King james was gay!

[thebrucebeat]

It's a shame when you have to attack to justify your behavior. Might I ask, if King James was gay, what does the gay left gain? What does the gay left gain by attacking Christianity and people of faith?

Do you people really believe that only Christians oppose poor lifestyle choices?

Not one from the gay left even attempted to answer my questions.

Those are two questions.
Which would you like an answer to?

 

[Chuckt]

None of the earliest ones belonged to the church. Where do you think the church got the copies they copied from?
NONE of the earliest manuscripts include the story. If one was found in a trash dump, that doesn't tell you who owned it before or how it got there. It doesn't address all the others that leave this story out.
Think before you post. These arguments are humiliating, and you should be able to think your way through to how they make you look very, very bad.

Are you "aware of Dr. Burgon's extensive work on the Early Church Fathers? (The Traditional Text, New York: Cosimo, 118-122). And how Dr. Burgon shows that the majority of quotes used by the Early Church Fathers were Byzantine in nature?"

We have the correct manuscript family in the KJ. END of story.

You have never studied how the KJV came to be or where the translation comes from, or you wouldn't be saying this.
Whenever you see "End of story" in an argument, you can be pretty certain, almost 100% of the time, that the person has run out of ways to support their argument.

No. I am ordering books all the time and I just ordered two Kindle books on the subject and I may order more.

It hasn't ended. It has just begun.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Are you "aware of Dr. Burgon's extensive work on the Early Church Fathers? (The Traditional Text, New York: Cosimo, 118-122). And how Dr. Burgon shows that the majority of quotes used by the Early Church Fathers were Byzantine in nature?"

We have the correct manuscript family in the KJ. END of story.

You have never studied how the KJV came to be or where the translation comes from, or you wouldn't be saying this.
Whenever you see "End of story" in an argument, you can be pretty certain, almost 100% of the time, that the person has run out of ways to support their argument.

No. I am ordering books all the time and I just ordered two Kindle books on the subject and I may order more.

It hasn't ended. It has just begun.

So it's not "END of story"?
Ok.
Got it.
You've just run out of arguments for now. You have purchased some new ones.
With your poor thinking skills, I will look forward to how you mangle them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

How do you know what the original is if you never saw an original?

The disciples of the apostles would have known would have sought to preserve the original and since all the other manuscript families don't copy the mistake means that the earliest alleged manuscript wasn't the focal point.

NO ONE IS COMPARING ANYTHING TO THE NON-EXISTENT ORIGINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!
The earliest manuscripts we still have, closest in time to the originals we don't have, do not include this story. It was added later.
NOT PRESERVED! ADDED!
This is what I'm talking about. You think poorly. Your logic skills are so impaired it becomes an exercise in absurdity talking to you.

Your position is an assumption.

No, your position is, ChuckT.

The earliest known manuscripts don't have the story, thus the logical assumption is that the original did not have the story.

 

[Nutz]

It's a shame when you have to attack to justify your behavior. Might I ask, if King James was gay, what does the gay left gain? What does the gay left gain by attacking Christianity and people of faith?

Do you people really believe that only Christians oppose poor lifestyle choices?

Not one from the gay left even attempted to answer my questions.

Those are two questions.
Which would you like an answer to?

Any of them.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Not one from the gay left even attempted to answer my questions.

Those are two questions.
Which would you like an answer to?

Any of them.

I don't think it matters a whit that KJ was gay. Many gays are closeted because of the bigotry of their fellow congregants. No big news story. Leaders pander to their constituents.
No big news story there.

As to justifying bad behavior, Christians do that constantly on these threads.
Paul states clearly how a truly indwelt believer should appear.
Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.
The Fruits of the Spirit.
How incredibly infrequent it is to find a believer on here that exhibits these traits, or corrects to them when this is pointed out. They always tend to make excuses for why that just doesn't apply to them.
As for having a loving relationship with another consenting adult, maybe scripture just plain got it wrong.
Or more likely it represents a moment in cultural time as people tried to understand god and desperately find a way to beat their mortality, as man has always done.

 

[amrchaos]

Question

Why are the original manuscripts so important?

Is it possible that copies of the original existed and those were used instead?

Only because the inerrantists want to make the case of the perfection of the bible, and we have no way of knowing if this is the case.
Presumably, the copies were first made from an original, but how many were made before we got what we finally have in our hands?
Details, details.

OK, I understand your argument. The lack of an original manuscript undermines the case of a perfect copy. But is that what they mean by "perfection".

I ask this because metaphysicists have a tendency to misuse words. Their concept of "perfection" may not mean "perfect copy" nor have any relationship to it.

