/lit/ - Literature

>>23353650
The DRB says (1 Samuel 13:1) that Saul was one year old when he began to reign.

Another problem is where it says that the holy city was broken into by Babylon on the "fifth day" in Jeremiah 39:2, when it was really the ninth day, as reported by every translation here, as well as the DRB itself in 2 Kings 25:3 and Jeremiah 52:6, thus contradicting itself.

It contains a large number of other corruptions, such as the following:

–Genesis 3:15 "his heel" replaced with "her heel" in DRB
–Exodus 34:29 "his face shone" replaced with "his face was horned" in DRB (saying Moses had horns)

–2 Samuel 21:19 "the brother of Goliath" replaced with "Goliath" in DRB (contradiction with 1 Chronicles 20:5, and that David killed Goliath)
–Psalm 2:12 "Kiss the Son" replaced with "embrace discipline" in DRB (removal of Messianic prophecy)

–Isaiah 14:12 "Lucifer" replaced with "morning star" in DRB (replacing the name of the devil with a name used specifically by Jesus, see Revelation 22:16 and 2 Peter 1:19; And no, the English definition of "Lucifer" is not equal to the Latin definition; it means Shining One, not "Morning Star")
–Zephaniah 3:15 "see evil" replaced with "fear evil" in DRB (following the (((Ben Asher))) Masoretic text, which the New King James also uses, rather than the Daniel Bomberg uncorrupted Hebrew text of 1525 which the KJV uses)

–Matthew 5:22 "without a cause" removed in the DRB (falsifying a saying of Christ, making it sound like He said all anger is sinful, even with a cause)
–Mark 1:2 "in the prophets" changed to "in Isaiah the prophet" (creating another contradiction as Mark quotes both Malachi and Isaiah, not only Isaiah)

–John 4:42 "Christ" removed in the DRB
–Acts 2:30 "Christ" changed to "the fruit of his loins" in DRB

–Acts 23:9 "let us not fight against God" removed in DRB
–Romans 11:6, second half of this verse (the logical converse) removed in DRB

–1 Corinthians 6:20 "and in your spirit, which are God's" removed in DRB
–1 Corinthians 10:28 "for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof" removed in DRB

–Galatians 3:17 "in Christ" removed in the DRB
–Ephesians 1:6 "he hath made us accepted in the beloved" changed to "he has blessed us in the beloved" (or "gratified us" in the older 1610 edition)

–1 Timothy 1:17 "wise" removed in the DRB
–1 Timothy 3:16 "God was manifest in the flesh" changed to "which was manifested in the flesh" in the DRB

–2 Timothy 2:7 "and the Lord give" changed to "for the Lord will give" in DRB (optative verb δῴη changed to indicative mood)

–Hebrews 10:34 "in heaven" removed in DRB
–James 5:16 "faults" changed to "sins" in DRB

–1 Peter 2:2 "unto salvation" added in DRB
–2 Peter 2:17 "for ever" removed in DRB

–1 John 4:3 "Christ is come in the flesh" removed in DRB
–2 John v. 3 "the Lord" removed in DRB

–Jude v. 25 "wise" removed in DRB (comp. 1 Tim. 1:17)
–Revelation 22:14 "do his commandments" changed to "wash their robes" in DRB

This is the start of the problems with the DRB.

>>23106500
Right, because the Bible is directly inspired by God. So it's not made up, it's divinely revealed and all of the writers of the Bible have this in common. That's also why Jude knew about the angels that are "reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." Because of divine revelation.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
- 2 Timothy 3:16-17

"But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ."
- Galatians 1:11-12

>>23053196
That apostasy goes back at least as far as Constantine and the Synod of Lateran (313) and Synod of Arles (314).

Fortunately God preserved the church, and His word also, despite the existence of yet more false prophets. They, like the gnostics (Marcionites), tried and failed - naturally - to emulate the church, which is God's institution on earth, and is the pillar and ground of the truth like it says in 1 Timothy 3:15. One of the most important realities of this is that the Scriptures were kept and preserved within the churches, eventually leading to the Geneva Bible of 1560, an English translation which is largely the same as the King James, and similar translations being made in other languages around the same time.

>>22894888
>Who’s to say what’s in accordance with the Holy Spirit and what isn’t?
The Holy Spirit is to say, obviously. It's not up to any of us, but God. Didn't I just tell you? God is real, so this is entirely possible and indeed happens. In Luke it says this:

"And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?
Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?"
- Luke 11:9-13.

So then, you might very well have not because you ask not, or because you "ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts." It's as simple as that.

