by this I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in thy mouth is truth." 1 Kings 17:24 KJV



"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times." Psalms 12:6 KJV


"As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him." Psalms 18:30 KJV



"The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple." Psalms 19:7 KJV



"For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth."[/B] Psalms 33:4 KJV



"Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it." Psalms 119:140 KJV



"And take not the word of truth utterly out of my mouth; for I have hoped in thy judgments." Psalms 119:43 KJV



"Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever." Psalms 119:160 KJV



"Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge, That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?" Proverbs 22:20,21 KJV



"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him." Proverbs 30:5 KJV



"...the scripture of truth...." Daniel 10:21 KJV



"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." John 17:17 KJV



"But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God." 2 Corinthians 4:2 KJV



"By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left,..." 2 Corinthians 6:7 KJV



"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,..." Ephesians 1:13 KJV



"For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." 1 Thessalonians 2:13 KJV



"...the word of truth." 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV



"Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures." James 1:18 KJV



"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." 1 Peter 1:23 KJV

 

[Mocking You]

Name that infallible source authority, the infallible standard, by which the KJB/others are corrected.

The Geneva Bible. The predecessor of the KJV, using the same manuscripts as the KJV.

[Just thought I'd jump in here...Carry on.]

 

[kiwimacahau]

God inspires humans beings to learn Hebrew / Aramaic and Greek as well as their mother tongues; God inspires folk by the Holy Spirit to dedicate their lives to translating the scriptures ; God is the infallible standard by which all Bibles are corrected. The KJV is not, it is neither infallible nor perfect.

 

[kayaker]

Wasn't Jesus rejected by the nation over nothing?

If they did that to me I probably wouldn't care what they thought of my pedigree. Or my choice in a wife.

Would you?

You bring up a rather deep subject, Dial. Jesus was rejected because He was a descendant of Judah (prophesied progenitor of Messiah, Isaiah 65:5 KJV) via Judah's widowed, non-virgin, put-away, daughter-in-law, Tamar (Genesis 38:6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, KJV), I beg your patience. Said relationship was contrary to Leviticus 18:15 KJV, Leviticus 21:7 KJV, Leviticus 21:9 KJV, Leviticus 21:13 KJV, Leviticus 21:14 KJV, Leviticus 21:15 KJV. I realize this may be a bit of a stretch simply considering Jesus' detractors comment in John 8:41 KJV. So, please continue considering Leviticus 21:16, Leviticus 21:17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, KJV. Now, when you associate these words of of the Lord spoken to Moses to tell Aaron... Jesus' words to His detractors in John 8:15 KJV come better into view, along with John 8:46 KJV. Jesus was without spot or blemish, and that meant more than Jesus not having a withered hand. To my fallible rendering, being without spot or blemish meant Jesus also did not have a heritable illness/defect, the result of inbreeding in one's ancestry. Please consider John 9:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, most likely heritable blindness. Jesus didn't heal broken bones or the flu, or STD's.

Furthermore, Jesus had an unblemished ancestry considering Leviticus 21:7 KJV, Leviticus 21:14 KJV, Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3, affirmed by Joshua 3:9, 10, even affirmed some 1,400 years later by Ezra 9:1, 2, 3, 10:2, 3. The reason Rahab was left outside the camp (Joshua 6:23 KJV) was because she was a Canaanite, or at least one of those rebuked by Joshua 3:9, 10. The reason she was brought that close to camp, and spared utter destruction, was due to her impeccable faith. This was a clue for Canaanites to keep their noses clean revealing God's mercy.

Now, along the lines of Jews (generally speaking) rejecting Jesus; they whitewashed the Canaanite Rahab, saying she was 'converted,' contrary to the aforementioned, un-rescinded Mosaic law. Thereby, the 'Jews' 'sanctified' David's ancestry to make him king. But, they've not figured out Rahab the harlot was NOT in the lineage of David (Isaiah 6:9, 10, 11, 12). The 'Jews' whitewashed Ruth saying she was a 'converted' blood Moabite contrary to aforementioned, un-rescinded Mosaic law (Deuteronomy 23:3, 6). Thereby, the 'Jews' continued the 'sanctification' of David to make him king. But, they've not figured out Ruth was definitely NOT a blood Moabite. Most likely Ruth was a post-conquest 'daughter' of Ruben who inherited the land south of the Arnon river (the southern most border of the Land of Moab).

