Acceptable reasoning concerning the KJV

Ransom

Shut up, man
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,127
Reaction score
180
Points
63
You commented as if you believed it.
Today's episode of "Inept Mind Reading" brought to you by moonbat_undivided.

When James said the Geneva Bible was the worst, and I said It was actually the best, did some part of that confuse you?
 
Last edited:

treasure_unseen

Active member
Registered
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
904
Reaction score
47
Points
28
Today's episode of "Inept Mind Reading" brought to you by moonbat_undivided.

When James said the Geneva Bible was the worst, and I said It was actually the best, did some part of that confuse you?
This is what you said...

it was actually the best translation available at the time; what James objected to was not the text, but the notes, which were highly political and anti-monarchy.
There is no indication that you disagreed.
 

Ransom

Shut up, man
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Registered
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
8,127
Reaction score
180
Points
63
There is no indication that you disagreed.
There's no indication that you understood, which is why you're being ignored by me now on this thread as having nothing worthwhile to say.
 

tmjbog

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
140
Points
63
There's no indication that you understood, which is why you're being ignored by me now on this thread as having nothing worthwhile to say.
I must disagree with you. It's not just on this thread that he has nothing worthwhile to say.
 

robycop3

Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Points
6
And you ridiculously believe what he said? He was a chronic liar and enemy of God. The proof is the notes found in the KJV that largely matched what the Geneva had already done.

Despot King James hated that the Geneva translated the Scripture in a manner that countered the narrative that he was the ruler of every man under God.
Actually, what KJ hated were the Geneva's marginal notes, especially those that basically stated it was OK to rebel against a tyrant. When he gave the Anglican clerix permission to make a new Bible version, he instructed them to not include too many extratextual notes. (Remember, from the time of Henry VIII onward, the British monarch was head of the Anglican Church.)
 

treasure_unseen

Active member
Registered
Joined
Mar 20, 2020
Messages
904
Reaction score
47
Points
28
Actually, what KJ hated were the Geneva's marginal notes, especially those that basically stated it was OK to rebel against a tyrant. When he gave the Anglican clerix permission to make a new Bible version, he instructed them to not include too many extratextual notes. (Remember, from the time of Henry VIII onward, the British monarch was head of the Anglican Church.)
He hated the God represented in the Geneva Bible. You know God's Word produced by exiles from the English monarchy.

You're buying the false political narrative. "King" James was plotting and plotting people try to hide their motives behind the best intentions. He was a liar, a murder and a thief. His desire to rule all men under His authority that he said was given to him "by God" came from Satan.

It amazed me that some of you will talk of how Tyndale and others gave their lives to authorities to bring the Scriptures to English and you turn right around and readily accept this despot kings actions at "face value".
 
Top