This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
reformed baptist stated correctly that NIV readers will know this if they read their marginal notes or footnotes.
The next question is did Matthew and/or Mark actually write those words?
The reason the NIV places them in footnotes is because manuscript evidence isn't conclusive that they...
I agree with kiwimac.
KJV only type thinking only sounds convincing when one takes isolated verses out of their context. If I am selective with my verses, I can also make the KJV sound bad compared to modern translations.
But verses aren't to be read in isolation. They are to be read in...
One major flaw with this kind of debate is the circular argument that the KJV is correct. It comes across in various ways.
An example is concluding that modern version omitted, cut out, or removed verses such as Acts 8:37.
Isn't it possible that 8:37 was added in some manuscripts and...
About Acts 8:37, there has been no Greek manuscript prior to the sixth century that contains it. Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus do not contain it. On top of that two papyri have been discovered that contain this section of Scripture but lack verse 37: p45 & p74. When both Vaticanus and...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.