Agreed. The Bible is a book of theology, but what I am bringing up is the information (what the apostles wrote) that the theology is based on. Theology doesn't tell you what the apostles wrote. Theology is just the study of that information.Well…the Bible is primarily a book that deals with theology. That is its purpose. It is the sole authority for Christian theology. The Bible focuses on God’s redemption of sinful man. The main character throughout the pages of scripture is Jesus Christ.
Sure, we have an English Bible that tells you that information, but we wanna go back as close to the source as possible, which is what even the English translators do, and that's done by looking at the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts - typically, the earliest we have.
You've made some points, but none that I've seen that would justify the claim that the KJV is the best, esp. in light of the KJV not relying on all of the manuscript evidence and text interpretation methods that modern versions rely on.I have presented several points why I believe the KJV is the best translation for English speaking people. There are false claims, contradictions, omissions and altered doctrine in many of the newer versions. Nothing has been offered to show the KJV is inferior to these newer translations. None of the problems I pointed out have been addressed. Ignoring them or sweeping them under the rug does not resolve the issues newer translations have.
Well hey, an eye for an eye, and an opinion for an opinion..You are more than welcome to “think” that. But what do you base your thought on? Do you have some insight concerning scribes adding their own work while transcribing? Or is this solely your opinion? I haven’t just offered my opinion; I have offered irrefutable evidence to support my belief the KJV is superior to newer versions. I welcome any evidence that the NIV, NASB, HCS, or any other version surpasses the King Jimmy
