How did a bunch of American Protestants become convinced that a specific translation of the Bible from 400 years ago is somehow the perfect word of God and that all other versions of the Bible including the Hebrew and Greek originals are somehow “inferior?”
>>18410352KJV is obviously correct because all jews are trying to eradicate it
Because I'm white. White people are great, white civilization is great, and I want more white people. Jesus was a white person. It says so right here in the KJV. Also, if you interpret the Bible strictly than the catholic church is not only a criminally corrupt organization but also a literal church of satan that encourages the worst crime a human could do: create a racially mixed animal. For most of American history, racial mixing was banned even though the catholic church allowed it. We literally cannot have this because it means blacks, mexicans, italians, the irish and other brown "people" would be able to move across the train tracks to our side of town.and because of this, Israel is completely justified and the Iran War is our war. I support President Trump, how is THAT a FIL OP SOAPY for you LIBERAL ?
>>18410352It's complicated. They think the KJV is the earliest modern English translation (which isn't really true obviously, it's just what they think) and thus is "closer to the source" do to its age, and they're extremely skeptical of newer translations because they think they're too influenced by modern political biases and sensibilities.
>>18410352The old testament is copied from clay tablets scribed into them 4000 years before it was written on paper. They are called the 7 tablets of the Enuma Elish. The writers of the old testament changed the narrative to suit their religion.
>>18410352English is the most widely spoken language in the world and the KJV is the most famous English translation of the Bible, therefore it's the perfect word of God. Or do you think God would allow his authentic divinely-inspired writings to become hidden and require effort or intelligence to sift out? If so, then how hidden could they become? Could God allow it to become so hidden that only half the people who go looking for it can quickly find it within reach? What about a third? A quarter? Could God allow it to become so hidden that it was buried underground for centuries and only rediscovered in 1945? Where does it end? Since there's no clear natural stopping point, it must be at the very beginning, so only the most popular Bible in the most popular language is the correct one.
I'm not a Christard but I like reading the KJV because all the Early Modern Englishisms make me feel like I'm reading some ancient wizard tomes
>>18410352Because it's beautifully written.
>>18410379This, it's just an emotional bond they have formed with this specific version because the ye olde style English gives it authority. It doesn't matter that it is full of errors and that it had multiple revisions itself. Nope, it's the perfect word of God because it gives them the feefees. That's it! There is no other reason a Christian needs to believe in anything. Don't forget these are the same people who claim they have the truth because they believe they (exclusively, even other Christian denominations don't count) have felt the tickle of the holy spirit.
>>18410527>because the ye olde style English gives it authorityThis. KJV onlyism is basically an argument from ignorance. There was an anon here a while back who tried to tell me that the Dead Sea Scrolls validated the KJV and that they are identical or near-identical texts. This is veritably untrue, and the anon in question really knew nothing about biblical manuscript traditions. But he kept insisting that they were the same, and simply ignored spoonfed explanations pointing out precise differences. Really quite frustrating.
>>18410357By this metric, Islam is correct
American "christianity" is based on nothing but narcissism and money-worship.
>>18410869Mormons are rooting for a Corpse-Emperor their war in Iran won't be won for the next 40,000 years
>>18410352Enjoy burning.
>>18410953I will enjoy burning a king james bible
>>18410352It sounds old and kind of 'heavy', the American mind automatically reads that as inherently more valuable - and is unable to understand the historical baggage around that translation (that it was written by a heretical king with the sole intention of making it look like the bible didn't say that he couldn't divorce his wife for no reason and marry his mistress).
Just glad were finally getting a combination bible with Septuagint and Byzantine Text in English.
>>18410352Catholic Church couldn't keep the bible away from them so they instead made them read it but not understand it.
