Re: King James Bible ONLY! ... give me a break
Loading...
Loading...
603
views
Link to this comment:
Share to:
Loading...
- 10:09Did you know that "Jesus" was not in the 1611 KJVby chazaqkabad25,413 views
- 0:55hey KJV onlyists - check this outby quickpost12345643 views
- 8:48Re: King James Only? ... The Final Wordby marcuslebeau668 views
- 2:41Typical dialogue with KJV onlyistby bretlcarpenter596 views
- 1:06My Challenge to the KJV Onlyersby ancienthebreworg4,341 views
- 8:39Schaap: King James is not God's Preserved or In...by jleu77730,724 views
- 6:25King James only people lets talk...by Dremias554512,647 views
- 7:15Re: GET A GOOD BIBLE, A "HOLY BIBLE"! KJV 1611 ...by REVPIPSTER1,816 views
- 4:30King James version ONLY!by preachinshawn197 views
- 8:49King James Version only?by lovejesusplz1,509 views
- 1:32King James only? I challenge youby CovertAgent78,968 views
- 2:46Why I believe KJV1611 bible is the word of GOD ...by 1611baptist7,054 views
- 2:42Challenge To King James Onlyistsby newagain197724 views
- 9:12Kent Hovind on the KJV: Reply Part 2by DrOakley16899,987 views
- 1:56New World Order Solution 2008by truthseekerlibrary4,870 views
- 40:53Once Saved, Always Saved ? ... The Final Wordby TicTocMinistries33,435 views
- 6:35The KING JAMES ONLY MOVEMENT - Why they are MIS...by ppsimmons13,725 views
- 1:29Why I believe KJV1611 is the word of God 10th r...by 1611baptist2,303 views
- 6:34Is the King James Bible the only Bible?by Just0A0Though1,366 views
@alexmcginness No, you ignorant plagiarist, you openly admit that you can’t read any Greek or Hebrew, and the only thing you learned on YouTube was how to spam comments.
As KingJamesBible wrote succinctly, "What's with this translate or shut up stuff? The King James is ALREADY translated perfectly! How do you improve upon perfection? Anyone living today who thinks they can translate greek BETTER than the KJV translators is an incredibly stupid and PROUD person."
Learn to read, troll.
boggymark1 1 month ago
@alexmcginness How in the world is worshipping on the first day of the week preventing a person from being able to buy or sell as the mark of the beast will. Man, I sure am glad I don't roll w/ a works-based religion like yours.
filoIII 5 months ago
@alexmcess
When (if ever) did you come under the conviction that you are a lost sinner on your way to hell, "Trucker Bob,"?
There are no "errors" in the inerrant King James Bible as an irrefutable matter of historical fact, but you antichrist liars without exception who are Biblical illterates in English, Greek and Hebrew are all headed for a hopeless eternity without Christ in a lake of fire where the smoke of your torment will ascend forever according to the Holy Scriptures in any language.
jjpetkusiii 5 months ago
@aless LOL!
As RainhadoCanto4 wrote succinctly, "This is hilarious!! I guess you have run out of 'legitimate' reasons for bashing the King James Bible!! Now you go after those who believe in it for the manner in which they express themselves!
"Paranoia setting in? I have no doubt they also speak more intelligibly!!
""A good man obtaineth favour of the LORD: but a man of wicked devices will he condemn.'
"Proverbs 12:2"
Hell awaits you as all you unsaved liars are headed for the lake of fire.
jjpetkusiii 5 months ago
@alexmess
Your faulty "premises" (barely intelligible) contradicts not only elementary logic and common sense but the Holy Scriptures starting with Acts 2 also. For example, I could cite languages by the dozen into which my comments could be translated without, errors, omissions or additions. So could any number of legitimate polyglots, and no factual error in the Scriptural text of the King James Bible--which is verbally inerrant in English as a matter of historical fact--has ever been proven.
jjpetkusiii 5 months ago
@alexmcginness ROFLOL!
As edwardpf123 wrote succinctly, "Do you realize that what you said doesn't even make sense? Try to follow, even though it might overtax your brain. There was no BC LXX. Christ didn't quote anything from it. The current LXX we have is from the 3rd century AD and Origen had the NT Mss in front of him when he was editing the LXX and matched the NT quotes to the match the LXX readings. So, you haven't proven that a BC LXX was ever in existance-it wasn't."
jjpetkusiii 5 months ago
@boggymark1 Amen, Brother!
There are no errors anywhere in the AV1611,
As RainhadoCanto4 wrote succinctly, "Here [are] the 'revisions' to the King James Bible:
"1. 1612: Typography ( from Gothic to Roman type).
"2. 1629 & 1638: Correction of typographical errors.
"3. 1762 & 1769: Standardization of spelling.
"The 'Board of Managers' of the American Bible Society in 1852 determined that 'The English Bible as left by the translators has come down to us unaltered in respect to its text...'"
jjpetkusiii 5 months ago
@jjpetkusiii Amen!
There are no errors in the King James Bible, and as handydude6 put it, "The question is the Textus Receptus vs the rest. The Textus Receptus had spread all over Europe, N. Africa, and Russia, by... the Council of Nicea. All of the bibles agreed except for the Septuagint which is OT, and the Vulgate. That was 99% of the works against 1%. So we are to believe that the Septuagint and Vulgate which have been resurected in the New Bibles are the true gospel? I don't think so."
boggymark1 5 months ago