Christ Jesus Came into the World to…
Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine…
I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief, and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost.
ADVERTISEMENT
The KJV bible from the very same website doesn’t have “the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality” passage as in the ESV bible. It appears we have a bible for everyone or we can just write in whatever we want and it becomes gospel. This is why (I think) we can never take the bible literally.
—-
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;…
@watchtower
Surely you realize the New Testament wasn’t written in English. Surely you appreciate the fact 17th century English is different than English spoken today.
Surely you can’t be serious.
So the KJV version is not “english” but the the ESV is? Surely you can’t be serious JD? The passage in KJV seems pretty clear to me, no mention of homosexual…are there words in it that requires a modern day man to interpret it differently?
@watchtower
It would appear you are sincerely and innocently uninformed about the Bible with regard to language and its history of translation. Admittedly, that may have been an unfair assumption to make.
Regrettably, there is neither the time nor forum here to engage in that discussion, nor was that the intended point. If you’d like to continue this discussion offline, please feel free.