Smacked in the gob (mouth) - a bit like :eek: but more so…
The reason is simple: People don’t agree with the translations.
The KJV was very carefully translated,the translators washed their hands before every verse. It was quite an undertaking.
Its just a matter of the translation many denominations differentiate themselves based on vs a new translation that may erase their interpritation(I.e. Pentecostals,baptists and etc all tend to disagree about the exact meaning of the verse, if one or the other re-writes the bible then its possible to obliterate the others translation.)
Also - the NIV wasnt translated from the KJV or modernized…it was re-written from another bible that isnt very acceptable to most christians.
Heres come information
http://www.exorthodoxforchrist.com/problems_ni.htm
I’m sorry, Darph, but your link simply perpetutes the lies that Melton’s screed was pushing earlier, but using pictures. The Vaticanus was never “rejected by early Christians,” nor was the Sinaiticus. Rather, they represent a different tradition of copies in which the copyists errors (and all the existing manuscripts have errors) follow the tradition now known as the Alexandrine while the Textus Receptus follows the tradition known as Antiochan.
There is no evidence that the “early church” rejected any of the copyist traditions. However, when North Africa and the Middle East were converted to Islam, the Alexandrine tradition came to an end while the Antiochan tradition continued in the Byzantine Empire, giving the Antiochan tradition a great many more copies from which Erasmus could compare to begin to create what later became the Textus Receptus.
I have no criticism of the efforts that went into the creation of the KJV. It was created under the best conditions that they could manage at the time. However, the attacks on later translations always seem to get caught up in dishonest rhetoric, making the current defenders of the KJV appear dishonest, themselves.
Well the main part of it all lies here : Mormons and Protestants follow the KJV and reject catholics as little more than enlightened Pagans.
Can’t you be a little more sweeping in your generalization? It’s not like you can back it up factually, after all.
Ok, I,my family, my church,and all of the other churches in my area - as a protestants,consider catholics to be pagans who pray to other humans instead of God for forgiveness. Please read up on the whole thing called the protestant revolution, it pretty much shaped the face of the world - brought the catholic church and the dark era to an end in the modern protestant world.
The mormon church (Of Latter day saints), (i work in a mormon owned and operated company with about 95% mormon body,and we discuss religion on a daily basis mind you), consider catholics to be pagans who are going to hell. P
Did you think i was making blind assumptions or are my own beliefs enough fact for you? 
Darph, you DO understand that not all Protestants are KJV adherents?
Yes, and not all humans have 2 eyes or arms or legs. But when your general description of humans is a 2 eyed creature,is it not?
You can, of course, provide documentation from the governing bodies of current Protestant denominations that claim Catholics are “Enlightened Pagans.” Even the Southern Baptist Convention doesn’t seem to claim this, in this [url=]pdf highly critical of Catholic beliefs. Your personal claims are anecdotal, and worth as much as my personal claims that I know no Protestants who believe Catholics are “Enlightened Pagans.”
Then your beliefs are based on an ignorant lie.
Wow, I didn’t know that the Catholic church was brought to an end! Did someone tell the Pope and the other billion or so Catholics out there?!
Well if people you work with say that it MUST be true! :rolleyes:
I’ll take the blind assumptions options and raise you to blind, ignorant assumptions.
There are some flaws of translation and transliteration in all versions.
The paraprased version being the worst as they are by and large the attempts of individuals to pass off their own views as the views of scripture.
Study the generally accepted translations together and you will get a pretty coherent consistent view of scripture.
“Beware of the Cog”
Darph:
You wouldn’t happen to be a big fan of Jack Chick’s would you?
You’ve made several factually incorrect assertions. Never mind that the KJV is flawed translation, never mind that it’s not the “protestant” Bible. I would like you to support your assertion that Catholics are either “pagan” or that they 'worship humans."
What “area” do you live in where people are so uniformly ignorant?
When you get out of high school you may discover that you don’t actually know everything. That should come as quite a shock to you.
I’m not sure what “main part” you are referring to, but your cryptic comment invites several factual responses, even without having any facts, itself.
The KJV was a masterful effort of scholarship and prose for its time, but it is not free of error and is open to a number of criticisms. (None of those criticisms should be construed as making it invalid as one presentation of the word of God.)
Regardless, quite a number of Protestant churches have chosen to move away from the KJV and adopt either the Revised Standard Version or the New International Version as their primary texts when selecting an English translation.
The several sites that have been linked in this thread that attempt to mask or deny any legitimate criticism of the KJV are, themselves, riddled with factual errors (and, on a number of points, are actually dishonest in their presentations).
