Subj : Re: I am third
To   : Bogomips
From : jimmylogan
Date : Mon May 19 2025 14:52:18

-=> Bogomips wrote to jimmylogan <=-

 Bo>   Re: Re: I am third
 Bo>   By: jimmylogan to Bogomips on Sat May 17 2025 08:02 pm

 > I agree 'modern interpretation' is a problem, but why do you say the
 > Bibles were written less than 100 years ago, and how to satisfy man?
 >
 Bo> The reason being, there are newer versions that leave out scripture
 Bo> that is originally in the KJV. It is my belief that a person can read
 Bo> whatever they like, but if your going to teach, make it the KJV

I have had MANY discussions about this very topic recently...

I don't knock ANYONE for wanting to study the KJV themselves,
but to insist that it's what should be TAUGHT and nothing else?
That I don't agree with...

Can you give an example of scriptures left out? And when you say 
left out of the KJV, you realize that things like the NIV are NOT
translations OF the King James, but go back to the original 
languages...

And one more question - and I'm being totally serious about this - 
why KJV and not 1611? Or Tyndale? They were "English translations"
before the modern King James (and no, not talking about what is
called the New King James.)




.... AAAAA - American Association Against Acronym Abuse
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
 þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

.