Hi Carlo,

Sorry for the delay.  I can see we are in disagreement...

Well that's wonderful the whole verse of Acts 8:37 is in ur
bible(NASB).  I take it the others verses I quoted were not...

I see u agree with the Westcot and Hort theories on texual criticism.
Is this true?

Since you brought up manuscripts in great detail and contend your
leaving it to the Greek scholar, whom they are, I don't know, maybe
you can name them for me so I know who they are...

Anyway, since NASB, holds to two other manscripts as more important
than the KJV manuscripts let's look one of them as an example...

The Vaticanus.  This manscript held by many newer versions including
your version which explains omissions from Scripture omits the
following...Psalm 106 through 138 Genesis 1:1; the whole book of
Revelation and everything in Hebrews after 9:14...

The manscript itself leaves out words or whole clauses.  Letters and
words, and often times sentences are written twice over or begun and
immediately cancelled.

Do you believe the saints of God in the NT were quoting from the
originals in Hebrew? In Psalms 12:6,7; talks about God perserving His
Word and you are in disagreement saying the Bible is not, that man had
the power to corrupt it because it's not the original...

NT saints like Paul were confident they had true copies of the OT that
were inspired. Do you really think they had uninspired variants of
God's Word which disagreed with one another? Back when Paul the
Apostle was living that there was no true copy from the originals from
the OT.  Are you going to rely on Hebrew scholars to tell you want to
believe, or should I say ones whom you agree with...?



On 8/20/06, Carlo Rose <rosec007@...> wrote:
>
> Mike wrote: "Thanks for this discussion even though it was pretty brief and
> you are not really interested in this topic!"
>
> Carlo responds: I am generally not open to discussions of Bible translations
> with KJV only folks for good reasons.  But I can't leave some statements you
> made without comment.
>
> Mike wrote:"The NASB omits the following Scriptures: Acts 23:9, Romans 13:9,
> and
> Acts 8:37...A very popular scripture that is omitted or part of it removed
> is in most newer versions is Acts 8:37."
>
> Carlo responds: Acts 8:37 is both in my KJV version and the NASB version.
> My guess is that the other passages you mentioned are not in the most oldest
> and reliable manuscripts, and that's why they're a little different.  But
> I'll let the Greek scholars among this list address that.
>
> Mike wrote: "I hold a book in my hand that contains no errors,"
>
> Carlo responds:  This is simply not true.  For example, within the Greek
> text of the KJV there are about half dozen or so passages where there is no
> Greek manuscript backup whatsoever.  Erasmus translated the Latin Vulgate
> back into Greek in order to fill in the blanks for which he had no Greek
> text.
>
> Some people would justify what Erasmus did by some blanket appeal to
> providential guidance by the Lord.   To defend such an obvious error by
> appealing to God's providential guidance is tantamount to conferring a de
> facto infallibility (if not actual inspiration) upon Erasmus as an editor of
> a conflated Greek text.  The only Scriptures that are guaranteed completely
> and utterly infallible and inerrant are the God-inspired manuscripts, not
> the copies of the God-inspired texts.
>
> As I said before, the KJV Bible has served Christendom well.  It is not a
> perfect translation, neither are certain parts of its underlying Greek
> texts.
>
>
> Carlo
>