Concerning Jesus return

[placebofactor]

The following question is difficult for me to ask because of a hundred little details connected to it.  
I believe the time of Jesus' return has been hidden in the book of Daniel and Hosea for several thousand years and is only now to be revealed.

I believe Jesus Christ is the God of Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” To support that I use the following.
Jesus said in Revelation 1:8, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, said the Lord, which is, and which was and which is to come, the Almighty.”

Hebrews 1:10 states that he laid the foundation of the earth and heavens.

Colossians 1:16, "By him were all things created." With that said, we know without doubt that Jesus Christ is God.

Philippians 2:7-8, tells us He had taken on “the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of man. And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself --.” With Hebrews 2:9, he “was made a little lower than the angels--.”
But after his resurrection, he was given the glory he had with the Father before the world was, John 17:5. God is said to be all-knowing, yet in Mark 14:32, Jesus said concerning his return, “Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.”

Because God is all-knowing, it appears his words limit his understanding. So, my question is, did this change after his resurrection? Did he again receive the glory he once had, ‘all-knowing?’ John 17:5. After he was taken into heaven, the Father gave him the Holy Spirit. Jesus then sent him to us. Nothing in scripture tells us the Holy Spirit did not have this information. If he does, are any new revelations ready to be made known? Or has the whole story been told?

[Difflugia]

What's the substance of your argument? Is there any?

No, it's up to you to explain what you posted.

That's what I thought.

Quote: the Douay-Rheims had some influence on the KJV.

The KJV was primarily a revision of the Bishops' Bible, which was the official English Bible of the Church of England at the time, but was less popular than the Geneva Bible. King James commissioned the KJV (the "Authorized Version") as a direct response to this, intending the new version to be more readable and understandable by English-speaking laity.

Despite the KJV being a direct descendent of the Bishops' Bible, there are a number of verses that show that the translators liked, for whatever reason, the wording of the Douay-Rheims. A few important ones:

• "Forgive us our debts" of the Douay-Rheims instead of "forgive us our trespasses" of the Bishops' Bible in the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:12).
• "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1) is nearly identical to the Douay-Rheims.
• 1 Corinthians 13:12 ("Now we see through a glass darkly...") is almost identical to the wording of the Douay-Rheims, as opposed to the Bishops' Bible.

Is that what you thought "says a lot" about the KJV, or did you have something else in mind?

[onewithhim]

What's the substance of your argument? Is there any?

No, it's up to you to explain what you posted.

That's what I thought.

That is what YOU wrote.

[Difflugia]

That is what YOU wrote.

Yes. I wrote a number of things that you haven't responded to.

Which part "says a lot" about the KJV and why?

[placebofactor]

What needs to be understood, until the 16th century, the Catholic church had a stranglehold on ownership of Bibles. Only their clergy were allowed to have Bibles, and only in Latin. At that time, the Catholic church ruled all of Europe, parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Russia. If you were caught with a Bible written in English by men like Tindal, or Wycliff, you would be strangled or put to the stake and burned alive. King James was directly responsible for overturning the Catholic dominance. Also, until the Guttenberg Press was invented in the 15th century, the Bible was written by hand. Also, the majority of the common people in the so-called Holy Roman Empire were uneducated and few able to read. The condition of the working class was horrible back then, and those in authority, especially in Rome, their Popes ruled with an iron fist. Tindal's last prayer has been recorded in history. it went something like this, "Lord Jesus, open up the eyes of the king."

It was King James and the King James Bible that opened up to a dumbed-down Christian world, the word of God. For that reason alone, I believe the King James Bible is the finished work of the Holy Spirit. All these other new renderings of the Bible came out around 1950 or later. Easier to read, "Yes" if you're lazy. The problem is corruption enters the picture. Money was the driving force behind these newly revised editions of the Bible. Read about the corruption of Wescott and Hort, and those that followed that put their dirty hands on the world of God. Soon after, America was being settled, Christianity spread like wildfire, the preferred Bible for the next 450 years was/is the King James Bible.