>>18411246I love leather bibles. Goatskin LSB is my main bible
I think the Catholic Church had a good case to be made by gatekeeping Biblical translations. Where they went wrong was asserting Latin as a sole liturgical language with their own textual basis, and by gatekeeping linguistic study. The reason Jews don't have the same issues with the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament is because they make learning Hebrew mandatory for reading it, so there's no disagreements over whether or not it's the "right" translation, because they literally read the original text as it was written down. Christians could do the same thing, they could make learning Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek requirements for Bible study, that way everyone just reads the original text. If Jews can do it, so can Christians
>>18410352American Christianity is heavily decentralized and was formed in the great awakenings. Great Awakening theological presuppositions had never been exposed to something like the glut of new translations we’ve seen in the last 150 years. In response to this glut, and the confusion that follows such an excess of choice, this great awakening Christianity began clinging to the only steady tradition it had known in the King James Bible. It didn’t help that the 19th century was the century of protestantism going categorically insane. The 120 years from the potato famine migrations up to the election of JFK was a period of intense paranoia and schizophrenia on the part of English speaking protestantism, as it had basically polemicized itself into absurdity due to overexposure to Catholicism. This period is what gave us the “everything is really pagan” virus that still infects the mind of normies today, as the argument originally began as an plethora of accusations against Catholicism. It was the era of anti-intellectualism, fundamentalism, increased sectarian violence, religiously motivated nationalism, etc.The 19th century killed protestantism, and KJV onlyism is a rotten fruit of that death.
>>18411194Unfortunately, this post is more historically illiterate than KJV-onlyists. I don't even know what to say really.
>>18411420>so there's no disagreements over whether or not it's the "right" translation, because they literally read the original text as it was written downThey still debate the meaning of the archaic language anyway. Biblical Hebrew is not intuitively comprehensible to modern Hebrew speakers
>>18411730Absolutely, but the difference is that interpretation is left more to either individuals with the Talmud sort of acting as a reference to help base some of those interpretations on
KJV onlyism doesn't teach other translations are inferior. The point is that other English translations are inferior. The Bible in spanish or something is not necessarily inferior at all. Greek and Hebrew are not inferior.
>>18412446A Catholic family member refuses to believe that circumcision is mentioned a single time in the bible. You'd be surprised how many Christians go with the flow and don't know anything about their own religion. I fully believe that there are a significant amount of American Christians that think the Bible is an English first tome.
The modern "Bibles" have errors and contradictions unlike the KJV. The KJV is not corrupted, that's one of the reasons why it's the pure word of God. Here are some examples of why KJV is superior to any other translations or copies of texts:2 Samuel 21:19KJB"And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare–oregim, a Beth–lehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam."NASB"And there was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam."Goliath was beheaded by David over 30 chapters ago in 1 Samuel 17:51. While the underlying Hebrew also says “Goliath”, the correct reading “brother of Goliath” is confirmed by the parallel passage in 1 Chronicles 20:5.Hebrews 3:16Modern Bibles suggest all Israel provoked the Lord and were not able to enter the promised land. However, Joshua and Caleb did not provoke the Lord (Numbers 14:22-24), nor did others, according to the KJB, such as Eleazar the priest, who also entered the promised land (Numbers 3:32, Joshua 21:1).Genesis 27:39In the KJB, Isaac blessed Esau. But in modern translations, he curses him, contradicting the Holy Ghost in Hebrews 11:20, which reads: By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.Hebrews 3:16Modern Bibles suggest all Israel provoked the Lord and were not able to enter the promised land. However, Joshua and Caleb did not provoke the Lord (Numbers 14:22-24), nor did others, according to the KJB, such as Eleazar the priest, who also entered the promised land (Numbers 3:32, Joshua 21:1).The site is https://kjvcompare.com/ for easy comparison.Check these passages for example: Hebrews 2:14, Luke 2:33, Deuteronomy 22:28, Galatians 4:1, Genesis 22:17, Genesis 1:27, Genesis 5:1, Mark 1:2www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VRT2FFXntchttps://truthischrist.com/seven/
>>18413494thanks to you KJV-onlyist, I abandonned the corrupted modern scriptures I now learned Koine Greek to read the Bible so I never have to touch a pig english translation of the Jewish Tanakh (read: KJV) ever again.
