Missing link was a lie (2)

[Gracchus]

Did Jesus walk on water, or didn't He?

Yes, and Superman flew to the moon.

 

[Split Rock]

In other words, suppose Jesus fully-endorsed everything Daniel said -- would that really matter to you?

We know that it wouldn't matter to you if Jesus came down and told you your interpretation of scripture was wrong... you would tell him to "Take A Hike" too... correct?

 

[MoonLancer]

Wow... very interesting idea. I'm guessing this one of the reasons why religious folk (not just Christians) fear some of our new science and call it 'playing God.' They probably feel that bypassing some of their absurd mental barriers and beliefs should only be possible by their God.

well they can already do this with mice. It turns out that all the offspring using this method are female. ironic.

 

[MoonLancer]

Yet they are born with the sin nature, so there must be something more to this than just Y chromosomes?

Something [myopic] science can't see?

or ignorant theology makes a claim it cant backup?

Greek can take a hike.

Does this look Greek to you?

↓

Mt 14:25 And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.

did you know that king James was gay?

 

[MoonLancer]

Nope -- I'm just trying to show that, no matter what Daniel said or didn't say in the AV1611 Bible, you're 'I dunno' is what prevails.

In other words, suppose Jesus fully-endorsed everything Daniel said -- would that really matter to you?

You thought you were going to nail dad by demanding he show you Jesus even mentioning Daniel, and when I came in and showed you (which, I'm sure you weren't expecting) -- you now want to change the focus of your argument.

('Useless aside', my foot.)

Kindof like how you said sin travels in sperm and scientists can already use an egg to fertilize another egg (in mice not humans)? So i guess its going to be scientists who eradicate sin and not god? ohhh that must suck. How does that foot taste?

 

[tanzanos]

Greek can take a hike.

Does this look Greek to you?

↓

Mt 14:25 And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.

Come come AV! This is not like you to insult ones language!

Pray tell me; When did the KJV first appear? Was it not a translation based on the original Hebrew and Greek?

All you have to do is open the KJV and it ascertains the fact that it is a translated work!

We are talking historical accuracy here and not religion. Let us leave our biases out and stick to the facts.

By dismissing the Greek text; You are in actual fact dismissing the whole NT!

Lest we forget; the English language that the KJV is written did not exist at the time of Christ. The Greek did and was the lingua franca in that part of the world. Just like English is the lingua franca today.

To your honesty I lay my expectation of an answer that reflects truth!

 

[dad]

I'm not making any point at all, other than calling into question your command of the source materials (the Bible).

So you have no point and admit it. OK.

You seem unable to produce the source texts about it though.

The abomination of desolation? Well let's look at what Jesus said.

mat 24: 15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand 16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

So, it is future, and is at the start of the Great Tribulation. Unless you think you can over ride Jesus (and even if you think you can) --that nails er.

I'd love to be proven wrong about that though.

About what? Have you some point after all??

In a way they are...in as much as a person thinks the commentators are a reasonable substitute for an actual familiarity with the biblical text.

I think that someone with an actual familiarity would have a point Work on that.

 

[AV1611VET]

did you know that king James was gay?

No, King James was not gay.

 

[tanzanos]

No, King James was not gay.

Will gay unfriendly Southern Baptists expel King James?

King James was actually a queen
From OpEdNews

Now that the North Carolina Baptist Convention has threatened to expel any church that is friendly to gays, does this mean that they are going to abandon the King James Bible? After all, his subjects joked "Elizabeth was King: now James is Queen." Southern Baptists and anti-gay fundamentalists might not like to hear it but just listen to what King James wrote to George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham: "I naturally so love your person, and adore all your other parts, which are more than ever one man had." James also wrote that "I desire only to live in the world for your sake."
Lest there be any doubts among Southern Baptists investigators about this being erotic as opposed to platonic affection, the far older James called angelic young Villiers "my sweet child and wife, and grant that ye may ever be a comfort to your dear dad and husband." In return, Villiers, the subject of the nursery rhyme, Georgie Porgie, wrote James that "I cannot now think of giving thanks for friend, wife, or child; my thoughts are only bent on having my dear Dad and Master's legs soon in my arms." Villiers wrote as a man who "threatens you, that when he once gets hold of your bedpost again, never to quit it." James wrote to Villiers that "whether you loved me now . . . better than at the time I shall never forget at Farnham, where the bed's head could not be found between the master and his dog." READ IT ALL
​

History knows not the feelings of men nor their beliefs; It is an account of happenings irrespective of the morals pertaining to the occasion.

 

[AV1611VET]

King James was actually a queen

Um ... no.

I did hear that he was a Homo [sapiens] though; is that close enough?

And for the record, King James did not translate the Bible.

 

[tanzanos]

Um ... no.

I did hear that he was a Homo [sapiens] though; is that close enough?

And for the record, King James did not translate the Bible.

This is true!

Now are there any answers forthcoming from you on the question I posed regarding the translated work from the Greek and Hebrew known as the KJV bible?

 

[AV1611VET]

Now are there any answers forthcoming from you on the question I posed regarding the translated work from the Greek and Hebrew known as the KJV bible?

No.

Reverse-engineering the Word of God to find some hidden spiritual Truth, or to contradict the current translation is not how it works.

 

[tanzanos]

No.

