Replies

This is a citation to a Bible verse from 2sheep's interpretation.

It doesn't read that way at all. 2sheep is trying to pass off his interpretation of Romans 3:2 as the direct words of Paul.

There are several such posters on FR. IMHO they should be permanently banned on the grounds of inherent untrustworthyness.

One thing I am very curious about -- why would an organization which is straining so hard to distinguish its Jewish character as opposed to the "Christian Church," lean on a Bible translation that is the product of the Anglicans? If they claim they are distinct, they really ought to have their own translation. The Anglican church, which produced the KJV, would be hopelessly pagan in their view, what with their Christmas and Easter celebrations.

Which organization are you referring to? Jews for Jesus or other Messianic groups? A Hispanic Messianic congregation that I know has several members who are fluent in Hebrew and read from the Hebrew Text and simultaneously translate when not reading from the Reina Valera which is the 1569 Spanish translation with a revision in 1602, of the Masoretic Text and Textus Receptus BECAUSE like its English counterpart, the KJV, its translators feared G-d, did a very painstaking job of translating, and didn't try to soften or pervert the message, unlike some of the newer perversions. Bible Gateway.com says: The Reina-Valera Antigua was first translated and published in 1569 by Casiodoro de Reina, after twelve years of intensive work, and later put out in 1602 in revised form by Cipriano de Valera, who gave more than twenty years of his life to its revision and improvement. The NIV translating team had 100 "scholars" from 20 denominations (how ecumenical!) working for ten years, but many of those scholars weren't translators, they were editorial reviewers and stylistic reviewers. Well, betcha by golly wow!