Effective evangelists?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Finally a cogent reason.

Okay, please identify some CONFLICTING passages for us.

Romans 16:24 NIV....No such verse.

KJV...The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

[Sean]

Here is a ton of them...https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...89-x73v3nYXpAA

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Sean

Romans 16:24 NIV....No such verse.

KJV...The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

That is not a CONFLICTING passage. A conflicting passage would be where a single passage is translated two different ways that conflict with one another. Like if one version "ye must be born again" and another said "you don't need to be born again".

Please provide examples, not a google search results page.

[Sean]

A missing passage is not a conflict?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Sean

Here is a ton of them...https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...89-x73v3nYXpAA

Again...check this out Esaias...

[Esaias]

Never mind.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Never mind.

You kill me

[Sean]

Bible translation
Passage NIV NASB NKJV RSV NRSV ESV NCV TLB REB HCSB AMP CEB CJB CEV ERV GW EXB GNT Knox LEB MSG Mounce NET NIrV NLV NLT OJB
Matthew 9:34 F
Matthew 12:47 O F F F F O F F F F
Matthew 17:21 O B F O O F O F F B F O O O F O O O O O F
Matthew 18:11 O B F O O F O F F B F O O O O F O O O O O O
Matthew 21:44 F O F F F B F O F F F F O F
Matthew 23:14 O B F O O F O F B F O O O O F O O O O O O
Mark 7:16 O B F O O F O O F B F O O O F F O O O O O O
Mark 9:44 O B F O O F O O F B O O O O O F O O O O O O
Mark 9:46 O B F O O F O O F B O O O O O F O O O O O O
Mark 11:26 O B F O O F O O F B F O O O O F O O O O O O B
Mark 15:28 O B F O O F O F F B F O O O O F O O O O O O B
Mark 16:9–20 F B F F F B F F B F B F F B F B B B B
Luke 17:36 O B F O O F F B F O O O O F O O O O O O
Luke 22:20 F F F O F
Luke 22:43 F B F O F B F F F B+F B F
Luke 22:44 F B F O F B F F F F B+F B F
Luke 23:17 O B F O O F O O F B F O O F O O F O O O O O O B
Luke 24:12 O F F O F
Luke 24:40 F F F F F
John 5:4 O B F O O F O F F B O O O O F O O O O O B O B
John 7:53–8:11 F B F O F B F F B F B B+F B
Acts 8:37 O B F O F F O F F B F O O O O F O O O O O B O B
Acts 15:34 O B F O O F O O F O F O O O O F O O O O O O B
Acts 24:7 O B F O O F O F B O O O O O O O O O B
Acts 28:29 O B F O O F O O F B F O O O O F O O O O O O B
Romans 16:24 O B F O O F O F B F O O O O F O O O O O B




Esaias...are you curious now(what this is)?....see the site and it will help.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Great post, but rdp please expound on the back-translation of Erasmus. I understand that he wrote down the book of Revelation pretty much from memory? He used a commentary which he found on the book of Revelation, but the commentary was missing the final pages so therefore Erasmus winged it? Could you show that information please? If you have any detailed research on this I would love to read it. Also thank you for the above post.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Yes, RDP, I too would like to see more info on this.

*First, I am currently taking more classes on-line in Greek & have much catch-up work to do tonight - so my time will be limited.

*Second, Sean's "arguments" would be howled off of a stage in academia-proper (e.g., DTS, Harvard, Yale, etc.)...Well, in reality, he would never make it the platform in the first place .

*Here is a list of links that will supply all the relevant data from text-critics such as Dr. Daniel Wallace. Also, though I do not like his pompous spirit (typical "Calvinist") - Dr. James White has some very informative video-lectures on these matters (which I reluctantly include below).

*Gail Riplinger's "information" was ripped the shreds sooooo long ago - & demonstrated to be completely false data. I am including the debate she did with James White below wherein White exposed her outright false data.

*Anyone still using Riplinger as a source wouldn't know text-criticism if it bit them on the knee-cap. I assume that Sean uses the Apocrypha since it wasn't removed from the KJV until 1885 - and there are two versions of the current Blaney Revision, Oxford & Cambridge...Hmm, wonder which one is "inspired"? {They differ from one another in numerous places.} Plumb silly.

*Oh, & no, the term Textus Receptus is a Latin term coined by the Elzevir brothers many years after the original 1611 KJV was printed (again, Sean has no earthly clue what he's talking about - & seems quite happy to be ignorant in this area). Links below:



*https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-n...vailable-today



*

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Sean

Again...check this out Esaias...

,..

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...89-x73v3nYXpAA