Login

**Aractus** · (This post was last modified: January 1, 2013 at 6:26 am by Aractus.)

(January 1, 2013 at 4:39 am)FallentoReason Wrote: So would it be safe to say that in your opinion, it was a fully human process, which evidently involved cherry picking those documents that focused on Jesus' "humanity" the most?

I gave you the historical answer. We don't "cherry pick" I'm afraid. Nor did the Jews for that matter. Heretical gospels/scripture were contemporary writings in the mid-2nd to mid-3rd century that used early church figures and disciples to attain pseudo-validity. They were recognized as being inauthentic and not added to scripture.

Now leave this thread alone and let a Catholic answer the question!!!

KichigaiNeko · January 1, 2013 at 6:52 am

So you don't "do" the King James version then??

**Aractus** · January 1, 2013 at 7:10 am

Not really, the KJV was good for its time, and certainly better than the Douay Rheims Bible, and about par with the Geneva Bible (it's at least 90% Geneva anyway).

Zen Badger · January 1, 2013 at 7:13 am

(January 1, 2013 at 7:10 am)Aractus Wrote: Not really, the KJV was good for its time, and certainly better than the Douay Rheims Bible, and about par with the Geneva Bible (it's at least 90% Geneva anyway).

Given that like the others the KJV is a work of pure fiction.......

KichigaiNeko · January 1, 2013 at 7:21 am

Don't forget the "cherry picking" done by dear old Jimmy-boy

**Aractus** · January 1, 2013 at 7:27 am

King James hated the notes in the Geneva Bible, not the translation itself. Hence why the translators were instructed to use it in their translation and hence why the KJV borrows so much from it and from Tyndale.

KichigaiNeko · January 1, 2013 at 7:43 am

(January 1, 2013 at 7:27 am)Aractus Wrote: King James hated the notes in the Geneva Bible, not the translation itself. Hence why the translators were instructed to use it in their translation and hence why the KJV borrows so much from it and from Tyndale.

I thought that the KJV was translated to english from latin. What is this borrowing you are talking about??

**Aractus** · (This post was last modified: January 1, 2013 at 8:32 am by Aractus.)

Douay-Rheims was translated from Latin. It was the official sanctioned translation from its inception (completion 1609) until the Jerusalem Bible (1966). The JB was largely based on the French translation. Meanwhile protestants had long moved on from translating translations and already had over a dozen English translations all using the Hebrew and Greek ...

KichigaiNeko · January 1, 2013 at 8:40 am

Sounds more like a Barbara Cartland novel

Mark 13:13 · January 1, 2013 at 10:26 am

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Mark's Gospel was damaged and reassembled incorrectly	SeniorCitizen	1	1184	November 19, 2023 at 5:48 pm Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
	Dear God, please soften their hearts...	zwanzig	12	4208	August 6, 2023 at 3:31 pm Last Post: LinuxGal
	You think Catholics hate Charles Goodyear	Woah0	7	2854	August 28, 2022 at 5:43 pm Last Post: Anomalocaris
	What do Catholics think of Frollo from "Hunchback of Notre Dame" story?	Woah0	2	1405	August 26, 2022 at 9:46 am Last Post: awty
	Traddy Catholics on the ropes?	Jehanne	16	5213	July 18, 2021 at 2:20 pm Last Post: Rev. Rye
	Not just catholics!	zebo-the-fat	109	33777	June 11, 2019 at 12:34 am Last Post: Fake Messiah
	Embellishments in the Gospel of Mark.	Jehanne	133	39273	May 7, 2019 at 9:50 pm Last Post: Amarok
	How can you prove that the gospel of Mark is not the "word of god"?	Lincoln05	100	29503	October 16, 2018 at 5:38 pm Last Post: GrandizerII
	Catholics warring against the Pope?	Fake Messiah	29	13641	November 27, 2017 at 6:52 am Last Post: Jehanne
	Dear Xristards Don't Pick On Muslims	Minimalist	20	5927	July 24, 2017 at 1:40 pm Last Post: Cecelia