>>18413520Even if you know how to read Koine Greek, you don't have access to the same manuscripts that the KJV translators had access to. Those are gone and not available anymore.Romans 1:19, "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them." "God reveals Himself to men inside of them. In regards to the Bible revisers, they know in themselves (God bears witness) that the King James Bible is the truth. The problem is that they don't want to submit themselves completely to the truth. They want the truth to be subject to them."If you don't want to submit the to the truth, you will not get truth. But if you submit to the truth and don't refuse what God is giving you, then you will understand.By personally deciding what the Bible says instead of just reading it and trusting it, you are overlooking it, causing you to be come the final authority instead of the word of God. God has preserved His word like He promised. The KJV is the pure word of God. The ancient manuscripts are not preserved because God doesn't want people to go to them. God wants people to read the King James Bible.https://truthischrist.com/seven/https://truthischrist.com/elton-anomaly-823543/https://truthischrist.com/70x7-kjb-code-jesus-is-the-son-of-god/
>>18413648The KJV writers used the M*Soretic text, so it's not divinely inspired (rewritten by r*Bbinic hands). If you're not using a Septuagint-based translation, you are using uninspired Scripture as your canon. Cope, seethe, dilate.
>>18413648>you don't have access to the same manuscripts that the KJV translators had access to. Those are gone and not available anymore.They used the Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus which we still have today. Also, those aren’t even the oldest complete ones we have lol. The oldest copies of the Old Testament are the Dead Sea Scrolls and the oldest copies of the New Testament are the Codex Sinaiticus Codex Vaticanus.
>>18413657I’ve always seen people say the Masoretic text was redacted by medieval rabbis, but nobody ever explains how they are different from the Septuagint
>>18413744Septuagint includes the Deuterocanon, to begin with. No Masoretic text include it. It creates a weird limbo for Masoretic-based but deuterocanonical-compliant versions where they have to Frankenstein their translations using both Greek and Hebrew texts - if they don't do like the Protestants and toss the Deuterocanon out because it's """tradition""" [Rabbinical Jewish tradition] (Probably making Saint John Chrysostom apoplectic in Heaven).Also most masoretic text is based on the Leningrad codex (circa 1008 AD; already off to a great start when it is close to a millenium since the death of Jesus), and it's basically unreadable at certain points. Not to mention that if you use the NT, you can actually spot differences in OT-CITATIONS with the text displayed in the Bible, as with the infamous quote from Acts 7 of Stephen, which quotes Amos 5 and is basically not even the same text from the OT to the NT.>OT : But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves.>NT : Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.they're both the same line... in the same translation... clearly not the same when compiled, though
>>18413734>>18413657https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSueA1P7G-Yhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYhwgzhCr6ghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaD91oDwAnc
>>18414192answer why the KJV Bible makes Stephen's Acts 7:43's reference to Amos 5:26 erroneous because he cites the wrong idol's name entirely while Septuagint traductions make it correct, as pointed in >>18413807
>>18414294The citation of the Septuagint in the New Testament does not imply the Old Testament was reinspired (you are literally the equivalent of Steven Anderson, but with idols and candles) any more than the citation of the KJV in modern times implies the speaker believes the English to be reinspired. The Septuagint is not the only version cited in the New Testament nor is it the only version used by the eastern churches.
>>18414294It's not an error. Because the OT was written in Hebrew, the names are different in the New testament because they are transliterated. (Elijah/Elias, Johsua/Jesus etc.)Both Remphan and Chiun are referring to the same pagan deity.
>>18410352I use to be a Catholic KJV-onlyist. Glad that’s over.
>>18414337And yet Stephen cites the name used in the Septuagint - meaning he cites from a Bible which includes the Deuterocanon. So either the KJV uses non-inspired Scriptures that reject books from what is presented by a Saint in the New Testament, or the Church has failed, has identified a false Saint in Stephen, and has broken Jesus' promise. Just these two verses mean that the KJV can't be the final and only translation of God's Word, because then the discrepancy in its own text can't be explained in a vacuum, without the other versions to explain why Stephen cites a different name despite both the original and the reference supposedly being in the same compilation of books.Mind you, I'm not saying the KJV is bad for *this* in particular (I'm rather more upset at the moving of the Deuterocanon to the Apocrypha and then its removal in the NKJV), but it's just one more proof that Masoretic does not align with the Septuagint, which is the Old Testament used by the witnesses of the New Testament and the Early Church.