Reverse-engineering the Word of God to find some hidden spiritual Truth, or to contradict the current translation is not how it works.

Perhaps you misunderstood me AV. I was only referring to historical accuracy and not wishing to refute your religious beliefs. I also do not wish to propagandise in favour of my language. After all unbiased honesty is a virtue, is it not?

Also since the Hebrew and Greek biblical works preceded the KJV then it could hardly be considered that referring to the original as "reverse engineering". If we were to use this term then all the bibles are reversed engineered from the Hebrew and Greek originals.

It matters not what the original language was. What matters is how people interpret their beliefs. This is besides the point I am making.

Can you at least refer to your KJV and quote the part where it says that the KJV is a translated work from the Hebrew and Greek?

 

[tanzanos]

Here is a copy paste excerpt from a religious website referring to the history of the KJV:




The 47 translators of the King James Version of the Bible were well established and accomplished scholars. King James I did not like the Geneva Bible nor the "official" Bishop's Bible, so he originally commissioned 54 translators to revise the scripts, paying special attention to the Hebrew and Greek original manuscripts.

Conformists and Puritans alike, with great dedication, were approved to take up the task in June 1604. However, only 47 of the men actually remained on the project with Bishop Bancroft entrusted with managing the project's work.

The translators were formed into six companies: two meeting at Westminster, two at Cambridge, and two at Oxford. The books of Genesis through II Kings were translated by the first Westminster Company, 1 Chronicles through Ecclesiastes by the first Cambridge Company, and Isaiah through Malachi by the first Oxford Company. The second Oxford Company translated the four Gospel accounts, Acts, and Revelation. The Second Westminster Company translated Romans through Jude. All of these men were of extraordinary and vast learning. They included:

• 
  [*] Lancelot Andrews, skilled in 15 languages
  [*] William Bedwell, an Arabic scholar
  [*] Dr. Smith, proficient in Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic
  [*] John Harmar, a noted scholar in Greek and Latin

These are just a few of the highly intelligent and educated men appointed the task. All were exceptional in various fields of knowledge. After seven years of intense but fruitful work, the collective effort was published in 1611.

Their success has led to the King James Bible holding the first place position throughout the English-speaking world for over 3 centuries. However, its success is not due to their scholarship alone. Just as important in these men were their Spiritual characters.

Any translation of the Bible is affected by the faith of the translators and the leading of the Holy Spirit of God. A secular writer or translator will never translate God's Holy Word as will a Believer. Martin Luther is reported to have written, "Translating is not an art that everyone can practice, as the mad saints think; it requires a right, pious, faithful, diligent, God-fearing, experienced heart. Therefore, I hold that no false Christian or sectarian can be a faithful translator."

 

[AV1611VET]

I also do not wish to propagandise in favour of my language.

My friend, I'm going to say this with as much respect as I can find about the Greek language -- specifically the Classical Greek --

On second thought ... nevermind.

I'll just use my favorite example about how corrupted it became:

The word "sin" in the Classical Greek, all it is is a sports term -- right?

Specifically, it means 'to miss the mark'?

(I believe Satan's favorite language is Classical Greek; but of course, I can't prove it.)

Can you at least refer to your KJV and quote the part where it says that the KJV is a translated work from the Hebrew and Greek?

No -- thank God.

 

[MoonLancer]

No, King James was not gay.

Oh? maybe he was just bisexual then.

 

[MoonLancer]

Um ... no.

I did hear that he was a Homo [sapiens] though; is that close enough?

And for the record, King James did not translate the Bible.

Ofcourse silly. You expect a king to do such tedious work? Are you saying he had no influence on the translation? Because he did. He dictated just as God did. So to stand where you are and say this it is a kin to saying god had no part in the bible.

 

[AV1611VET]

The 47 translators of the King James Version of the Bible were well established and accomplished scholars. King James I did not like the Geneva Bible nor the "official" Bishop's Bible, so he originally commissioned 54 translators to revise the scripts, paying special attention to the Hebrew and Greek original manuscripts.

According to Gail A. Riplinger, the KJV translators only used them as a reference tool.

Where are they today?

I've made this point before ... how could the KJV translators, the Bishop Bible's translators, and the Geneva Bible's translators all have used the [so-called] original manuscripts, and still be nearly word-for-word with each other?

Supposedly the other scholars did the same thing (using the Classical Greek originals), and look what all we have today: the NIV, NASB, ASB and etc.

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh? maybe he was just bisexual then.

I don't care if he worshipped Satan -- Tan made a good point:

He didn't like the Geneva Bible and he didn't like the Bishop's Bible -- (Wanna guess why?) -- so he ordered a new translation.

But in doing so, and if Tan is correct about him, then he played right into God's hands and gave us the final Translation -- the AV1611.

Do you think it's any coincidence you guys don't like It today -- just like James I didn't like the Geneva or Bishop's?

 

[MoonLancer]

My friend, I'm going to say this with as much respect as I can find about the Greek language -- specifically the Classical Greek --

On second thought ... nevermind.

I'll just use my favorite example about how corrupted it became:

The word "sin" in the Classical Greek, all it is is a sports term -- right?

Specifically, it means 'to miss the mark'?

(I believe Satan's favorite language is Classical Greek; but of course, I can't prove it.)

No -- thank God.

LOL Greek is evil and satan's language. So the KJV was translated from satan's language?