Bible Discussion Thread

There is vast different between inspiration and translation the latter of the two is man's using his own life experience and his ability to translate the the scripture(Bible), which have several errors in it writing that the sceptics utilizes for silly argument.



Now, first and foremost, as the apostle said,"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. "

For example: number one, Bible, it only can be found on the cover, now, lookup the definition for Bible and Scriptures and you decide which is the most appropriate name for the book. And the book have two covenants, old and new, and not testaments, for the latter is distraction to the true meaning.

Daniel,

"There is vast different between inspiration and translation"

So what is your point? Of course, they refer to two different things. The Bible was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek. How can we English speaking people understand what was written in these languages unless they are translated into English or other languages for people around the world.

Christians assert that the originals are inspired and translators do their best to convey the words and thought from one language to another. Any and all translations are not inspired, although some King James Only advocates claim that the KJV is just as inspired as the autographs.

I don't believe that quibbling over Bible vs. Scripture or Testament vs. Covenant is worth any time or effort.

I'd like to see the "errors" you claim are in the translation you've referred to.