Is the TR Equal to the Autographs?

[abcaines]

I thank God for the texts, but they are just written words until holy men of God bring them to life through teaching and preaching.

I value preaching highly, but I think your statement is an overreach, at least what it seems to imply the way it’s written. The word of God doesn’t need any human being to bring it to life. Inspiration, as defined in evangelical history, means that the word of God is alive already and it doesn’t require any human being to teach it to make it alive. A person can read it for themselves without any other agency and it is very much able to bring life to the reader, absence any other human being.

Holy. Spirit.

 

[JimKnox]

I thank God for the texts, but they are just written words until holy men of God bring them to life through teaching and preaching.

Not true.
Prov 4:22, John 6:63, Heb 4:12.
These Scriptures, many others, teach that the actual WORDS on the pages of the Bible are LIVING.

Sorry but you misspoke this time.

 

[Ekklesian]

My conclusion is that we have an exact inerrant, complete copy of an inerrant translation in the 1769 edition of the AV1611 and no other.

How do you know? Did Jesus read from it?

Yep.

I'm still waiting to hear how Jesus read from the 1769 edition of the AV1611.

 

[JimKnox]

I'm still waiting to hear how Jesus read from the 1769 edition of the AV1611.

Same way He read from "the originals".

 

[Ekklesian]

Same way He read from "the originals".

Which was...?

 

[JimKnox]

Which was...?

Not sure if "Reading is Fun" phonics method was available back then.

 

[Ransom]

Not sure if "Reading is Fun" phonics method was available back then.

But your school obviously had a lifetime subscription to "Making Assertions Without Evidence Is Fun."

 

[JimKnox]

But your school obviously had a lifetime subscription to "Making Assertions Without Evidence Is Fun."

Says the cultist.

 

[subllibrm]

My conclusion is that we have an exact inerrant, complete copy of an inerrant translation in the 1769 edition of the AV1611 and no other.

And this conclusion requires that we admit that the 1611 was not.

The claim has been made that the 1611 translators were led (inspired) to create an English translation without any errors. Yet they clearly failed if it needed to be fixed 158 years later.

What led to the revision of the perfect bible?

 

[Ransom]

Says the cultist.

The above meaningless whatever-you-call-t brought to you by the big brains at Big KJV, who think being retarded is just as good as actual evidence and reason.

 

[JimKnox]

The above meaningless whatever-you-call-t brought to you by the big brains at Big KJV, who think being retarded is just as good as actual evidence and reason.

The Alinskyite brainwashing accomplished upon your room temperature IQ is astonishing.

 

[Ransom]

The Alinskyite brainwashing accomplished upon your room temperature IQ is astonishing.

I know words with more than one syllable too.

​

 

[JimKnox]

And this conclusion requires that we admit that the 1611 was not.

The claim has been made that the 1611 translators were led (inspired) to create an English translation without any errors. Yet they clearly failed if it needed to be fixed 158 years later.

What led to the revision of the perfect bible?

Item #1:
The conclusion does not "require" any such admission since the 1769 edition IS the 1611 Translation. I think the concept of (editions) is misunderstood by this objection.
Item #1 is refuted.

Item #2:
Later typographical errors do not affect the Translation since the science of movable type and the printing press were still in its infancy. This fact is no different than the ancient process by which scribes copied Scripture. When an error on a given page occurred, they discarded that page and rewrote it.
Item#2 is refuted.

Item#3 has been answered.

 

[Ransom]

Item #1:
The conclusion does not "require" any such admission since the 1769 edition IS the 1611 Translation. I think the concept of (editions) is misunderstood by this objection.
Item #1 is refuted.

Item #2:
Later typographical errors do not affect the Translation since the science of movable type and the printing press were still in its infancy. This fact is no different than the ancient process by which scribes copied Scripture. When an error on a given page occurred, they discarded that page and rewrote it.
Item#2 is refuted.

Item#3 has been answered.

The KJV is inerrant, as long as KJVers are willing to make excuses for the errors.

​