Jump to content

Love Fountain

Members
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Love Fountain

Recent Profile Visitors

283 profile views
  1. Interesting only because I’ve never seen anyone present Synonymous Parallelism in Hebrew Poetry according to the sense? In all my years of studying Hebrew Poetry, I’ve always seen it presented according to the Thought and the Thought Structure. May I please know which scholar you are following that teaches Hebrew Poetry and Synonymous Parallelism according to the sense?
  2. Interesting post, I think you meant to say Genesis 4:23?
  3. Hi Faber, That is funny! It sure didn't turn out too well for the NASB! LOL Not only is the KJV correct in John 14:14 by leaving out "Me", so is the Geneva Bible and every single other Bible that leaves "Me" out in that verse! Not one single person has proven the figures speech of pleonasm and ellipsis in John 14:13-14 per what was shared to be incorrect! LOL No scholar denies Bullinger's work on the Figures of Speech in the Bible or they would be laughed out of their scholarly circles! Only thing thus far is nothing but emotional accusatory diatribes along with zero intellectual integrity throughout this thread! You, you, you, you, you, you and on and on...equals zero intellectual integrity! How about attacking what is shared and quit the personal attacks that always start with you...seems to be a real issue with some of the posters here! None would talk like that to someones face, so knock it off already! The earlier manuscript doesn't have it because it's better because it's closer to the source, in relationship is laughable! So laughable that no one even recognized the Cain and Esau references being older is better were Reductio ad Absurdum because to merely accept something closer to the source aka earlier manuscript is better because it's older would be as absurd as it comes! Yet eat and drink up, yum yum yum, yum yum yum! So please do tell, Does one pray to Son the first 6 hours of the day, then does one pray to the Father the next 6 hours of the day and then back to praying to the Son the next 6 hours of the day! LOL Nice try Faber! We started with only one to see how you handle it! Still waiting for your rebuttal...and proof the figures of pleonasm and ellipsis are not correct? Also laughable is how Faber and Origen can't answer two very simple questions about Mark 7:16! Still waiting... Is Mark 7:16 the word of God? Is Mark 7:16 original to the gospel of Mark? Wow, check it out, hovering over Mark 7:16 shows a pop up of the wrong verse in the ESV! LOL Oh and please leave the lukewarm footnotes out! LOL Either the the words belong or they don't, fence straddlers and luke warmers need not apply, just ask Laodicea! Either that which is in the footnote is spurious or it's not! What kind of wishy washy scholarship doesn't even know that? LOL Well hey, let's put it in the footnote just in case! LOL IN the name of Yeshua aka Jesus, be kinder to your brethren in Christ and stick to the subjects and quit the personal attacks! Love Fountain
  4. Hello davidtaylorjr, Anything man touches becomes tarnished! The originals were not written in English! God has provided many ways to fix what man has done so that the Berean Heart who searches the Scriptures for the truth with honesty can find God by searching with all his heart! The modern translation only supporters and their hatred of the KJV has spawned the KJV only movement and both are ignorant! This thread pitted the NASB vs. the KJV, in John 14:14, the KJV is correct and proven by the figures of Pleonasm and Ellipsis. Blessings, Love Fountain
  5. Hello Faber, In order to understand why the NASB has “Me” incorrectly in John 14:14 we must first understand that John 14:13-14 cannot be divided from each other! The reason John 14:13-14 cannot be divided from each other is because the two verses together form a figure of speech called Pleonasm , this figure is also known as redundancy! This figure has been utilized by God, to give more emphasis to what is being stated in the text. As shown below in the KJV of John 14:13-14, “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name…” or “if ye shall ask any thing in my name…” is the same thing repeated in a different way, which is a pleonastic figure of speech. John 14:13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14:14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. KJV The blunders of many of the modern literal translations/Bible versions, like the NASB is that they are so literal they have literally altered their versions of the words of God! Not only have they literally altered the words of God in their literal pursuit of what was not literal, they have literally neglected what God has written in a figure of speech to emphasize what is written. God uses figures of speech all over the Bible to give the students of the biblical text a more in-depth study and a more detailed understanding of what is written by giving more emphasis to the words in the Bible and their meanings. Thus far, more than 200 Figures of Speech in The Bible utilized in thousands of ways have already been documented in the biblical text. Most people and those who consider themselves scholars appear to have no idea or regard of all the figures of speech written in the Bible! The error of putting the word “Me” into John 14:14 is an example of the disregard or lack of knowledge regarding a couple figures used in many places in the Bible! The first figure disregarded in John 14:13-14 is called Pleonasm as noted above and the second figure of speech disregarded in John 14:13-14 is Ellipsis as shown below! Ellipsis otherwise called Omission is when a word or words are left out of a sentence because they are not necessary for the sense of what is written. In other words a grammatical figure of speech called Ellipsis is used when words are left out of a sentence because they are obvious to the sense of what is being stated! The words left out by Ellipsis are noted below in John 14:13-14 in [brackets] and clearly shows we are to ask the Father in the name of the Son for there is no other way, “that the Father may be glorified in the Son” if the Father is left out of the asking! John 14:13 And whatsoever ye shall ask [the Father] in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14:14 If ye shall ask [the Father] any thing in my name, I will do it. KJV Hope that helps! Blessings, Love Fountain John 16:23 And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you. 16:24 Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full. KJV