 

[Chuckt]

You have never studied how the KJV came to be or where the translation comes from, or you wouldn't be saying this.
Whenever you see "End of story" in an argument, you can be pretty certain, almost 100% of the time, that the person has run out of ways to support their argument.

No. I am ordering books all the time and I just ordered two Kindle books on the subject and I may order more.

It hasn't ended. It has just begun.

So it's not "END of story"?
Ok.
Got it.
You've just run out of arguments for now. You have purchased some new ones.
With your poor thinking skills, I will look forward to how you mangle them.

In other words, you don't own the truth.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Question

Why are the original manuscripts so important?

Is it possible that copies of the original existed and those were used instead?

Only because the inerrantists want to make the case of the perfection of the bible, and we have no way of knowing if this is the case.
Presumably, the copies were first made from an original, but how many were made before we got what we finally have in our hands?
Details, details.

OK, I understand your argument. The lack of an original manuscript undermines the case of a perfect copy. But is that what they mean by "perfection".

I ask this because metaphysicists have a tendency to misuse words. Their concept of "perfection" may not mean "perfect copy" nor have any relationship to it.

They like to use words like "perfect" and "without error".

 

[thebrucebeat]

No. I am ordering books all the time and I just ordered two Kindle books on the subject and I may order more.

It hasn't ended. It has just begun.

So it's not "END of story"?
Ok.
Got it.
You've just run out of arguments for now. You have purchased some new ones.
With your poor thinking skills, I will look forward to how you mangle them.

In other words, you don't own the truth.

But you are going to buy you some!
LOL!

 

[Chuckt]

So it's not "END of story"?
Ok.
Got it.
You've just run out of arguments for now. You have purchased some new ones.
With your poor thinking skills, I will look forward to how you mangle them.

In other words, you don't own the truth.

But you are going to buy you some!
LOL!

I found a scholar who wrote a book against what you are teaching and they don't come much better than this man. I already have some of his books.

 

[thebrucebeat]

In other words, you don't own the truth.

But you are going to buy you some!
LOL!

I found a scholar who wrote a book against what you are teaching and they don't come much better than this man. I already have some of his books.

Are you just collecting books, or are you considering reading one?
Would you read one that didn't already agree with what you want to hear?

 

[PostmodernProph]

The assumption is the story wasn't there before, and then it miraculously appeared.
Except it isn't an assumption.
It's data.
It is also based on data that your thinking skills are impaired.

Faulty data. One of the earliest manuscripts was found in a trash dump. It means it didn't belong to the church.

None of the earliest ones belonged to the church. Where do you think the church got the copies they copied from?

????....another church......that's why a letter to the Romans also ended up in Thessalonica and Cornith.......

 

[JakeStarkey]

And that's how manuscripts end up differing.

 

[Chuckt]

But you are going to buy you some!
LOL!

I found a scholar who wrote a book against what you are teaching and they don't come much better than this man. I already have some of his books.

Are you just collecting books, or are you considering reading one?
Would you read one that didn't already agree with what you want to hear?

Brucebeat,

I'm a busy person. I'll read anybody's book but I will also discredit the one you are talking about and I would probably use the heretic word today if I thought I wouldn't get sued. I'm not a consumer. I'm a salesman. In other words: I don't need you to teach me anything.

1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

May you take your own advice and read books that don't appeal to you in order to learn the truth:

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00JL6JDHA/ref=pe_245070_24466410_M1T1DP]Amazon.com: The Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53-8:11) - A Tour of the External Evidence eBook: James Snapp Jr: Kindle Store[/ame]

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004WPZZHW/ref=pe_245070_24466410_M1T1DP]Amazon.com: Assorted Essays on New Testament Textual Criticism [Annotated] eBook: William Sanday, Frederic G. Kenyon, F. C. Burkitt, George Salmon, F. H. Chase, Edward Miller, Charles Sitterly, Eberhard Nestle, J. Rendel Harris, James Snapp Jr: Kindl[/ame]

 

[Nutz]

Those are two questions.
Which would you like an answer to?

Any of them.

I don't think it matters a whit that KJ was gay. Many gays are closeted because of the bigotry of their fellow congregants. No big news story. Leaders pander to their constituents.
No big news story there.

As to justifying bad behavior, Christians do that constantly on these threads.
Paul states clearly how a truly indwelt believer should appear.
Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.
The Fruits of the Spirit.
How incredibly infrequent it is to find a believer on here that exhibits these traits, or corrects to them when this is pointed out. They always tend to make excuses for why that just doesn't apply to them.
As for having a loving relationship with another consenting adult, maybe scripture just plain got it wrong.
Or more likely it represents a moment in cultural time as people tried to understand god and desperately find a way to beat their mortality, as man has always done.

What?

Again, not all who oppose the homosexual lifestyle are Christian. Why attack Christianity to justify the gay choice?

