[Samuel]

I suppose when you have two codices, that don't even agree with one another. You have to use a scientific Theological approach. You simply take a Quarter flip it, Heads I win, Tails you loose, that settles it.

So that being the case, who could go wrong with Wescott and Hort ??.

[Brother Tim]

Flipping coins would have been heretical, most certainly!

They did the only fair thing. Westcott got to pick his favorite reading for one verse, and then Hort got to pick the next!

[Samuel]

Oh! ok I see now.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Jordan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIzmRvAeDJM

God bless brothers

Jordan, like Tim, I was willing to talk to you, with patience, and I still am. What I want from you is your participation. Honest participation, this is not a comedy club. This is dead-serious spiritual business. This is not Fightin' Fundamentalist Forum, where both sides can shoot in and out with quick drive-bys. This is a forum of substantial personalities and as such, you are going to have to face the fact you are no longer a child, but a man.

You have a most impressive little website and come off as an authority. People not as knowledgeable as you come there, and you need to face the responsibility of what you are presenting because as a man, in the eyes of God you are responsible. For them and their decisions. You need to be dead right on your presentations, because if you defraud a brother or sister in Christ, their cry to the Lord will not be unheard.

My first question to you is, are you the perfect man of God mentioned in verse 17 below? I want you to read these three verses carefully. Those who oppose those of us in this forum who maintain the position that the KJV is the only Bible for the English speaking world claim that verse 16 below applies only to the "original manuscripts". I want you to read verse 15 and answer my second question: Did Timothy have the original manuscripts? Simple yes-no binary questions, there is no middle ground, there are no third alternatives.

2Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

You asked questions that gave birth to this thread, I answered to the best of my ability in the time I had to answer them. I want reciprocation. I want answers and commentary from you on both these questions above. I want to know what you're made of. I want to know if you are honestly seeking answers or if you are a thrill-seeking phony as some feel you are but are being polite and not enunciating. I'm honest, you're one of the two, turning point has arrived. If I want to hang out and have a slap-fight with thrill seeking phonies, I'll spend all my time in Fightin' Fundamentalists Forum and forget this forum. I was your age once and there is not a thought in your head I don't know about. When I was your age I was in the embalming room of a funeral home making decomposed bodies presentable for their families. I literally had to put dead babies back together who had been thrown into chain link fences from moving cars. Answer my questions to the best of your ability as I did yours. If not, you're a thrill seeking phony. If you answer them, then you'll have earned one of the building blocks of a man: Respect.

Grace and peace to you.

Tony

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Well, George, I must eat crow here. I was willing to give a young man some space to get a little learning and growth. You saw one who was already hardening against the truth. I yield to your experience, for he has revealed himself.

I'm going to sit back and see if my two questions are answered Tim. We've been good hosts to Jordan here, I wonder if he would host one of us on his site and let an opposing viewpoint be heard or if he's what we called on the street ministry, One-Sided & Double Minded?

I'll wait patiently.

Grace and peace to you.

Tony

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Flipping coins would have been heretical, most certainly!

They did the only fair thing. Westcott got to pick his favorite reading for one verse, and then Hort got to pick the next!

Was it the Mad Hatter in WESTCOTT IN HORTLAND who chanted:

"Conflate, Conflate
I really must conflate.
Lucian has combined these verses,
Now I must conflate..."

Glaze and Peas

senoB ynoT

[Jordan]

I want to apologize to all the KJB Bible believers here. I stepped over the line with the video, and have since removed it. I would like to apologize for that and hope that you will all forgive me. I would like to ask though, I have a KJB, but it says it's an 1873 edition? What's the difference between this and the 1611? Thanks guys, and God bless!

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Jordan

I want to apologize to all the KJB Bible believers here. I stepped over the line with the video, and have since removed it. I would like to apologize for that and hope that you will all forgive me. I would like to ask though, I have a KJB, but it says it's an 1873 edition? What's the difference between this and the 1611? Thanks guys, and God bless!

I seem to recall I had the Scrivener, is it cast into paragraphs without any verse divisions?

BibleProtector probably would know more, I do not have a copy of the '73.

Grace and peace

Tony

[bibleprotector]

Yes, Scrivener's has no verse divisions but paragraphs: he also changes many words, including changes to the underlying text as presented English, as well as casting doubt upon 1 John 5:7, etc.