>>18413657>>18413807>>18414294>>18414954FYI Dead Sea Scrolls validated the Masoretic Text, including usage of the Hebrew word almah in Isiah 7:14
>>18414971The Scrolls also include the Deuterocanon, which all Masoretic-based Bible -and the Tanakh- do not include. You gonna bring that up, or...?
>>18415052So? The Dead Sea scrolls also include Enoch. Are you going to say that Jews intentionally removed Enoch?
>>18415061my point is that the Dead Sea Scrolls are not authoritative either, since they contradict your position too. They are uninspired like the Masoretic. Stephen does not cite the Dead Sea Scrolls, buried off - he cites the SEPTUAGINT.
>>18415065>And yet Stephen cites the name used in the Septuagint - meaning he cites from a Bible which includes the Deuterocanon.No, he cited the OT hebrew passage, not the greek translation of the passage. The reason why the name is different is because the name is transliterated, the NT is written in greek.>>18415065>Stephen does not cite the Dead Sea Scrolls, buried off - he cites the SEPTUAGINT.That didn't exist at that time. Why would Stephen cite a greek translations of the hebrew texts? Especially since the greek translations of the old testament contradicts with it.
>>18415201>No, he cited the OT hebrew passage, not the greek translation of the passage. >That didn't exist at that time.legitimately retarded, this is possibly the stupidest fucking reply in this thread
>>18410527>people who claim they have the truth because they believe they No different than normalfags and redditors doing same shit, faggot
>>18410680jews spread islam because its the nerve center of the MENAmutt bio-mass the jews wield against The West.
>>18415298Matthew 5:18“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”Jot and tittle. Those are hebrew wordings, not greek.Matthew 23:35“That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.”This passage is referring to the order of the books in the Hebrew OT. Abel (Genesis) to Zacharias (2nd chronicles) that matches with the hebrew OT, now with the greek OT>no no, but the scholars say it existed in the BC's, way before origen.Why didn't Jesus recognize it then? "The main evidence for a bc septuagint is a document called the letter of aristeas. Dating of the septuagint it is supposed to detail the way that the egyptian king went about having the old testament translated into greek, however many consider this to be a fraud possibly perpetuated by Philo of Alexandria as it contains many factual errors and could not have been written by the person who was given credit for writing it. The head librarian of the great library who supposedly oversaw the project did not serve under the king in question, there are many other issues that make many just as many scholars consider this letter a fraud and there are scholars that think it's real."https://youtu.be/BbJwWLXDKEI?si=zmsFO5RmSShC6DFXIf you really want to rely on texts from Egypt, go ahead, but the Bible itself doesn't have anything good to say about Egypt.
>>18410358>Protestants and their negatives IQsNothing new here.
>>18413494Lemme get this straight, you're arguing the KJV is the "uncorrupted" version of the Bible because the "translators" changed some verses to cope with contradictions in the actual text.The reason I put "translators" in quotes here isn't because they took liberties by the way, but because 99% of the KJV is ripped verbatim from slightly older English-language bibles.
