Perhaps Hebrew is unknown to you, but not to me.
Well you're wasting your time trying to impress me with it.
I say this very respectfully, but frankly, it looks like graffiti to me and sounds like ... well ... another language.
TCassidy said:
Any serious student of God's word will take the time to have, at least, a study knowledge of the very words God gave by inspiration.
And what, pray tell, were the very words used by the autographers?
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you weren't there.
Furthermore, I'll bet you think Moses autographed the book of Genesis, don't you?
TCassidy said:
The problem with your KJVOism is "which KJV?" There are dozens of differences between the AV of 1611 and the most common KJV in print today, the 1769 Oxford edition.
"Problem"?
Maybe to you it is, but not to me.
I use th KJB, fifth edition.
TCassidy said:
Even KJVO author D.A. Waite admits there are around 150 "changes of substance" that change the meaning of the text.
You mean like believing Moses crossed the Sea of Reeds, and not the Red Sea?
TCassidy said:
So, which of the 7 or 8 different revisions of the KJV do you think is the correct one,
The fifth.
TCassidy said:
... and why do you think that?
I'll paraphrase Gail Riplinger on this one:
"God created a Diamond in 1611, then polished It five times to a high gloss."
Something like that.
TCassidy said:
And why are the other KJVs wrong?
Don't know. Don't care. Don't care to know.