[peopleoftheway]

Bibleprotector answered this in another thread

The 1769 Edition is the basis of today's printings, but there are still differences between various editions today.

Now, the 1873 Scrivener Edition is one of the worst, because it makes all kinds of changes to the King James Bible that are unauthorised, and are plainly wrong.

Now you asked forgiveness for your KJV onlyism video, I forgive you.

Luke 17:3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.

Question that only time will tell and the Lord will know, have you repented? Do you seek truth of the Bible issue or are you still here to pursue an agenda against the KJB as the inerrant word of God?

The printers in those days didn't have spell checker, word processors, and various other such tools, individual text blocks were placed individually BY HAND. I have been in the Graphic design / Printing trade for 12 years (currently unemployed), I have experience of modern printing and a little knowledge on the processes used many years ago

We can divide the changes into 3 categories
Spelling - Printing - Textual

If you look anywhere on the web for images of the 1611 edition you will see that It looks quite different from what we have today almost unreadable, this is because the 1611 typeset was Gothic. Gothic is also known as geramic as it originated in Germany. Where printing was invented, the Gothic typeset was used to resemble the hand written letters of the MIDDLE AGES
In 1611 the Gothic typeset was soon to be changed to Roman type which wasn't quite as elegant as Gothic text but would soon replace it as the preferred typeface.
If you have never read or studied Gothic it is hard to imagine the Look of the text, words did not change, but looking at the text some of the letters LOOKED like other letters because of the form they took, for example
The Gothic "s" looks like the Roman "s" when used as a capital letter or at the end of a word. But when it is used as a lower case "s" at the beginning or in the middle of a word, the letter looks like our "f."
Another variation is found in the German "v" and "u." The Gothic "v" looks like a Roman "u" while the Gothic "u" looks like a Roman "v." This explains why our "w" is called a double-u and not a double-v.
A point you raised in your video (thankfully removed for your own sake)
you mentioned the spelling in those days of Jesus (which Bibleprotector clarified on another thread)
The Gothic "j" looks like our "i." So Jesus becomes Iefus (notice the middle "s" changed to "f") and joy becomes ioy. Even the Gothic "d" had the stem leaning back over the circle in a shape resembling that of the Greek Delta. These changes account for a large percentage of the "thousands" of changes in the KJV, yet they do no harm whatsoever to the text.


Below is a list taken from "The answer Book" By Sam Gipp

KJV REVISIONS BY THE YEAR, FOR PRINTING ERRORS.
(note: the printing press had been invented in 1450 by Johann Gutenburg in Germany. Remember that translators did not have word processor's, IBM PC's or spell checking software!)

1613 A.D. thy right doeth ---corrected to--- thy right hand doeth
1616 A.D. which was of our father's ---corrected to--- which was our fathers
1617 A.D. Seek good ---corrected to--- seek God
1629 A.D. requite good ---corrected to--- requite me good
1629 A.D. this book of the Covenant ---corrected to--- the book of this covenant
1629 A.D. chief rulers ---corrected to--- chief ruler
1629 A.D. For the king had appointed ---corrected to--- for so the king had appointed
1629 A.D. The cormorant ---corrected to--- But the cormorant
1629 A.D. The crowned ---corrected to--- Thy crowned
1629 A.D. which was a Jew ---corrected to--- which was a Jewess
1629 A.D. the city ---corrected to--- the city of the Damascenes
1638 A.D. And Parbar ---corrected to--- At Parbar
1638 A.D. For this cause ---corrected to--- And for this cause
1638 A.D. a fiery furnace ---corrected to--- a burning fiery furnace
1638 A.D. now and ever ---corrected to--- both now and ever
1638 A.D. this thing ---corrected to--- this thing also
1743 A.D. the wayes side ---corrected to--- the way side
1762 A.D. shalt have remained ---corrected to--- ye shall have remained
1762 A.D. Achzib, nor Helbath, nor Aphik ---corrected to--- of Achzib, nor of Helbath, nor of Aphik
1769 A.D. returned ---corrected to--- turned

My question is, are you really interested? Or will you still wilfully overlook the many many textual changes and ommisions contained in modern apostate versions, that have been translated from weak, false, roman catholic, philosophy leavened texts, that most of all affect DOCTRINAL issues with their error. not just spelling and grammar as the changes in the KJB have done.