>The Scofield Bible was made with the express purpose of turning American Christians into zionists. I don’t think the Holy Spirit had much of a hand in that.
You'd probably be surprised how many people are too concerned with what others are doing rather than focusing on their own walk, and they never seek guidance from God at all, while seeking the truth as such, studying and praying. In some cases their whole lives perhaps they never do this. It really is that direct, I believe.

>>22868036
Yes I would go with the King James Version, also known as the Authorized version. Because it's based on the Received Text.

>>22711213
The hypocrisy in this regard is very easily explained. The whole point is, they are projecting their own evil fantasies on the Christians, and it is in fact, and has been them who are introducing and trying to implement these very same things. Any other supposed target for criticism is just a stand-in for the campaign against the biblical worldview, which is the real target of these people because they hate it. They despise the truth and refuse to accept it.

If they did accept the truth, they wouldn't be what they choose to call themselves.

The strategy for these people is just to put out enough propaganda, and pump out so much propaganda, so that they will have the truth get drowned out by a so-called firehose of falsehoods. They create problems intentionally, with things like false flag attacks and agents provocateur.

Any other dichotomy that they present to you apart from their persistent attack on Christianity is just a puppet-show meant to distract us. The supposed conflict they present to us, whatever the form it takes, is a hegelian dialectic, where both their thesis, and their antithesis both have the presuppositions they want already built in, and they as the theater-masters proceed to amplify it, that is, their own perverse creations and twisted ideologies, left and right, endlessly in the media. However the Bible is the one truth they can't stop which exposes these people and what they are doing. Amen.

>>22401781
>>22401784
You're all reprobates and scum of the earth in my mind.

>>22401740
Pic unrelated, btw.

>>22390045
Corroborated by real-world evidence.

Don't @ me, atheist psychopaths.

>>22313561
Next I would write out the text for Philippians 2:6, John 1:1, John 5:18, John 8:58, Colossians 1:16, Colossians 2:9, and so on. Colossians 2:9 is especially strong for the teaching that Jesus is fully God in addition to being fully man. But if someone has already denied everything that you have, they will also deny and contradict the rest as well, no matter how much of the Scripture is posted. 1 John 5:7 is part of Scripture too, by the way. I know that doesn't suit you and your preferences, but it's no reason to get bent out of shape over.

>>22311926
>I thought it argued in favour of forgiveness and "turning the other cheek" (i.e., allowing people to do you harm and "rising above it").
It does because of the following:

"Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good."
- Romans 12:17-21

Basically, it's living in a way that acknowledges God and leaves place for the Lord to take vengeance. There is no possible way you can live like this without believing in God taking an active role in protecting you and taking care of your needs.

But if you think about it, God has already been doing this for us anyway, but we have been failing to properly acknowledge Him. Jesus is telling us to live in a way that acknowledges God in everything that we do. That is the only way in which any of this makes sense.

>>22286148
>find out why Christians HATE comedy
What about what it says in Proverbs?

"But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:
26 I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;
27 When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.
28 Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:
29 For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord:
30 They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof."
- Proverbs 1:25-30

>>22283708

>>22254019
Read the book of Proverbs

>>22241380
>>22241855
There are no contradictions in the King James Bible.

>>22241868
Atheism is a blind faith religion for proud fools.

>>22239725
The King James Bible

I guess that's cheating a little bit since it's really 66 books.

>>22221464
>he posts on /lit/ more than reading any books
>he has never read the King James Bible, the most influential book in the English language and influential for other literature

>>22214367
>these are quoted by early theologians, e.g., Origen's First Principals.
So what? Origen was heterodox and most likely mutilated himself.

>The received text is thus winnowed by history.
It's been universally recognized by the church in all ages, whereas other texts have not been. The words of men have come and gone, like fads that appear and then fade away, they've been degraded by corruption and lost or partially lost and sometimes recovered or rediscovered over time. They are fallible by comparison to Scripture, and the words of man are not God-breathed or inspired. Consider the following from the biblical perspective:

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you."
- 1 Peter 1:23-25

"For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe."
- 1 Thessalonians 2:13

"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail."
- Luke 16:17

Since the schizo discordmod is ruining /his/ right now, let's discuss the BIBLE, a collection of 66 book written by 40 different authors here.

Friendly reminder, you will die in your sin and perish if you don't repent. If you don't forsake your wicked and evil ways and turn to God, you will perish. Just look at Ezekiel 19, Isaiah 55:6-7, Luke 13:3 and 5, and countless other verses. There's also Matthew 5:17 for the hypocrites who claim Christ destroyed the law and prophets.