 

[GreenBean]

Another little known fact: After King Jame's death, the Bible named after him was changed to specifically include homosexuality as a sin, although earlier bibles, dating back to ancient times, didn't.

I checked and the 1611 King James Bible mentions Homosexuality as a sin.

Show some evidence because I don't believe you.

History is chock full of Fags .... If it's biblical lore you have an intrerest in try researching David - there's some circuimstantial Gay subtext regarding him and a character "Jonathan"


1 Samuel 18:1-3
Now it came about when he had finished speaking to Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself. And Saul took him that day and did not let him return to his father’s house. Then Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself.


1 Samuel 20:16-17
So Jonathan made a covenant with the house of David, saying, “May the LORD require it at the hands of David’s enemies.” And Jonathan made David vow again because of his love for him, because he loved him as he loved his own life.

When Jonathan is slain ...

2 Samuel 1:25-26
“How have the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! Jonathan is slain on your high places. I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; You have been very pleasant to me. Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women.”

1 Samuel 20:41
When the lad was gone, David rose from the south side and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed three times. And they kissed each other and wept together, but David more.

 

[Chuckt]

Another little known fact: After King Jame's death, the Bible named after him was changed to specifically include homosexuality as a sin, although earlier bibles, dating back to ancient times, didn't.

I checked and the 1611 King James Bible mentions Homosexuality as a sin.

Show some evidence because I don't believe you.

History is chock full of Fags .... If it's biblical lore you have an intrerest in try researching David - there's some circuimstantial Gay subtext regarding him and a character "Jonathan"


1 Samuel 18:1-3
Now it came about when he had finished speaking to Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself. And Saul took him that day and did not let him return to his father’s house. Then Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself.


1 Samuel 20:16-17
So Jonathan made a covenant with the house of David, saying, “May the LORD require it at the hands of David’s enemies.” And Jonathan made David vow again because of his love for him, because he loved him as he loved his own life.

When Jonathan is slain ...

2 Samuel 1:25-26
“How have the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! Jonathan is slain on your high places. I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; You have been very pleasant to me. Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women.”

1 Samuel 20:41
When the lad was gone, David rose from the south side and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed three times. And they kissed each other and wept together, but David more.

I've seen more affection on the football field and baseball field and it doesn't mean they are gay.

 

[GreenBean]

I checked and the 1611 King James Bible mentions Homosexuality as a sin.

Show some evidence because I don't believe you.

History is chock full of Fags .... If it's biblical lore you have an intrerest in try researching David - there's some circuimstantial Gay subtext regarding him and a character "Jonathan"


1 Samuel 18:1-3
Now it came about when he had finished speaking to Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself. And Saul took him that day and did not let him return to his father’s house. Then Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself.


1 Samuel 20:16-17
So Jonathan made a covenant with the house of David, saying, “May the LORD require it at the hands of David’s enemies.” And Jonathan made David vow again because of his love for him, because he loved him as he loved his own life.

When Jonathan is slain ...

2 Samuel 1:25-26
“How have the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! Jonathan is slain on your high places. I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; You have been very pleasant to me. Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women.”

1 Samuel 20:41
When the lad was gone, David rose from the south side and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed three times. And they kissed each other and wept together, but David more.

I've seen more affection on the football field and baseball field and it doesn't mean they are gay.

Probably not gay - you're right. But it makes for some interesting conversation.

In a 1978 book "Jonathan Loved David"
The author wrote that the story of David and Jonathan was simply a retelling of the homosexual relationship between Gilgamesh, king of Uruk, and Enkidu, his close companion. It's fairly established that a lot of the Old Testament was extracted from the earlier Babylonian epics.

 

[Nutz]

I checked and the 1611 King James Bible mentions Homosexuality as a sin.

Show some evidence because I don't believe you.

History is chock full of Fags .... If it's biblical lore you have an intrerest in try researching David - there's some circuimstantial Gay subtext regarding him and a character "Jonathan"


1 Samuel 18:1-3
Now it came about when he had finished speaking to Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as himself. And Saul took him that day and did not let him return to his father’s house. Then Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself.


1 Samuel 20:16-17
So Jonathan made a covenant with the house of David, saying, “May the LORD require it at the hands of David’s enemies.” And Jonathan made David vow again because of his love for him, because he loved him as he loved his own life.

When Jonathan is slain ...

2 Samuel 1:25-26
“How have the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! Jonathan is slain on your high places. I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; You have been very pleasant to me. Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women.”

1 Samuel 20:41
When the lad was gone, David rose from the south side and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed three times. And they kissed each other and wept together, but David more.

I've seen more affection on the football field and baseball field and it doesn't mean they are gay.

I really don't know why you waste your time.