But, the 'Jews' wouldn't whitewash Jesus? Doesn't that sound a bit hypocritical? Consider Matthew 23:13, 14, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29 along with Revelation 2:9, 3:9. So, those alleged Jews who were behind this conspiracy during Jesus' day were the Shelanites (Numbers 26:20) hiding behind the somewhat ancestrally ambiguous title, "Jew." The Shelanites were Canaanite descendants of Judah, prophesied progenitor of Messiah (Isaiah 65:9) via his Canaanite wife (Genesis 38:1, 2, 1Chronicles 2:3), contrary to Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3, Joshua 3:9, 10, Ezra 9:1, 2, 3, 7, 10:2, 3. Prior to the Shelanite alleged 'Jews', their ancestors were the synagogue of Satan (Matthew 23:28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, who killed Abel?, Revelatino 2:9, 3:9).

The ISRAELITE "Jews" of Jesus' day, including Pharzites and Zaharites (via Tamar, Numbers 26:20), were deluded following the circumcised Shelanites holding the aforementioned Mosaic Laws over their heads: Leviticus 18:15, Leviticus 21:7 KJV, Leviticus 21:9 KJV, Leviticus 21:13 KJV, Leviticus 21:14 KJV, Leviticus 21:15 KJV. How about that... the Israelite Jews were duped by a pack of hypocrites! Well, I guess Jesus was more than right in ways that escape the multitudes: Matthew 23:13, 14, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29, Revelation 2:9, 3:9, with particular emphasis on Revelation 3:10 KJV.

I appreciate your notion of pedigree, Dial. I'm a bit of a mongrel myself, about 1/8th Cherokee. I'm Chief Blind Wild Hawg of the Buffalowlife tribe, LOL! Of course AFTER Jesus' conception, we both acknowledge pedigree is of no significance regarding entrance privileges into spiritual eternity, as Paul spoke. Our adoption papers were signed in Jesus' authentic Pharzite Jewish blood, btw. That was the problem Nicodemus had, he was 'blue-blooded,' we might say. On the flip side of that coin, Jesus' ancestry was utterly paramount to Him being an acceptable sacrifice.

As far as my choice of wife... let the record show that I highly recommend a medical evaluation to ascertain heritable genetic risks that one might be exposing their beloved future progeny to. The Jews do this on a regular basis, btw... another time, perhaps.

Thanks for your enduring patience, Dial... been cooking with my son this evening. Btw... if you want to know the reason the Catholics are so ANTI-solo... check out their TRANSLATION, they're not playing with a full deck. They don't perceive a choice, either. They surrendered their spiritual individuality to their hierarchal elite who only have rights space-docking with God. Of course, many Protestants can't fathom Matthew 8:19 KJV, Matthew 8:20 KJV, either.

kayaker

 

[john w]

The Geneva Bible. The predecessor of the KJV, using the same manuscripts as the KJV.

[Just thought I'd jump in here...Carry on.]

Then you will get no quarrell, from me.

Study it, survey it, mediatate on it, and believe every word.

 

[john w]

God inspires humans beings to learn Hebrew / Aramaic and Greek as well as their mother tongues; God inspires folk by the Holy Spirit to dedicate their lives to translating the scriptures ; God is the infallible standard by which all Bibles are corrected. The KJV is not, it is neither infallible nor perfect.

"God inspires," you chirp?


Translated: Clueless as to the biblical definition of "inspire"/"inspiration," but, instead, provides the secular definition.

Lovely.

"God is the infallible standard by which all Bibles are corrected."-you


Which means NADA, unless you have a "pipeline" directly to God.


=deception, subjectivity