Contrary to what all your fag-loving apostate churches and what the whore of babylon's son of perdition and that cult's harlot daughters have to say about God's judgement; if you don't repent, you will perish.

If you even just regard iniquity, or sin, or lawlessness, or disobedience to God's laws, in your heart, God won't even hear you. He won't waste his time listening to some unrepentant sinner like you. Most of you don't even want to admit your sins are sins, you just want to claim to be saved and claim to be righteous while you refuse to stop sinning.

Christ, the baptist, and Christ's apostles all preached repentance. I thought /his/ was past this fundamental basic teaching of Christianity, but apparently not. This also includes mary-worship, idolatry, lying, stealing, homoism, fornication, and the lies could just go on and on. This also includes violating God's biblical sabbath or keeping the Roman sun-day-sabbath rather than obeying God.

As Peter said, we ought to obey God rather than men. Obeying God would mean obeying God's laws rather than the traditions of rome. Yet they claim peter is a pope!

>>22117687
>Matthew says a guard was stationed outside the tomb
It also says the guards "became like dead men" when the angel rolled back the stone, which happened before any women showed up. The fact other Gospels don't focus on them isn't a contradiction. Find where any Gospel explicitly says there "were no guards" and then you can post here about this again.
>Mark records 3 women, Matthew records only 2 women, Luke says at least 5 women,
If there are 5 women, that means it is possible to focus on 2 or 3 of them. None of them say there were "only" or "exactly" X number of women. Similarly the fact that two men were cured that had been possessed of devils according to Matthew 8:28 doesn't contradict the fact that Mark and Luke only focus on one of them in their accounts.
>John records only Mary Magdalene who then goes and gets Peter and the other disciples.
Just because John focuses on Mary doesn't mean the other women can't exist. It never explicitly says Mary was alone when she came to the tomb either. In fact, other women must have been there because while Mary was going to Peter + John, the other women are going to tell other disciples when they encounter Jesus, so they must have split into different groups, and the Gospel of John focuses on Mary. Very easy to explain.

>Mark says they arrive after sunrise, Matthew says about dawn, Luke says before dawn
Luke says "very early in the morning," not "before dawn." No contradiction.

>Also, Matthew says the stone is still in place in front of Jesus' tomb while the other three say it was rolled away already.
Matthew describes what happened before the women arrived (while they were still on their way to the tomb). Anything else you need to know about this?
>Also, who do they women meet at the tomb? Mark says one young man is there, Matthew says an angel is there and Pilate's guards are also there, Luke says two men suddenly appear there, John says the women never enter the tomb, but there are two angels there.
Matthew says that the angel rolled away the stone from the tomb and the soldiers "became as dead men." This is before any women arrived or while they were still traveling to the tomb for the first time.

Mark says it was a young man clothed in a long white garment. Angels appeared as men, so that isn't a contradiction - See Judges 13:6-11 where an angel of the Lord is described as having the appearance of a man.

Also, no issue with the fact that Matthew and Mark just focused on what one angel did and said.

>John says the women never enter the tomb, but there are two angels there.
That's a separate encounter with two angels after Mary got Peter (and John) to come to the empty tomb and they left, with Peter "wondering in himself at that which was come to pass." Mary stays behind after this, and sees two angels inside the tomb, one standing at either end of the place where Jesus laid. Also, this resembles the two cherubim which stood on either end of where the Ark was, in the Holy of Holies.

>>21887920
"Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?
11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin."
(John 19:10-11)

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."
(Romans 13:1-2)

>>21601872
>then Jesus should not have said anything about Peter being the rock and confusing everyone.
Hmm, that's not what Matthew 16:18 says. I get what you're trying to say here but there's no possible way Christ didn't know people would misinterpret His words. In fact in John chapter 6 a lot of people left Jesus after He made some statements that they misinterpreted and got offended by. I don't think that was accidental, rather, the people who are not fit for God - or perhaps just not ready yet - will hear what they want to hear and miss what God is really saying in these passages. That's why Jesus often says, let him who has ears hear. The implication is that there are going to be people who misunderstand, these being the proverbial people who do not have ears, as opposed to those that do have an ear to hear.