  6. Thank you for your response Faber and further explanation along with the links for me to review! With all due respect I do find the following statement rather pretentious, "Manuscripts written closer in age to the original would far more likely would be more accurate to what the author wrote", especially since we are discussing what is the true word of God! Anyway, I have looked at the links you shared and will continue to look more and hope to have some discussion with you regarding them, however and for now what do you think about Mark 7:16. Is Mark 7:16 the word of God and is Mark 7:16 original to the biblical text? Blessings, Love Fountain
  7. Thank you for your responses Origen! IMHO, the only false analogy is "better is older" or "the earlier manuscripts argument" without further explanation to someone asking kindly, so thank you for your further explanation. Common sense to one is not common sense to another, especially in light of the manuscript battle that continues on day in and day out to what is the actual word of God and what is not. Something done sooner by no means is common sense as to what was done correctly, neither is that type of reasoning effective to someone seeking truth other than what someone else merely states to be "their" fact. Onward we go, "A bad analogy cannot overturn critical evidence, sound reasoning, and years of scholarship.", supposed critical evidence, supposed sound reasoning, and supposed years of scholarship are overturned all the time whether some accept correction or not, sure doesn't make anything older better or more reliable to truth. How about we have a look at Mark 7:16. Is Mark 7:16 original to the biblical text? Is Mark 7:16 the word of God? Look forward to your response on Mark 7:16 per my two questions. Blessings, Love Fountain
  8. Thank you Davidtaylorjr for sharing "Fragments of Truth", the trailer was interesting but not interesting enough to buy it. I tried the free download of the discussion guide in various web browsers but it didn't work. Are you able to attached a .pdf link to the discussion guide so I can read it? As stated earlier, I'm not a KJV Only supporter but I do enjoy my KJV the most! In your post you suggest John 7:53-8:11 (woman caught in adultery) are not original to the Gospel of John, do you believe that to be true? Also, do you believe John 7:53-8:11 to be the word of God? Look forward to your response and hope you also have a .pdf of the discussion quide. Blessings, Love Fountain
  9. Thank you Everyone for the additional welcomes! Have a blessed day!
  10. Hi Faber, Interesting question indeed! A question that needs to be looked further into on all the verses you shared to see what has been added and/or removed and why the many differences in the manuscripts preferred by certain Bibles. The older is better or more accurate doesn't satisfy my search for truth and which words are truly God inspired! According to that type of logic would we say Cain was older than Abel and thereby Cain was the best and most reliable since he was earlier? Of course not! We know how that worked out! Would we say Esau was best and most reliable since he was older than Jacob? Of course not! Are there any other reasons you have accepted the "earlier manuscripts" you refer to to be more accurate NT manuscripts or do you know of a more convincing approach than older is better that could help me understand why you think the manuscripts used for the KJV deleted out what you shared in the OP? Blessings, Love Fountain
  11. Hi Faber, Totally agree with "what were the words that God inspired" and happy to hear you enjoy the KJV too! Then why did the NASB add so much that you presented since the KJV truly didn't delete them since the KJV was already in existence without them prior to the NASB? By the way thank you for your questions in the original post, it adds to many things I've been looking at now for sometime about additions/deletions in various Bibles. Blessings, Love Fountain
  12. Hi, KJV is my preferred Bible but I'm not shy to look at all others in comparison to each other. Blessings, Love Fountain
  13. Hello Faber, While I'm not a KJV only person by any means, I do enjoy my KJV and it's my go to Bible of choice. That being said, all your questions ask why the KJV has removed many things, however isn't it true that the KJV was before the NASB? Therefore the KJV doesn't appear to have removed anything on your list since it was before the NASB? Therefore wouldn't the questions be why has the NASB added so much? Blessings, Love Fountain
  14. Hi Brady, Edgar J. Goodspeed's Apocrypha is the one I read and recommend. It also includes the 70 verses in 2Esdras chapter 7 that are sometimes missing in other translations. Not sure if it's in leather but it can be found in many places for an affordable price. Here is a link to it for you reference Goodspeed Apocrypha link Hope that helps! Blessings, Love Fountain
  15. Thank you Everyone! Appreciate your welcoming! See you around the forums.
×
×
  • Create New...