King James bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SaintJVMan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
252 words in the post and only 7 weren’t simply copied and posted, and I’m still not sure what point your trying to make.
 
“YET THE KING JAMES VERSION HAS GRAVE DEFECTS.” And, “THAT THESE DEFECTS ARE** SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS** AS TO CALL FOR REVISION . . .”

The KJV is based on the ancient manuscripts (400-600 yrs after Jesus)
The RSV is based on the most ancient manuscipts (100-200 yrs after Jesus)…Naturally more closer to Jesus,more authentic.
 
Rai said:
“YET THE KING JAMES VERSION HAS GRAVE DEFECTS.” And, “THAT THESE DEFECTS ARE** SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS** AS TO CALL FOR REVISION . . .”

The KJV is based on the ancient manuscripts (400-600 yrs after Jesus)
The RSV is based on the most ancient manuscipts (100-200 yrs after Jesus)…Naturally more closer to Jesus,more authentic.
Click to expand...

Which is why the vulgate is the most correct, however as luck would have it this thread is not about the vulgate, or the RSV bible its about the KJV.
 
40.png
SaintJVMan:
Which is why the vulgate is the most correct, however as luck would have it this thread is not about the vulgate, or the RSV bible its about the KJV.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t the LXX be even more authentic? Lol.
 
Psalm45:9:
Wouldn’t the LXX be even more authentic? Lol.
Click to expand...
Well I don’t speak Greek, and I would not mind having the New Testament as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top