>>18410352im an hpb onlyist, hpb is the only version that renders Mal 2 and Hos 4 to my satisfaction
>>18415883There are no contradictions in scripture, it is perfect
>>18414337>they couldn't find half the verse in the Greek manuscripts, but they said. "it SEEMS like it belongs here"So you admit they added words into the text that did not exist in the manuscripts they used in their translation? And you justify this by saying their hunch was divinely inspired?>On page 1512, next to Hebrews 1:3, the text contains a marginal note, "Fool and knave, leave the old reading and do not change it!" – "ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἄφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει" which may suggest unauthorised correcting was a recognized problem in scriptoriums.[44]lmao seems like some things never change>The words "he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also" 1 John 2:23 were italicised because the King James translators initially did not find them in the majority of Greek manuscripts and in earlier editions of the Textus Receptus but rather strongly in the Latin.>The second clause of this Trinitarian verse is supported by the Vulgate, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, Ephraemi, Porphyrianus and about 70 other Greek manuscripts (Novum Testamentum Graecum: Editio Critica Maior: IV Catholic Letters, Text, 2nd Ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2013), p. 292). Most modern translations (e.g. NIV, ESV, NASB) follow this reading.>But with there being about 517 extant Greek manuscripts of 1 John and with just over 70 manuscripts having 1 John 2:23b, the clause is a minority reading. Accordingly, the Byzantine Majority Text does not include the clause. Most Greek manuscripts do not actually have it because of an accidental scribal error called homoeoteleuton that propagated. But anyway your argument that they were magically inspired to reconstruct the original from their dreams is bullshit. They had access to the verse by relying on the Latin translations which proved to be better than the shitty Greek manuscripts they used for the KJV in most other cases
>>18416351If I had to figure out myself which scholar and scribe is correct and go trough this same observation you're going through, and had nothing else as evidence that the KJV is the pure word of God, I wouldn't know what Bible to read either, but fortunately God has made the KJV in such a way that if your eyes are open, it's impossibly to deny that it's mathematically impossible for the KJV to be the way that it is by just coincidence.There is plenty of proof to convince you to stop being the final authority and just submit to the word of God and let it be the final authority, but if you fight against it and immediately reject it as silly because you don't want it to be true, since you'd have to abandon your pride as an intelligent Bible student who known better than the normies, it will mean nothing to you. God gives people what they want, and if you want to reject the authority of His word, He doesn't force you to accept it.Just take a moment, humble yourself for just a while, and go trough these links if you really care about the purity of the word of God and want to know the truth.https://truthischrist.com/seven/https://truthischrist.com/elton-anomaly-823543/https://truthischrist.com/70x7-kjb-code-jesus-is-the-son-of-god/https://truthischrist.com/new-discovery-in-first-and-last-verses-of-the-king-james-bible/
>>18416452>I wouldn't know what Bible to read either, but fortunately God has made the KJV in such a way that if your eyes are open, it's impossibly to deny that it's mathematically impossible for the KJV to be the way that it is by just coincidence.That's because even you recognize that there are serious issues with the standard narrative. You have resorted to putting your brain in a box and blindly believing it's the truth in a circular manner. Also what does that even mean? Just because you have 7x7x7 words in genesis proves nothing. If I wanted to I could also make a post with exactly 343 words. Is that divine now? This pattern is highly dependent on the specific edition of the KJV. For example take verse 11 in your image the original 1611 version uses "it selfe" instead of "itself">let it be the final authority, but if you fight against it and immediately reject it as silly because you don't want it to be true, since you'd have to abandon your pride as an intelligent Bible student who known better than the normiesSo in other words to make it true you have to want it to be true and then abandon critical thinking because you fool yourself into thinking that's a humble thing to do. Why can't you be like the early Christians who admit their bibles are tampered with by man? How come you know better than them?
>>18416499Every word of God is pure. (Proverbs 30:5, Proverbs 8:8)The word of God is incorruptible and endures forever. (1 Peter 1:23, Isaiah 40:8)Jesus placed heavy emphasis on the scriptures. (Matthew 21:42, Matthew 22:29, Matthew 26:54, Luke 24:27, John 5:39)Jesus, Paul, Timothy, the Bereans, and the Ethiopian eunuch had the scriptures, which were copies of copies of copies, not the original autographs. (Luke 4:17-21, Acts 8:32,35, 2 Timothy 3:15, Acts 17:10-11, Galatians 4:30)The words (plural) of Jesus Christ exist today, and haven’t passed away. (Matthew 24:35, Mark 13:31, Luke 21:33)God preserved His words to all generations and will He continue to do so. (Psalms 12:6-7, Psalm 100:5)The word of God is the final authority, even the sword of God. (John 12:48, Galatians 3:22, Ephesians 6:17, Hebrews 4:12, Revelation 19:13,15,21)So if the KJV is not the pure word of God, then where is it? There aren't any errors or contradictions in it like in the modern versions, and there are many mathematical miracles.>If I wanted to I could also make a post with exactly 343 words.That example of Genesis 1 was just one of many, when you look at the patterns you realize that it's not something that could have been done intentionally by man. I know there are many "Bibles" that are tampered by man, but God is more powerful than man, and He preserved His word for us to read. The evidence clearly points to His pure word being in the King James Bible. And there is no reason to believe you have to search for it somewhere else.
