The Bible is ink on paper. Both are dead. So again, it's a nice bedtime story, but that's not what I'm here for. Or are you trying to promote a doctrine that preaches that the Gospel can change over time? (Just not sure, no offence intended.)
Doesn't that assertion kill the whole "Bible is the LIVING word" thing? If the text isn't important, then let's just hold hands and sing "Kum ba yah". If the text IS important, then shouldn't one make the effort to learn the language?
I'm slightly inclined to agree with you here, but the conclusion is that the text doesn't matter at all. Is that a position that you wish to take? If so, what is one to do when encountering dozens if not hundreds of people who preach conflicting Christian teachings?
Wait.... are you Catholic? (But a Catholic wouldn't reference the KJV.) So then, what is the basis for your Ecclesiastical Authority?
Rhema
PS: In that we don't know each other, I thank you for posting the references, but they are a bit elementary to me.
Perhaps you'd be more comfortable with Aramaic scriptures then. Here's a link back at ya brother.
The Holy Aramaic Scriptures: With a literal English translation and transliteration of The Eastern Peshitta New Testament Text, such as given in The Khabouris Codex.
www.thearamaicscriptures.com