[onewithhim]

What needs to be understood, until the 16th century, the Catholic church had a stranglehold on ownership of Bibles. Only their clergy were allowed to have Bibles, and only in Latin. At that time, the Catholic church ruled all of Europe, parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Russia. If you were caught with a Bible written in English by men like Tindal, or Wycliff, you would be strangled or put to the stake and burned alive. King James was directly responsible for overturning the Catholic dominance. Also, until the Guttenberg Press was invented in the 15th century, the Bible was written by hand. Also, the majority of the common people in the so-called Holy Roman Empire were uneducated and few able to read. The condition of the working class was horrible back then, and those in authority, especially in Rome, their Popes ruled with an iron fist. Tindal's last prayer has been recorded in history. it went something like this, "Lord Jesus, open up the eyes of the king."

It was King James and the King James Bible that opened up to a dumbed-down Christian world, the word of God. For that reason alone, I believe the King James Bible is the finished work of the Holy Spirit. All these other new renderings of the Bible came out around 1950 or later. Easier to read, "Yes" if you're lazy. The problem is corruption enters the picture. Money was the driving force behind these newly revised editions of the Bible. Read about the corruption of Wescott and Hort, and those that followed that put their dirty hands on the world of God. Soon after, America was being settled, Christianity spread like wildfire, the preferred Bible for the next 450 years was/is the King James Bible.

I thought it was King Henry VIII that up-ended the stranglehold of the Catholic Church on the people. Anyway, the King James Bible is difficult to understand and more modern versions are a great help. How can people today understand the King's English? You say they would if they weren't lazy? How can a person know what a "shambles" is unless he stops and does intense research? Well, that definition has already been ascertained by more modern translators. Why not be grateful for the research already done?

[placebofactor]

What needs to be understood, until the 16th century, the Catholic church had a stranglehold on ownership of Bibles. Only their clergy were allowed to have Bibles, and only in Latin. At that time, the Catholic church ruled all of Europe, parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Russia. If you were caught with a Bible written in English by men like Tindal, or Wycliff, you would be strangled or put to the stake and burned alive. King James was directly responsible for overturning the Catholic dominance. Also, until the Guttenberg Press was invented in the 15th century, the Bible was written by hand. Also, the majority of the common people in the so-called Holy Roman Empire were uneducated and few able to read. The condition of the working class was horrible back then, and those in authority, especially in Rome, their Popes ruled with an iron fist. Tindal's last prayer has been recorded in history. it went something like this, "Lord Jesus, open up the eyes of the king."

It was King James and the King James Bible that opened up to a dumbed-down Christian world, the word of God. For that reason alone, I believe the King James Bible is the finished work of the Holy Spirit. All these other new renderings of the Bible came out around 1950 or later. Easier to read, "Yes" if you're lazy. The problem is corruption enters the picture. Money was the driving force behind these newly revised editions of the Bible. Read about the corruption of Wescott and Hort, and those that followed that put their dirty hands on the world of God. Soon after, America was being settled, Christianity spread like wildfire, the preferred Bible for the next 450 years was/is the King James Bible.

I thought it was King Henry VIII that up-ended the stranglehold of the Catholic Church on the people. Anyway, the King James Bible is difficult to understand and more modern versions are a great help.

Don't take this wrong, but if I can understand the K.J.B., of course with a great deal of effort, anyone can. The question is, "How much effort does a person wish to put into understanding it?"

How can people today understand the King's English?

It's easy, buy a concordance, a few well-recognized commentaries; Matthew Henry, Adam Clark, and Walvoord and Zuck etc.

You say they would if they weren't lazy? How can a person know what a "shambles" is unless he stops and does intense research?

Hmm! How much time is it worth to save your soul?

Well, that definition has already been ascertained by more modern translators. Why not be grateful for the research already done?

