Rainy: Ed, you seem to think that most mainstream Christianity is King James only, or maybe you believe that mainstream Christianity is 100% God-breathed for any modern translation of the Bible. I do not believe you are right.
Ed: Hello Rainy, actually i don't think that most mainstream Christianity is King James only, nor have i commented on "King James only", nor do i believe that most pastors and theologians imagine the modern translations to be 100% God breathed. I do understand that the religious system's biblical inerrancy and infallibility doctrines are based upon the original manuscripts which no longer exist and that this is why there is such an industry within institutionalized religion to get as close as possible to recreating what was originally written - since it is believed to be 100% God breathed - and to search and study the Greek in the hopes of getting as close as possible to recreating those presumably 100% God breathed words. So all of these areas where you said you don't believe i am right, you spoke against beliefs to which i do not even hold.
The area where i expect you will disagree with an actual position i do hold to is that I don't believe that faulty translations are the only problem, but i also overwhelmingly believe that the originals themselves were never 100% God breathed, inerrant and infallible to begin with and that these doctrines are false, debilitating and destructive. I wrote about many of my actual reasons for this within a 4 part or so discussion i initiated about 4 months ago and where Trapper who disagreed with my position on the imperfect bible was the primary other individual within that dialogue. I'm not sure if you ever had a chance to read that, but it is to be found here: https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=2416300#i1
I do believe that the KJV-only people are even more deceived than the others, and i see them (including the KJV-only guy in the video you shared) as a kind of religious cult, but my beliefs against the doctrines of the 100% God breathed bible go far beyond just the KJV.
Rainy: When I read the doctrinal beliefs of many groups I noticed that many believe that it was only the original texts that were God-breathed. That is why in sermons many refer back to the original language for a word study.
Ed: Yes this is how i understand their position to be as well.
Rainy: You are really over playing this and it is not necessary as it is not true.
Ed: I am sorry that my beliefs are uncomfortable for you and i sincerely wish it were not so. I disagree with you when you say that i am "over playing" my beliefs against the institutionalized religious system's doctrines of the 100% God breathed, inerrant and infallible bible (the original manuscripts) and when you say that my beliefs are not true, but you are certainly welcome to your opinion. To be clear, my perspective is that you are over playing your institutionalized religious system aligned idea that the "original" bible is 100% God breathed, inerrant and infallible and my perspective is that this is not necessary and that your beliefs in this area are untrue... Do you see what i did there? I wanted to give you an opportunity to experience that on the receiving end : ).
Rainy: I only see it true for those who are King James only and their beliefs are based only on the reasonings of men.
Ed: It seems we can agree upon the KJV only delusion and as well i completely disagree with the frenzied attack of the guy against James White within the video you shared : ).
Rainy: ... They know the translations are made from copies of what was God-breathed and most of it is very accurate to the original.
Ed: I would say that they incorrectly believe it was 100% God breathed, not that they know : ). I am open to the possibility that most of it is very accurate to the original, but i do disbelieve that it was ever 100% God breathed in the first place. Parts of it yes, parts no.
Rainy: That's why the Holy Spirit is all over many modern Bible versions. Each version says the same thing in a different way sometimes.
Ed: I agree that parts of the bible are great and that the great parts are derived from God breathed original writings. I just disagree with the idea that this is true of every part.
Rainy: Hope you will have a short five minute listen.
Ed: Yes i checked it out and i don't believe there was anything therein with which you and i disagree. Thank you for thoughtfully listing and setting the specific minute markers.
Rainy: PS: I didn't know you didn't believe in the Trinity.
Ed: Yes. I have had some reservations about the doctrine, but hadn't really given it too much thought and attention until perhaps about a year ago. As i described above, i feel it is very poorly substantiated scripturally. Do you continue to hold unwaveringly to your belief in it? : ).