1 2 3 4 5 7
#54379
Broken Egg
So... a variation between the original manuscript (which would have been the original word of god) and an edited, rewritten version (done in a completely different language no less) means that the original manuscript, the first Christian Bible, is wrong? What? It's not like you've got scientific evidence backing up the authenticity of the King James Version versus the original Hebrew texts.
7/20/2006 12:23:00 PM
#54383
Adrian
Too stupid for words...
7/20/2006 12:29:02 PM
#54385
Troff
Amazing. Can't vote, the scale is inapplicable. If he was a fundy, he wouldn't hold this opinion. He's just a wannabe fundy, except for the fact he's too ignorant. Of his own religion, no less...
Why, in the name of mercy does fundamentalism (or religion in general) require (or result in) such ignorance?
7/20/2006 12:30:42 PM
#54388
Pike
Logic wasn't a part of this person's education. Yet another child left behind...
7/20/2006 12:38:46 PM
#54395
NotMe
This is just pathetic He acknowledges a \"original\" Hebrew text but claims that it is wrong when compared to his non-original?
Maybe he should get a rebate from his school.
7/20/2006 12:53:43 PM
#54397
mkb
WTF, over?
7/20/2006 12:54:13 PM
#54404
noself
Demented as it may seem, there appears to be a group of ultra extreme KJVers who believe that the KJV is the ONLY inerrant Word of God TM because it was divinely inspired. The rest was written/transcribed by falliable humans.
I mean cannonisation occurs and there's the whole Gnostic thing
7/20/2006 1:07:41 PM
#54405
Julian
Jebus weren't no stinken Joo!
7/20/2006 1:14:12 PM
#54421
Prager
Let me see if I understand this: A translation of the original text into a new language after which the authority of the original is denied and the translation becomes the accepted text. Is that about it?
7/20/2006 1:28:01 PM
#54427
Star Cluster
Correct you are, noself. There is an ongoing exchange of letters to the editor of a local newspaper concerning this very thing. There are quite a few that argue that the KJV is the ONLY true and correct version of the Bible.
7/20/2006 1:46:24 PM
#54433
Hadanelith
The ignorance is spreading...
7/20/2006 2:04:16 PM
#54442
David D.G.
Noself, Star Cluster: They think that the KJV is the ONLY inspired Word of God (TM)? What the heck do these people think the previous versions of these books over the preceding centuries were -- God's uninspired rough drafts?
Seriously, this kind of bloody-mindedness is simple insanity. That's just too stark a break with even the fundies' own reality to make any kind of sense.
~David D.G.
7/20/2006 2:12:43 PM
#54452
Puistokemisti
This has got to receive some award, but I just cannot figure out what award would do justice to this...this..I don't even have words to descripe this.
7/20/2006 2:24:23 PM
#54456
Dante's Virgil
If he's such an unshakeable fan of the KJV, I'd love to know where he thinks all the unicorns it references have gone.
7/20/2006 2:29:14 PM
#54469
Star Cluster
David: Apparently. I'm just reporting what I've seen in print, sports fans. I don't profess to understand them. Even in my \"faithful days,\" I wasn't this mind-numbingly stupid.
7/20/2006 2:50:06 PM
#54475
HeatheNZ
What a numbskull. Everyone knows that the Good News Bile is the one and only truely dictated word of god.
7/20/2006 2:57:39 PM
#54479
TDR
you got dropped on your head a lot, didn't you, kid?
7/20/2006 3:03:25 PM
#54480
gregfl
This demonstrates the danger of fundie thinking.
My bible is right, even if the translation is shown to be wrong!
7/20/2006 3:03:45 PM
#54501
Dr. Major
Note to everyone, original WRITTEN bible was in Aramaic, a precursor to Hebrew.
7/20/2006 3:27:25 PM
#54506
Talisman
Originally posted by \"
Note to everyone, original WRITTEN bible was in Aramaic, a precursor to Hebrew.
Somehow I doubt that would mean much to
AV1611VET.
7/20/2006 3:38:55 PM
#54517
Papabear
First, no originals of any Bible books exist.
Second, the OT was likely originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, but the NT was written in Greek.
Third, the KJV was translated from the few, relatively late manuscripts which were available at the time; hardly what one would call \"original.\" Compared to some newer translations which utilize many more ancient manuscripts now available, the KJV contains many more errors and forgeries.
Last, you're an idiot.
7/20/2006 3:57:08 PM
#54520
Papabear
Dante's Virgil -- Unicorns? Dragons got 'em all.
7/20/2006 3:58:56 PM
#54525
ND
Holy shit. This guy has got to be one of the most stupid, ignorant human beings ever.
7/20/2006 4:22:23 PM
#54534
Blurb
Look, until you can learn to read chicken-tracks etched on papyrus or some ancient stone tablet, all your versions are wrong.
7/20/2006 4:38:19 PM
#54536
Sandman
Oh please tell me this guy isn't claiming that the translation is more accurate than the original source...
I don't even think there is a name for that logical fallacy, is there? Or has this guy actually invented a NEW one?
If so can we call it the \"AV16 Error\" in honor of him?
7/20/2006 4:41:00 PM
1 2 3 4 5 7