McBell
Unbound
how about "Johannine Comma"?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Challenge for those that believe in billions of years for the age of things. Give anything that is more than 6000 years old. NO ASSUMPTIONS ALLOWED.
- Thread starter SavedByTheLord
- Start date
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Brevity is the soul of wit
Very true. Though recently I have been using the ten year discrepancy between the two years of birth in the Nativity myths. He could not seem to understand that Cyrenius and Quirinius was the same person, with merely different anglicizations of the original Greek spelling of a Latin name.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Only the word of God counts not the translation notes.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You don't know which is which at times.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Have you already forgotten the date of Jesus' birth and the census?
This is the problem you've made for yourself. If you always ignore the answers you're given, why should anybody bother giving you any more? Why should anybody take you at all seriously? You're turning yourself and your version of god into a joke.
You were given a massive discrepancy / error in the previous post .. The Long ending of Mark in the KJV is a forgery.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
There is just the ending of Mark 16 in the KJB with 20 verses.
Based on that, what was this supposed discrepancy?
The translation notes are the word of God at times .. ? Do you not understand what the word of God is ? and in many cases .. the Translation note is there to point out an error .. such as the note provided to you on the Long ending of Mark .. telling us the KJV is in error .. conflicting with God's word ..
The footnote in the NKJV is as follows - ( Mark 16:9 Vv. 9–20 are bracketed in NU as not in the original text) ..
What part of "not in the original text" = error/discrepancy/addition/interpolation/Pious Fraud - are you not understanding ?
Bible A .. Mark 16 has 8 verses
Bible B .. Mark 16 has 20 verses
The discrepancy is based on the fact that 9 verses have been added to "Gods Word"
Further Troubling .. is the fact that these 9 extra verses are not trivial to the meaning of the text .. and further .. that these 9 verses contain the smoking gun on which Salvation is based ..
There is no proof of the "Resurrection" of Jesus after death in the original version of the story. Christians of the day believed in the promise of the Resurrection .. but God does not reveal the proof of the resurrection in the original version of Mark .
Do you understand the discrepancy ? 1) no proof of resurrection 2) absolute proof of resurrection ?
Do you understand the Pious Fraud ? 2) adding a whole new chapter to the story of Jesus .. proving that Jesus was raised from the Dead .. "Put your finger in the Hole where the spear was"
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
That makes no sense.
The King James Bible has 20 verses in Mark 16 and there is no other Bible to compare that to.
So, the KJB has 20 verses in Mark which match the 20 verses in Mark 16 in the KJB word for word.
So where is the supposed discrepancy?
As far as I have seen, all flat earthers are YEC.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
You still haven't justified your idolatry of the KJV in any way that isn't patently circular.
I'm a bit if an amateur invertebrate paleontologist. Taking a YEC fossil hunting is the height of entertainment.
Of course we can compare the KJV to other Bibles .. how can you show a discrepancy between Bible A and Bible B .. if you can not compare to Bible B ?
The discrepancy is shown by comparison with another Bible. How else would one show a discrepancy ?
A YEC believes that they can calculate age of the earth by adding up the years that people in the old testament lived starting with Adam.
You just pointed out another curiosity. Flat earthers, tend to be YEC and KJV only.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
I know of no King James Bible user is a flat earther
Although the pagan forbears believed it,
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
And of course that makes no sense.
If someone makes a copy of the Mona Lisa it proves the Mona Lisa is false.
And if someone pretends to be you, you never existed.
Wow what a crazy theory.
But that is how desperate the evolutionists are.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
The problem is that the KJV is the copy - and not a very good one. You have never once justified the absurd claim that it is as your god intended.
What you are talking makes no sense .. that I will grant .. but none of what you are talking about was the argument being made.
When we compare the KJV to the Codex Sinaiticus there are discrepancies .. The word of God has been changed. This having nothing to do with a someone pretending to be you friend. and everything to do with the fact that there is huge discrepancy ..huge difference in the text from one to the other.
Do you understand that these discrepancies in the text have nothing to do with deperate evolutionists, . .. and that modern Bibles .. including the modern KJV .. goes to great lengths to point out the fact that this discrepancy exists .. and there is even a name for this discrepancy among theological types .. "Long ending of Mark" .. as opposed to the shorter ending that God intended.