While there are some (generally smaller) Christian groups that deny that the Roman Catholic Church is Christian, the overwhelming majority of Protestant churches make no such claim (as can be seen by any review of the issues of ecumenism as stated by the 36 member National Council of Churches including most of the largest denominations in the U.S. along with its affiliation with the World Council of Churches). It is amusing to see “Protestants” lumped in with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in the context of your remarks, given that among those small groups that condemn Catholicism, there are a very high number of the same groups that condemn the CoJCoLDS as being a “cult.”
(Based on your later comments, it would seem that you are probably simply misled by living in an area that is dominated by one or more of the smaller groups. You should probably do a bit more reading of Protestant views to discover the larger perspective of what wider populations of Protestants believe.)
And, in the interest of responding to your anecdotal testimony, none of the LDS members of my acquaintance consider the RCC to be other than Christian. (Further suggesting that the views you have related are dictated more by geography than theology or history.)
What governing bodies?
Most protestants don’t have a “governing body”,Except for the brothers of the church.
There are SOME southern baptists that joined that silly convention,but MOST southern baptists are INDEPENDANT baptists,who DO NOT have a “pope” to tell us what to beleive <important notice in caps for dramatic effect> WHICH IS THE WHOLE POINT OF BEING A PROTEST^ANT: PROTESTING AGAINST THE CATHOLIC GOVERNMENT STYLE CHURCH SYSTEM. Yay You,you just learned somthing. ;j ;j
Please pay a visit to Ireland,please explain to everyone there that this is just a big mis understanding and that Protestants and catholics get a long just fine,then everything will be fixed.
Yay. You just saved so many peoples lives i tell ya.
Darph. I hate to have to say this, but you are seriously losing ground, here.
The preceding statement does not support your claim that Protestants believe that Catholics are “pagan,” it merely indicates a certain amount of hostility between two groups. It is also historically inaccurate. Aside from a few certifiable kooks such as Ian Paisley, the issues of Northern Ireland have almost nothing to do with actual belief. The Protestants and the Catholics represent two cultural groups, most easily identified by where they go to church, that have not had a serious difference of belief throughout the slightly more than 200 years that they have been bickering over who would have the greatest voice in governing. (In the 1970s, a large proportion of the IRA leadership was actually anti-Catholic (or, at least, anti-clerical in the fine old European tradition) and probably could not spell transubstantiation.)
Well Tomndebb, I can tell you why my Fathers family is Here in the USA instead of back in Ireland ; Exile, for murdering Catholics.
This is a subject i have great great interest in,and a strong connection with.
Altho i feel they are wrong to kill people based on beleifs i can promise you i still respect their beleif that ireland is poisoned by Roman catholicism. And that Catholics are Pagans.
Catholics feel they can do hail marys and have their sins forgiven,protestants beleive that the only way is to ask Gods forgiveness and to accept his sons sacrifice, Hince the reason many protestants from ireland and lots here in the USA consider them pagan.
Oh - so it’s only those Protestants whom you recognize are “true” Protestants. The “no true Scotsman” fallacy then.
I have indeed learned something: you cannot support your arguments factually. Since you have proven unable to grasp the simple concept of providing references to support your assertions, I will leave you to all your your poisonous beliefs and little smilies, including Mr. Orthodox Jewish Man.
I am indeed sorry that your family was in exile for murdering Catholics. I think those who murder others should rot in jail. Yay.
Not enough of a connection or an interest to actually take the time to learn the real history, of course.
I did not claim that there was no hatred between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. I did note (as you have apparently never made the effort to learn) that the religious differences between them are far enough in the past that it had stopped being a religious feud, devolving into a cultural one, many years ago. (There are, of course, kooks like Paisley who attempt to keep the religious side of the feud burning, but they are a tiny minority.)
I also did not claim that there were no Protestants who believed Catholics were “pagans” (or, at least, that they are not Christians). There certainly are such people. You are not even the first such person to post those beliefs to the Straight Dope Message Board.
On the other hand, such people in no way make up a majority of the Protestants on Earth (or in English speaking countries or in the U.S.), so your initial claim that “protestants” or “mormons” believe that Catholics are pagans must, in the interest of accuracy, be modified to “some odd Protestants” and “a few Mormons” believe that Catholics are pagans.
Mind you, I am not attempting to change your beliefs (although you have already demonstrated that those beliefs are rooted in error and misunderstanding). I am only pointing out that your sweeping generalizations are clearly inaccurate.
Because you say so? I think you’ll find plenty of people that may disagree with you, though maybe not on this board.