Not only must you speak English these days, but also read only English:

[Bluebear]

:eyes:

=======

...Yes, that is a great company. I bought one of their large print version (old eyes... what can I say?).

The only thing I don't like about them is they sell foreign language versions of the KJB. (King James Bible) I don't think that's right. We know the only true translation is the 1600's version in English.

It's too risky for anybody to translate that into other languages. Mistakes can creep in... and that can lead to heresy. True Christians should only read English....

PLease don't put words in my mouth. I'm not very good at debating so I'll try to explain myself better. I didn't mean to suggest other cultures can't learn about God in their own language.

I AM saying this: If they are going to study the true Bible, their goal should be English. Because a Bible translated into another language CANNOT be the true word of God. Either you believe that the KJV is the only true word of God, or you don't. Simple.

http://www.kjbchurch.com/forums/index.php?topic=121.msg838#msg838

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. So the guys who wrote the bible wrote it in English?

Wow I had no idea :eyes:

[Bluebear]

3. Yes, the apostles evidently lived around London

:crazy:

[Solon]

5. Londonium, and they probably spoke a pidgin of Latin and Celtic, Briton Celtic most likely. n/t

[SoCalDem]

6. I heard it was in Missouri... n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. No silly, that was the Garden of Eden

and it's in Kansas, not Missouri.



http://www.roadsideamerica.com/attract/KSLUCeden.html

[Solon]

2. So the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic versions aren't authentic?

Anyone want to break the news to these folks that those were the languages spoken and written by those people in the Bible?

[Solly Mack]

4. LMAO...snort...giggle...oh fuck....that's stupid cubed

[Madspirit]

11. "stupid cubed"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[SoCalDem]

16. Oooh, a new appellation for Bush is born

*²=stupid³

[Solly Mack]

17. and that's NOT fuzzy math

Perfect!!

[Breeze54]

7. Who cares what fairy tales they read or don't read and in what language?

Fairy tales are fairy tales in any language.

[anotherCTliberal]

20. LOL brilliant

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

8. You know what that reminds me of? Muslims and the Koran.

They think the Arabic version is the only one that counts.

Now, at least their version is the original one. Going all fundie about a TRANSLATION is way lamer.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. The 1600s version?

Would that be the Rosin Bible, the Sinners Bible, the Judas Bible, the More Sea Bible, the Unrighteous Bible or just the plain, vanilla King James Version?

[Madspirit]

10. k&r...ROFL

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[GRLMGC]

12. Lovely. I especially enjoyed this little statement

"Since the KJV is the word of God, then how can you say a translation into Arabic or Mexican is OK?"

And all this time, I though Mexicans spoke Spanish. How ignorant of me. :sarcasm:

[whistle]

14. Were they still pouring hot oil down the throats of Protestant heretics

...who were blastfeaming the word of God when the KJB was being transcribed and printed in the late 16th and early 17th centuries?

<snip>
By the 1580's, the Roman Catholic Church saw that it had lost the battle to suppress the will of God: that His Holy Word be available in the English language. In 1582, the Church of Rome surrendered their fight for "Latin only" and decided that if the Bible was to be available in English, they would at least have an official Roman Catholic English translation. And so, using the corrupt and inaccurate Latin Vulgate as the only source text, they went on to publish an English Bible with all the distortions and corruptions that Erasmus had revealed and warned of 75 years earlier. Because it was translated at the Roman Catholic College in the city of Rheims, it was known as the Rheims New Testament (also spelled Rhemes). The Douay Old Testament was translated by the Church of Rome in 1609 at the College in the city of Douay (also spelled Doway & Douai). The combined product is commonly referred to as the "Doway/Rheims" Version. In 1589, Dr. William Fulke of Cambridge published the "Fulke's Refutation", in which he printed in parallel columns the Bishops Version along side the Rheims Version, attempting to show the error and distortion of the Roman Church's corrupt compromise of an English version of the Bible.

King James I With the death of Queen Elizabeth I, Prince James VI of Scotland became King James I of England. The Protestant clergy approached the new King in 1604 and announced their desire for a new translation to replace the Bishop's Bible first printed in 1568. They knew that the Geneva Version had won the hearts of the people because of its excellent scholarship, accuracy, and exhaustive commentary. However, they did not want the controversial marginal notes (proclaiming the Pope an Anti-Christ, etc.) Essentially, the leaders of the church desired a Bible for the people, with scriptural references only for word clarification or cross-references.

<MORE>

http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

[sinkingfeeling]

15. Yep, the KJB was put on the earth in English. Nobody had to do any

translation. Everybody knows Jesus and god spoke perfect English and can't understand a thing said (prayed for) in anyother language. And it sure has been proven that translating anything is 'too risky' and could let 'mistakes creep in'.

[angstlessk]

18. You do know King James was a homosexual? Do they?

google king james and homosexual..there is a plethora of informaiton out there!

[TlalocW]

19. Well, if English was good enough for Jesus

It's good enough for me!

TlalocW

[REP]

21. "Mistakes can creep in..."

The KJV is a great work of literature, but it's full of intentional mistranslations, such as "poisoners" being rewritten as "witch," to cite just one well-known example.

[Bluebear]

22. "It's too risky!"

:silly: