֍ ARE THERE OTHER SACRED SCRIPTURES/BOOKS BESIDE THE BIBLE? ֎

[SolXx]

no it was not.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by sky123

I have read many Manuscripts pre-15c and can assure you the word ' Woman/Women does appear, so let's agree to differ

Can you share some of these sources which show the word woman/women was used pre-15th century?

The Tyndale Bible in Genesis 2:22 does not use woman, it uses woma.

Genesis 2:22 reads "And the LORde God made of the rybbe which he toke out of Adam a woma and brought her vnto Adam."

[SolXx]

very clever Big John the vernacular in ancient Arabic of WOMA, is translated in Latin as whomed man. that was done in the 14th century which is a word now excepted.
edit; amd used to prou noun in its undrstandings in modern times of the 15th centrury, of which ws used in the munks decrying of the dead sea scrolls.
Scrolls that can no longer be used for further studies for they were destroyed.

thus? the topic of interests. are there any other tablets or scrolls. yes there are and they are currently being garnisheed as I stated. thus very moment.

postscrip; in aribic the word woma was never used unless the femal had concived. woma wA lwAUE USED IN THE ANCIENT SROLLS AS A WOMA THAT HAS CHILD IN THE BELLY

"womb of the child" NEVER SP0KEN AS WOMB OF THE MAN

[sky]

It was Translated and first printed in London.



INTRODUCTION
At least sixty men were directly involved in the translation of the King James Bible (hereinafter KJB). Most were Translators, while a few were project overseers, revisers and editors. Some served in several roles. Who were these men? What were their backgrounds? What did they share? In what ways were they different? They were a diverse group. While some were born in large cities and towns, most were from small villages scattered throughout England. Several were the children of university graduates, most were not. They were sons of mariners, farmers, school teachers, cordwainers (leather merchants), fletchers (makers of bows and arrows), ministers, brewers, tailors, and aristocrats. All were members of the Church of England, but their religious views ran the gamut. Some were ardent Puritans, others staunch defenders of the religious establishment. Some believed in pre-destination and limited salvation as taught by John Calvin, while others believed in self-determination and universal access to heaven as taught by Jacobus Arminius.

All of the Translators were university graduates. Oxford and Cambridge claimed nearly equal numbers of Translators as alumni. All of the Translators except one were ordained Church of England priests.



https://kingjamesbibletranslators.org/bios/

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Can you share some of these sources which show the word woman/women was used pre-15th century?

The Tyndale Bible in Genesis 2:22 does not use woman, it uses woma.

Genesis 2:22 reads "And the LORde God made of the rybbe which he toke out of Adam a woma and brought her vnto Adam."

You could start with the Aramaic Bible or the Hebrew Bible yourself, all available online and also Dictionaries to help

[sky]

Originally Posted by SolXx

very clever Big John the vernacular in ancient Arabic of WOMA, is translated in Latin as whomed man. that was done in the 14th century which is a word now excepted.
edit; amd used to prou noun in its undrstandings in modern times of the 15th centrury, of which ws used in the munks decrying of the dead sea scrolls.
Scrolls that can no longer be used for further studies for they were destroyed.

thus? the topic of interests. are there any other tablets or scrolls. yes there are and they are currently being garnisheed as I stated. thus very moment.

postscrip; in aribic the word woma was never used unless the femal had concived. woma wA lwAUE USED IN THE ANCIENT SROLLS AS A WOMA THAT HAS CHILD IN THE BELLY

"womb of the child" NEVER SP0KEN AS WOMB OF THE MAN

Men don't have a Womb

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by sky123

You could start with the Aramaic Bible or the Hebrew Bible yourself, all available online and also Dictionaries to help

Neither of those Bibles use English words as you already know.

Besides, you claimed the manuscripts existed, so why the big mystery in not showing us at least one example?

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

It was a delight to read your post.

More and more older manuscripts, etc. are being found that provides us with more insight on how accurate the Bible is today. This has led to more accurate Bibles.

You mentioned Nag Hammadi which also brought to our attention the Gospel of Thomas. I plan in the future to present several translations of that Gospel so people can see the differences between translations.

Thanks for surfacing Nag Hammadi to my attention.

The Gospel of Thomas (Sayings of Jesus) is definitely one of my favorite Christian writings. I would love to see what you present in the future regarding various translations of that Gospel.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

The Gospel of Thomas (Sayings of Jesus) is definitely one of my favorite Christian writings. I would love to see what you present in the future regarding various translations of that Gospel.

I already started the project. there are only 114 verses. I got as far as 3 verses. What I did was look at 1 verse at a time and did not look at 1 verse but 5 different translation of the verse so it would be easy to compare each translation.

sky123 wrote a big write-up claiming we can not do that because it was against forum policy so I removed all of the work.

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

I already started the project. there are only 114 verses. I got as far as 3 verses. What I did was look at 1 verse at a time and did not look at 1 verse but 5 different translation of the verse so it would be easy to compare each translation.

sky123 wrote a big write-up claiming we can not do that because it was against forum policy so I removed all of the work.

Sky didn't write a big anything I showed you Forums Rules which Lynn Posted and she has every Right.