Do you accept the apocrypha as God's word on par with the rest of Scripture?
Oh we must use slightly different terms in my area for nurses.My point is...it is the same Creator Who created our bodies and the Body.
*And it's mRNA...not RNA (I think that's a nurse)
Somewhere in the depths of the 58 year old hard drive that is my mind, I'm sure this is stored....but for now, what the heck does this have to do with the OP?The DNA never leaves the nucleus of the cell...it sends out an exact replica...mRNA...out into the world to spread the code...sound familiar?
Somewhere in the depths of the 58 year old hard drive that is my mind, I'm sure this is stored....but for now, what the heck does this have to do with the OP?
Somewhere in the depths of the 58 year old hard drive that is my mind, I'm sure this is stored....but for now, what the heck does this have to do with the OP?
Got it, so it really has nothing to do with the OP. Thanks."analogue (n.)
1826, "an analogous thing," from French analogue (adj. and n.), from Latin analogus (adj.), from Greek analogos "proportionate, according to due proportion," from ana "throughout; according to" (see ana-) + logos "ratio, proportion," a specialized use (see Logos).
The word was used in English in Greek form (analogon) in 1810. Meaning "word corresponding with another" is from 1837. Computing sense, in reference to operating with numbers represented by some measurable quantity (as a slide-rule does; opposed to digital) is recorded from 1946.
analogue | Origin and meaning of analogue by Online Etymology Dictionary
Wow....no wonder evangelicals are in decline.
Got it, so it really has nothing to do with the OP. Thanks.
...or just maybe it's better to stick to the subject of the OP instead of vearing off course.Some folks, when they don't get things, because of feelings of inadequacy, mock and ridicule. It is better to keep silent and search it out, or to ask questions, or to wait until you are ready for it...ignorance is inexcusable.
Well then, to answer your question, some Bibles do, and others do not.Any of them.
Accuracy is better.I personally wish everyone stuck with KJV as the main version and used other Bibles for studying purposes. It is important to me that we all have a common reference point even if some other versions may give a more accurate translation at times.
Well, different people read the same text and glean a different “message” don’t they? How do we determine which message is true and which is false?But, having said that, it is called the word, but it is the message that those words communicate that I am referring to.
Sure I do. Let me give you an example. The Vulgate is above the KJV and every other Protestant “Bible”.It does not sound like you regard the Bible above any other writing. Is that an accurate understanding?
Well then, to answer your question, some Bibles do, and others do not.
Accuracy is better.
Well, different people read the same text and glean a different “message” don’t they? How do we determine which message is true and which is false?
Here’s a hint: 2 Thessalonians 2:15
Sure I do. Let me give you an example. The Vulgate is above the KJV and every other Protestant “Bible”.
I don’t read Latin. The KJV does not admit that the Deuterocanonical books are Scripture, so it is automatically inferior.I think it's fantastic that you are a Latin scholar. I would love to be able to read the Greek and Hebrew as well. Realistically speaking, I'm probably not going to do that.
But I am curious, what is so different about the Vulgate than the KJV after both are compared to the original languages.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?