Didn't say that,but refusing anything else is. KJV missed a lot of translations and added the spin of the day on some,but it is a great translation overall. It's just not the only way to learn. Refusing anything else would be like learning to read but refusing every other book after Dick and Jane.

Yes sir you did, It’s all I have ever used or studied or has been the standard at any church I have attended. I do have a KJV study Bible in which people contribute there thoughts and ideas on verses and text. If that makes makes me ignorant for believing in one specific translation and nothing else than I guess I’ll be ignorant.

That's obvious.

Hahaha bless your heart.

I will not post about any more religious topics.
I will not post about any more religious topics.
I will not post about any more religious topics.
I will not post about any more religious topics.
I will not post about any more religious topics.
I will not post about any more religious topics.
I will not post about any more religious topics.

I’m writing sentences if anyone wonders....

Biblical Scholars have debated the translations of the Holy Bible for 1000's of years.

The fact that you all are arguing over it on this website is the reason that the aliens won't talk to us.

Ignorance is truly bliss I guess. Let's not change or evolve with new technology, ideas and tool's to study deeper. Let's dig our feet in and use the never ending oil supply like a plague on the planet. I think the Dinosaurs had more sense.

The royal family...their bloodline is nephilim. I think they might be the devil. No joke. Look it up. Its crazy.

based

Yep... Lizard people.

Oh boy

He read it on the innerwebs so it must be true...

The number of Americans that seem to be eat up with hatred of the British Royal family is bizarre. I just dont get why Americans care enough to have such strong opinions. Plus, they seem to be pretty decent folks, particularly William and Harry.

I am not fascinated with the royal family. But, I don’t dislike them either. I do find them interesting. My grandmother corresponded with the Queen Mother regularly about horses. I have no ideas how that came about. I think they met at some horse event in England in the 1970s.

They actually do a great deal for charity in the UK. I also think it is amazing that all the men serve in the military and they actually serve. They don’t just wear a uniform. Many of them have served in combat. Show me an extremely wealthy American family that would do that in today’s world.

I would have never thought that this country would have a royal family until the media anointed the Obama’s as one.

obamas not the first; kennedys were ...

I'm not a fan of the pope or modern day Catholicism in general. On this topic however, after reading the article, it seems that he's not changing the scripture at all (the original Greek/Aramaic/Hebrew) he's recognizing a mistake in the translation from his experts that caught it. If that is the case then I don't see a problem with it, especially if a board of others agree with the change. His reasoning for it I also agree with, that God would never lead us into temptation. Also when Jesus said the Lord's prayer it was designed to be a model for how to pray and it has become something that is repeated verbatim. The bible warns against chants, repeating things, etc as the pagans do (one beef I have with Catholicism). The same people that would get all up in arms about this strike me as the same ones who believe you should only read the KJV of the Bible. It's all just translations of scripture that was God breathed in other languages. If you really care that much about the true words then learn Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic and read the original transcripts.

Really seems like a nonissue, but props to the Pope on getting people talking about this and not touching kids. I imagine it is hard to keep the base growing and motivated with all the scandals. Add in that most new Catholics largely come from shithole countries and it looks like Catholicism will struggle to remain relevant

I think we hate the Royals because we ain’t forgot George and 1776.
Somehow the Revolution came up the other day.
I told the wife “Do you realize how big an upset this was? It was UT-Chattanooga beating Bama by 2 TDs. Then we played again a few seasons later and we did it again.”

Correct....They're heavily involved in charities. Harry started and is heavily invested in a charity for wounded vets, among others. And yes, when they serve in the military, it's not just a formality.

They also get labeled as taxpayer-funded leaches when that's not nearly the case many want to think it is. They actually generate a ton of income from private assets. The "Crown Estate" has a massive amount of private assets that have been in the family for centuries, in addition to countless private investments that generate income. In fact, the royal family actually gives a good portion of the profits from this estate (I want to say like ~15-20%) back to the treasury. As I recall, most of their "taxpayer funded expenses" are related to their residences and security. And it is received in return for the Queen's duties as "Head of the Commonwealth" - a position that is NOT simply inherited, but must be agreed upon by a group of Commonwealth leaders.

Long story short....you could do a lot worse than the British royal family.

Murdoc, I didn't read Mr. Clark's statement in any way to be condescending as you took it. Far be it from me to say something about being overly-sensitive ( I'm awful about it), but I think you might be on this matter. He said it was ignorant for the church to have a pulpit with a literal engraving of "KJV only", sort of in a sarcastic tone as if that church believed the KJV was the only true word of God. Perhaps you'd have to know that there's this weird sub-belief in the realm of Christendom that the KJV is the "real" Bible, and if your church isn't using it, then you're a heretic. THAT is ignorant. The KJV is fine and dandy, Mr. Clark doesn't believe there's anything wrong with it. You aren't ignorant for using it, he doesn't believe that.

Just my personal stance has always been: The KJV is simply a word-for-word translation of the original texts. (IMPORTANT NOTE: THE KJV IS NOT THE ORIGINAL TEXT, IT IS A TRANSLATION JUST LIKE ALL OTHER VERSIONS) However, it's written in centuries-old English (thou's, thereto's, herefore art thou unto thine???....daheck that even mean? ) So if I could use an equal word-for-word translation that uses modern English (ESV for example), which is how you and I actually talk, why wouldn't I? If the same passages infer the same meanings, but you insist on using a Bible that's written in virtually another language (because you believe it's different or better somehow), then that could reasonably be called ignorant.