Members Jordan Kurecki Posted November 22, 2014 Author Members Share Posted November 22, 2014 Walk into your Church bookstore, pick up the college textbook on exegesis, read the intro where the editor thanks Zondervan for the use of the NIV on CD to aid in his study. Then get back to me on "corrupt". not sure what exactly you are getting at? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members prophet1 Posted November 22, 2014 Members Share Posted November 22, 2014 not sure what exactly you are getting at? Not rocket science. The tools you're being taught to study Greek with are corrupt. Tomorrow, if you haven't already purchased it, go into the church bookstore and pick up the college textbook on exegesis, go to nearly the end of the intro, and read that the editor used the NIV on cd, to enlighten the exegesis of the Greek of the TR (which no one actually owns a copy of anyways). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Miss Daisy Posted November 23, 2014 Members Share Posted November 23, 2014 how would you know what books he's using? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Genevanpreacher Posted February 22, 2015 Members Share Posted February 22, 2015 The original 1611 did include the Apocrypha, but it with a note that it was recommended reading rather than scripture.​Just out of curiosity and not trying to 'fight', but where is this 'note'. I have an exact facsimile and a 'reprint' of the original 1611 and it says that no where.http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-Esdras_1_1611/You must be thinking about the Geneva Bible, where it has the 'argument' at the beginning of the Apocrypha, stating such.https://archive.org/stream/TheGenevaBible1560/geneva_bible1560#page/n773/mode/2up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 22, 2015 Members Share Posted February 22, 2015 Testing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 22, 2015 Members Share Posted February 22, 2015 Testing​Interesting, I posted three times here previous to this and it wouldn't show up but this does... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 22, 2015 Members Share Posted February 22, 2015 Now it won't let me post a copy/paste. Why?I'm using Firefox right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 22, 2015 Members Share Posted February 22, 2015 This short bit is inconclusive, and the best I've found so far trying to find more about the KJB and apocrypha, so if anyone has any more specific information on the matter I would appreciate it being posted here.http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Apocrypha-Books/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Steve Schwenke Posted February 22, 2015 Members Share Posted February 22, 2015 try using google chrome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Genevanpreacher Posted February 22, 2015 Members Share Posted February 22, 2015 Just out of info that I am aware of, the 1599 and various editions of the Geneva bible before the KJB, Â had the Apocrypha removed from them by various people after they were printed, so that it is pretty much a 50/50 chance of a Geneva having the Apocrypha in them. I have seen multiple editions of the KJB down through the years, and most, dating from 1611 through the early 1700's, all had the apocryphal books in them, with verse references to them mixed in with all the other verse references that are normal. As for the text itself, the 1611 King James Apocrypha is quite different from the Geneva Apocrypha, and most of the objections people give for them being 'riddled with errors' is not evident in the Geneva Bible Apocrypha. In fact many verses that are in the Geneva Apocrypha don't exist in the King James Bible Apocrypha, nor in most Apocrypha sections of the pre-1611 bibles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 23, 2015 Members Share Posted February 23, 2015 I was more speaking to arguments regarding why the Apocrypha was included in the KJB and why it was later removed. There are various arguments about this but most I've read don't include a lot of sourced facts.The Geneva Bible I have, which is boxed away right now, doesn't include the Apocrypha. Other than the facsimile of the original KJB, none of my KJB's include the Apocrypha either.I've found it interesting over the years that while preaching the Apocrypha isn't Scripture, some pastors will still point to certain Apocryphal books and quotes from them as authoritative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Ukulelemike Posted February 23, 2015 Moderators Share Posted February 23, 2015 There are certainly interesting things to read in the apocryphal books, but except in the Catholic church, no one has ever considered them as canon or trustworthy. They certainly add strange doctrines, as well as some areas that are blatantly in opposition to Bible doctrine.As I understand, the book of Judith is about a prophet during the time of Jeremiah, who is supposedly given direction from God to tell the people that they are to stand and fight the invading Babylonian armies, while we know that Jeremiah told them to stand down and surrender and accept God's discipline, and He would protect them and the land and the temple, and bring them back. So Judith was telling them just the opposite of what Jeremiah was telling them. One is wrong. So they are interesting, but dubious, at best, outright false at worse. Jim_Alaska and eswarden 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members heartstrings Posted February 23, 2015 Members Share Posted February 23, 2015 I was more speaking to arguments regarding why the Apocrypha was included in the KJB and why it was later removed. There are various arguments about this but most I've read don't include a lot of sourced facts.The Geneva Bible I have, which is boxed away right now, doesn't include the Apocrypha. Other than the facsimile of the original KJB, none of my KJB's include the Apocrypha either.I've found it interesting over the years that while preaching the Apocrypha isn't Scripture, some pastors will still point to certain Apocryphal books and quotes from them as authoritative.​Yes, Didn't the "angels cohabiting with women" thing come from the "Apocrypha" too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Genevanpreacher Posted February 24, 2015 Members Share Posted February 24, 2015 ​Yes, Didn't the "angels cohabiting with women" thing come from the "Apocrypha" too?​I think you might be referring to the Book of Enoch which is not in any Bible but is a coupla different books on their own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted February 24, 2015 Members Share Posted February 24, 2015 The History Channel tells us over and over again there are many "lost books" and "banned books" of the Bible out there and without knowing and reading those we don't really know the whole story. After all, these shows they repeat over and over again all have the same thesis which is the Bible isn't right, complete or good.If you don't like those programs, wait until the next night and they will provide programs explaining away much of the Bible based upon ancient astronaut theories or something similar. John Young 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.