Christ also said in John chapter 10:

"But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.
3 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice."
(John 10:2-4)

So basically, those who are His will hear. Those who are not will not grasp the meaning of the parables or the teachings, and the miracles done before their eyes won't even convince them. Like it says in John chapter 12:

"But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
38 That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them."
(John 12:37-40)

So you see, if people would just take Jesus at His word, they would be able to understand. The problem is many people are blinded and always inject their own false meaning into everything. That's why they misinterpret things like Matthew 16:18, and many other things besides, reading what's not actually there. Anyone that truly has ears to hear can understand regardless. I can prove it, since Jesus said so all of those times, and I know that God never does anything in vain or for no reason. Those whom God has blinded and hardened (for good reason, as typical of God who is infinitely good) are unable to see, hear, or be converted. It's no surprise you've got people running around saying all kinds of ridiculous things about the Bible then, or living their lives in complete opposite of what it says. That situation is purposeful by God due to God's infinite wisdom. Their inability to grasp is a sign that God has judged them.

>>21603508
God's word says that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20). So technically there is only one truth.

>>21373725
"For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator."
- Heb. 9

William Tyndale wrote this explanation:
Evangelion (that we call the gospell) is a Greek word; and signifieth good, merry, glad and joyful tidings, that maketh a man's heart glad, and maketh him sing, dance, and leap for joy. As when David had killed Goliath the giant, came glad tidings unto the jewes, that their fearful and cruel enemy was slain, and they delivered out of all danger: for gladness whereof, they sung, danced, and were joyful. In like manner is the Evangelion of God (which we call Gospel; and the New Testament) joyful tidings; and as some say, a good hearing published by the apostles throughout all the world, of Christ the right David how that he hath fought with sin, with death, and the devil, and overcome them. Whereby all men that were in bondage to sin, wounded to death, overcome of the devil, are with out their own merits or deservings, loosed, justified, restored to life, and saved, brought to liberty, and reconciled unto the favour of God, and set at one with him again: which tidings as many as believe, laud praise and thank God; are glad, sing and dance for joy. This evangelion or gospell (that is to say, such joyful tidings) is called the new testament. Because that as a man when he shall die appointeth his goods to be dealt and distributed after his death among them which he nameth to be his heirs. Even so Christ before his death commanded and appointed that such evangelion, gospell, or tidings should be declared through out all the world, and there with to give unto all that believe all his goods, that is to say, his life, where with he swallowed and devoured up death: his righteousness, where with he banished sin: his salvation, where with he overcame eternal damnation. Now can the wretched man (that is wrapped in sin, and is in danger to death and hell) hear no more joyous a thing, then such glad and comfortable tidings, of Christ. So that he cannot but be glad and laugh from the low bottom of his heart, if he believe that the tidings are true. To strength such faith with all, God promised this his evangelion in the old testament by the prophets (as Paul sayth in the first chapter unto the romans). How that he was chosen out to preach God's evangelion, which he before had promised by the prophets in the holy scriptures that treat of his son which was born of the seed of David.

>>21056769
>The King James Version (KJV) is NOT the same content, as the historic 1611 King James Version.
The KJV went through a few revisions where the spellings were standardized. In the original printing you have words with extra 'e' letters attached (i.e. "bee" instead of "be"), weird spellings ("flowre" and "floure" alternate spellings in James 1:10-11), and randomly placed & signs, in order to get even lines on the page with the archaic printing plate technology. The 1769 revision was the main source of spelling updates, although it continued to receive slight updates to make it more consistent up until about 1900. Many people refer to the KJV currently in use as the "1900 KJV" to be specific about the edition everyone is using.

The New King James was released in 1982 and is a completely and totally different translation. It's also based on a falsified and corrupted text, so that for instance it says "His servant Jesus" instead of "His Son Jesus" in Acts 3:13 & 26, and "will restore" instead of "hath turned away" in Nahum 2:2. They also mistranslated 2 Kings 23:29 to say "went to the aid" instead of "went up against," which leads it to directly contradict the parallel passage in 2 Chron. 35:20 which still says the same thing. So the New King James Version is actually a completely different and unrelated translation to the KJV.

>>20999103
>Which one? There’s a thousand editions.
You mean a thousand different printings? Yes, there are probably tens or hundreds of thousands of separate print runs of this book, because it is a very prolific translation. They are all representing the same translation. I have studied this subject, the only thing that changed was the spelling format, as well as typos being corrected. Especially within the line of Bibles printed by Cambridge between 1629 to 1885. People continued to correct or adjust minor details until around 1900, and the version that I always quote from is known widely as the 1900 KJV. It is the basis for almost everything printed since then, it can be found here: https://biblia.com/books/kjv1900/

>They all contain known errors since we now have access to more and earlier manuscripts than they had then.
Actually that's not really true. John Mill, a compiler of the Greek text in 1707, pointed out that Stephanus and other TR editors had access to manuscripts some of which might not have survived to today, so we don't necessarily have more. And as long as what we have matches the earliest manuscripts, namely the originals, that is all that matters. Thanks for stopping by, anon.