>>18416573>So if the KJV is not the pure word of God, then where is it?You don't have it, that's the point. You quoting a bunch of text from the same book you want to justify as divine is nonsensical. Especially when you're assuming so much in the interpretation. The bible itself says that Jesus' words do not endure forever and that many of them have been lost. Why do you think you have so many different accounts of what he did? Magically only your specific collection is supposed to be authoritative because you find the number 7. What even is this standard bro? On top of it all you're just blatantly denying the contradictions and errors. Especially those that can only be found with the KJV. We know for a fact that it contains errors because newer versions were published to remove them. Look at https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Psalms-69-32/ and https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Psalms-69-32/ Psalm 69:32 was corrected from "seek good" (1611) to "seek God". There are countless types of corrections like these. So why exactly do you believe it was perfectly inspired and all that when the KJV you have in your hands is changed from the one you revere >That example of Genesis 1 was just one of manyIt was so easy to disprove so why are you pretending all of the other examples aren't just as easy?
>>18410352Christians have some of the lowest average IQs of any demographic. This is true across all races.
They don't know what a "testament" is and think the book itself is the word instead of the testimony of those who witnessed the word.
>>18411420You mean like Cardinal Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros and his 1517 polygot bible with Hebrew, Aramaic, Koine Greek and Latin?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complutensian_Polyglot_Bible
>>18416655I don't know about that or before, but I can see that the KJV Bible is perfect right now. That's enough. Psalms 12:6 - 12:7:"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.">The bible itself says that Jesus' words do not endure foreverMatthew 24:35“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.”
>>18416852>I don't know about that or before, but I can see that the KJV Bible is perfect right now. That's enough.So now not even the original translators received divine inspiration? Just a particular version you bonded with? this sounds to me like delusion>The bible itself says that Jesus' words do not endure foreverpic rel says entire moments of Jesus' life are missing and if you want words specifically too then what he wrote on the ground is now gone too
>>18410352They have adult pretend time, there's no good reason for anything they say.But it's likely because the KJV is Americana."It's good enough for the Founding Fathers, so it's good enough for me!" but then taken to an extreme of "This is the perfect word of god".
>>18416950>>18416655This video would answer that better than I could explain, you can start watching at around 8:00 if you don't want to watch all of it:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBGjBMwQxqo
They just like the old-fashioned tenor of the KJV. The appeal of the KJV is that it's age makes it come across as elevated. When appeal to tradition is such an important part of your belief why would you want a translation that sounds less old?Of course actual traditionalism would require learning greek and hebrew (or latin if you're catholic I guess) but that's a bit of an ask. It's only the divine word of god. Better to just conclude the version you like best is divinely protected from translation issues, actually being able to read the original isn't worth the effort. So they land of the KJV. Wycliff is too hard for them to read, Tyndale is incomplete, thr Great Bible lacks the historical clout. KJV is the oldest English language bible they can read, with the added benefit of being traditionally used.
>>18410352glaze brigade for dramatic effect. When the Bible will be read largely in video game format, this shit will be done; everyone loves Greek and Hebrew now as the most high verification. KJV will cause brain damage these days because reading thou shalt not kill makes Amerifats one shotted by the third world on Instagram comments causing them debilitating white guilt over colonization.
>>18410358>Jesus was a white person. It says so right here in the KJV.Verse?
>>18411730Yeah but at least you're fewer steps removed and they're all reading the same words.
>>18412477Have you not shown him the specific verses that mention it?
>>18410378I honestly think this is the real reason even for them. They don't like their holy book that is supposed to contain the secrets of the universe to sound like some bloke on the street. Because it honestly exposes how ridiculous it all is to hear it in plain vernacular without the obfuscation of ye olde tongue. "And so Zeus doth unleashed the thunder of his terrible wroth." isn't so impressive when you realize it really just says "Zeus was very angry and threw his magic lightning bolt".
