John 5:3-4 Is it Scripture?

[kevinmiller]

Kevin. I'm so glad to hear you can read probably 20 words in Greek. I guess I was waaaay off the mark in my comments that you really have no idea what your are talking about. You have restored my waning faith in you as a scholar and a gentleman.

As if not having an extensive knowledge of Greek makes me ignorant... At least I know how to use common sense, something that is seriously lacking here.

As for the original 4 links you gave, all of these texts were written AFTER the KJB came out in print. Now you post another one dealing with Stephanus. Are you aware of the fact that the KJB translators did not always follow the Stephanus readings? Naw, probably not.

Okay, Will. You tell me, what did they follow? Did an angel whisper in their ear?

Did the King James Bible drop out of the sky? Well, almost, but not quite. My belief is that God Himself has promised to preserve His perfect words in a real and tangible Book here on the earth till the Lord Jesus Christ returns in power and glory. Heaven and earth shall pass away but His words shall not pass away.

I believe God sovereignly guided the KJB translators in both their selection of textual readings and the resultant correct meanings in the English language. I do not believe there is a single error in the KJB other than the occasional printing errors that have been made and corrected over time.
I do not believe that any other bible is the pure and perfect words of God.

Facts, proof, anything? Anything at all? Do you really have anything to contribute outside of your "faith" in something that has no grounding in simple logic or in the Bible? Why was the KJV "sovereignly guided?" And please don't give me circumstantial evidence. The truth is, you just don't know.

You talked before about Luther's German which omitted 1 John 5:7 and seemed to imply it was just as good as the KJB. You mentioned also the Geneva bible even though it has totally different meanings in about 100 verses I know of, and then you told us you really didn't know much about it or Luther's bible.

You then told us that you did not know of any other TR version that omitted verses. Well, I will be happy to inform you that Tyndale omitted the whole verse of Luke 17:36 "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."

If Tyndale omitted this verse, then is it still the perfect and complete words of God?

Tyndale also had a horrible textual error in Luke 2:22 where the true Bible (the KJB) says "when the days of HER purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished..."

There was a blood sacrifice made to atone for the sin of the woman, but nothing was to be offered for the male child, and much less for the Son of God according to Lev. 12:6-8. Yet here Tyndale says "for HIS purification". Wrong text and wrong theology.

At least I admit when I don't know something rather than making up some irrational story lacking in any kind of substance to hold up my weak arguments that are guided by my faith in something that is neither logical, nor Scriptural.

Perhaps we can discuss the differences between them when we have decided on why the KJV sets the standard and whether or not it dropped out of the sky in 1611.

I and many others believe in a perfect and infallible Bible and it is the King James Bible. You on the other hand are not quite sure where it is, and recommend a great variety of contradictory versions and wildly different and conflicting Greek texts, of which you say you can read some 20 words. I congratulate you on the depth of your expertise in these matters.

I know where the Bible is, I have a KJV in my bedroom. I also have a Korean Bible. Wildly different conflicting texts? Better be worried about that KJV of yours. It was translated from them. Umm...here's a revelation, the KJV is a translation! :idea:

Oh, and having clever talking points doesn't make you an expert either.

[chev1958]

Gentlemen, let's play nice now. :thumb