Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | justanotherchristian | 98534 | ||
OUTRAGE AND DISAPPOINTMENT!!!!!!! There is much to be admired in the NASB, but I can see that even in your latest revision, you have left 1 John 5:7 out of the text. I know your reasons - but I also know why it should be left in (not the least of which ia a matter of grammar). AND I see that you INCLUDED that verse in your new SpaNish translation - ??????? HUH? WHY is 1 John 5:7 good for the Spanish but not good for the English?? LISTEN!.... myself and a million others are waiting for someone to present us with an IMPROVEMENT (but not a butcher job or unwarranted change change)over the 1769KJV - and whoever would do that would sell millions. What is it with you folks that you cannot see that 1 John 5:7 and Romans 8:1b etc. ought to be LEFT INTACT in their places? FOR THIS ONE REASON ALONE (your EXclusion of 1 John 5:7 (and etc.), I cannot recommend or give away your NASB. IF you ever get around to producing a Bible that does not have verses removed from the text, I am right here and ready to buy. I BUY AND SEND BIBLES to Kenya.... those folks could use a more modern English than the 1769KJV (the NKJV is also corrupted and I know where) - but I have not found it yet. EXAMPLE: "falling away can and should be replaced with "apostasy" and "let" should be replaced with "hinder/restrain" - but we do not need to have 1 John 5:7 (a MOST crucial verse for The Trinity and the practical equality between God The Son and God The Word) removed!!!! PLEASE fix this problem right now and issue us a Bible in modern, literal English, that has all the text that's in the KJV. PLEASE???????????? |
||||||
2 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | flinkywood | 98539 | ||
Hi, Justanotherchristian, I also thought long and hard over the KJV v. modern translations issue, which boils down to a variety of textual differences and varients within those differences. You can do a search on this site and find a wealth of discussion on this. I prefer the Textus Receptus and the language of the KJV, but use these other translations (NASB, ESV, NKJV) with mucho gusto. Search under "textus receptus" "King James only" "translation". You'll find loads of info. Colin |
||||||