Search results

Are you kidding me?! You're being a creep. I put myself in that man's shoes and the first instinct of my flesh is to punch you in the mouth. You think it's alright to become close to another man's wife and let his kids call you daddy? What's wrong with you? That's wrong on so many different...

And when YOU, Oz, don't have a clue what you're talking about, you find out that the NLT was my first Bible and that my wife uses it as her Bible. I'm not going to get into a ridiculous argument over the NLT in a KJV thread. It's essentially a paraphrase and that's that.

brandplucked, and/or anyone else that can answer this question, why is the 1900 Cambridge KJV, otherwise known as the Pure Cambridge Edition, regarded as the true, pure, and finished work of the KJV. Who decided that and why?

Oz did Also the NLT is a paraphrase

I didn't call the NIV a paraphrase.

And that's just wrong, however I'm sure you're exaggerating a little. The KJV is a fine translation, but I wouldn't read it exclusively. I like a mixture of KJV, NASB, ESV, and NRSV. I wouldn't pick up an NIV or paraphrase over any of these.

The NIV is an atrocity. The NLT is okay. My wife uses it because she has difficulty reading it, but I wouldn't use a paraphrase as my main Bible unless I had to. If someone said the ESV, NRSV, NASB, among some others, were better, no problem. It's entirely debateable and I like all of those...

In what fantasy world is the NIV and NLT superior to the KJV?

I tested at a college reading and writing level in the 8th grade.

I'm saying a text you can understand is preferred. If need simplistic, fine. If you don't, fine. My one and only argument with you is that the ESV is not difficult to read, so stop putting words in my mouth.

Your definition of difficult is vastly different than mine.

I never once said that. I'm saying you are wrong to say that the ESV is difficult to read. It's not.

It is easy to read. I know the English language fairly well. There is nothing difficult about ordinary English words in perfectly legible sentences.

Why do I want to dumb something down that I already understand perfectly fine?

I agree! I was recently arguing with a user that claimed the ESV and NRSV are difficult to read. No, they're not, not ever close. There may be an undiagnosed learning/reading disability going on there, or a lack of education, or, as you've said, laziness. If plain English is difficult to read...

It doesn't bother me either. I have a KJV that is PCE in every way other than in 2 verses the word "spirit" is capitalized when it should not be, according to the PCE. If it bothers PCE KJVO's so much as I've read, just pretend they're lowercase. I'm not tossing a Bible out over to capitalized...

There is no doubt that you know more than I. I have been at this for 7 months. You have been at this for years. However I'm not so oblivious that I don't know a Catholic Bible when I see one. He's a Baptist. He's not going to walk into Church with a CTS or study from it. I have an NAB because I...

brandplucked, in Acts 11:28 and 1 John 5:8 the word "spirit" is supposed to be undercase according to the PCE. However, they are often capitalized. Does this matter or even change the meaning? From what I gather this is very sersious for PCE-KJV-O's.

But again, this is why you read multiple translations together. To each their own, though.

I did a little research. The Cambridge Concord Text isn't the Pure Cambridge Text. The Cameo Edition I mentioned above is essentially the PCE, with the only differences being that the word "spirit" is capitalized in 2 spots in the NT, whereas the actual PCE has it as lowercase. Apparently this...