Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Emperor Constantine" data-source="post: 1251226" data-attributes="member: 16623">This is not correct. The King James Bible includes all of the same books as the Catholic Bible; in addition to 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, and the Prayer of Manasseh which for whatever reason the Roman Catholics have ceased to include in their canon. Many modern editions exclude the apocrypha/deuterocanon, but complete editions are still available. My Oxford World Classics edition was inexpensive and has them all. And not that Luther had anything to do with the English Reformation or the KJV, but it's worth noting that in his debate with the Roman Catholic theologian John Eck, Eck criticized Luther for quoting the apocrypha, telling him it wasn't real scripture. He could do that because the Roman Catholics didn't settle their Biblical canon until the Council of Trent. King James didn't translate the King James Bible. And if homosexual infestation of a Christian denomination somehow falsifies their translations, you've got no room to be touting Roman Catholic translations. Recent RC translations go so far as to take the exact same positions that they used to condemn the KJV for. For example, Luke 1:28 in the NAB. You've got a lot of good information to share about Catholicism since it's a topic you're familiar with. But to speak about Bible translations or the Protestant Reformation, you've got to learn before you criticize. None of the educated Protestants reading a post like that can react to it any differently than you'd react to a Jack Chick tract.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Emperor Constantine, post: 1251226, member: 16623"] This is not correct. The King James Bible includes all of the same books as the Catholic Bible; in addition to 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, and the Prayer of Manasseh which for whatever reason the Roman Catholics have ceased to include in their canon. Many modern editions exclude the apocrypha/deuterocanon, but complete editions are still available. My Oxford World Classics edition was inexpensive and has them all. And not that Luther had anything to do with the English Reformation or the KJV, but it's worth noting that in his debate with the Roman Catholic theologian John Eck, Eck criticized Luther for quoting the apocrypha, telling him it wasn't real scripture. He could do that because the Roman Catholics didn't settle their Biblical canon until the Council of Trent. King James didn't translate the King James Bible. And if homosexual infestation of a Christian denomination somehow falsifies their translations, you've got no room to be touting Roman Catholic translations. Recent RC translations go so far as to take the exact same positions that they used to condemn the KJV for. For example, Luke 1:28 in the NAB. You've got a lot of good information to share about Catholicism since it's a topic you're familiar with. But to speak about Bible translations or the Protestant Reformation, you've got to learn before you criticize. None of the educated Protestants reading a post like that can react to it any differently than you'd react to a Jack Chick tract. [/QUOTE]

Verification