Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfly
I don't care what may or may not have been in the original. The story is in the ONE TRUE BIBLE 1611 KVJ! Unsaved trash may read whatever bible they like, but if they're lookin for a map to Heaven, It's 1611 KVJ or they may as well read a romance novel for all the good it does them.
|
Boy, did you just imply that
I am unsaved trash?!
Even King James made mistakes. After all, his Bible also contained the Apocrypha, but we all know THAT isn't really part of the Bible either.
For more info, follow the link I provided.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Jo...8Translated%29
"Thanks for your superb analysis, Michael, from which I learned immensely.
For the record, the ideological objection is not to how liberals "twist" this passage, but how the passage itself is written in such a liberal way that it renders its authenticity doubtful. It would be akin to discovering a passage that said something like this: "Jesus then said that government should take from the rich and give to the poor." Historical analysis can prove that to be non-authentic; political analysis can reach the same conclusion more efficiently and with a high degree of certitude.
Jesus did not forgive without repentance, yet the Adulteress Story claims He did. Jesus did not comment on capital punishment, yet the Adulteress Story claims He did. Jesus was not permissive about adultery, yet the Adulteress Story He was. Older people are not always wiser than younger ones, yet the Adulteress Story claims they are. And so on."