If you examine the recent history of modern versions, you will find there have been too many cooks in the kitchen; too much mudslinging; and too many copywriters.

[onewithhim]

What needs to be understood, until the 16th century, the Catholic church had a stranglehold on ownership of Bibles. Only their clergy were allowed to have Bibles, and only in Latin. At that time, the Catholic church ruled all of Europe, parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Russia. If you were caught with a Bible written in English by men like Tindal, or Wycliff, you would be strangled or put to the stake and burned alive. King James was directly responsible for overturning the Catholic dominance. Also, until the Guttenberg Press was invented in the 15th century, the Bible was written by hand. Also, the majority of the common people in the so-called Holy Roman Empire were uneducated and few able to read. The condition of the working class was horrible back then, and those in authority, especially in Rome, their Popes ruled with an iron fist. Tindal's last prayer has been recorded in history. it went something like this, "Lord Jesus, open up the eyes of the king."

It was King James and the King James Bible that opened up to a dumbed-down Christian world, the word of God. For that reason alone, I believe the King James Bible is the finished work of the Holy Spirit. All these other new renderings of the Bible came out around 1950 or later. Easier to read, "Yes" if you're lazy. The problem is corruption enters the picture. Money was the driving force behind these newly revised editions of the Bible. Read about the corruption of Wescott and Hort, and those that followed that put their dirty hands on the world of God. Soon after, America was being settled, Christianity spread like wildfire, the preferred Bible for the next 450 years was/is the King James Bible.

I thought it was King Henry VIII that up-ended the stranglehold of the Catholic Church on the people. Anyway, the King James Bible is difficult to understand and more modern versions are a great help.

Don't take this wrong, but if I can understand the K.J.B., of course with a great deal of effort, anyone can. The question is, "How much effort does a person wish to put into understanding it?"

How can people today understand the King's English?

It's easy, buy a concordance, a few well-recognized commentaries; Matthew Henry, Adam Clark, and Walvoord and Zuck etc.

You say they would if they weren't lazy? How can a person know what a "shambles" is unless he stops and does intense research?

Hmm! How much time is it worth to save your soul?

Well, that definition has already been ascertained by more modern translators. Why not be grateful for the research already done?

If you examine the recent history of modern versions, you will find there have been too many cooks in the kitchen; too much mudslinging; and too many copywriters.

All right. To each his own. You prefer the KJV, I prefer the New American Bible; American Standard Version; Young's Literal Translation; and the NASB.

[Capbook]

What needs to be understood, until the 16th century, the Catholic church had a stranglehold on ownership of Bibles. Only their clergy were allowed to have Bibles, and only in Latin. At that time, the Catholic church ruled all of Europe, parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Russia. If you were caught with a Bible written in English by men like Tindal, or Wycliff, you would be strangled or put to the stake and burned alive. King James was directly responsible for overturning the Catholic dominance. Also, until the Guttenberg Press was invented in the 15th century, the Bible was written by hand. Also, the majority of the common people in the so-called Holy Roman Empire were uneducated and few able to read. The condition of the working class was horrible back then, and those in authority, especially in Rome, their Popes ruled with an iron fist. Tindal's last prayer has been recorded in history. it went something like this, "Lord Jesus, open up the eyes of the king."

It was King James and the King James Bible that opened up to a dumbed-down Christian world, the word of God. For that reason alone, I believe the King James Bible is the finished work of the Holy Spirit. All these other new renderings of the Bible came out around 1950 or later. Easier to read, "Yes" if you're lazy. The problem is corruption enters the picture. Money was the driving force behind these newly revised editions of the Bible. Read about the corruption of Wescott and Hort, and those that followed that put their dirty hands on the world of God. Soon after, America was being settled, Christianity spread like wildfire, the preferred Bible for the next 450 years was/is the King James Bible.

I thought it was King Henry VIII that up-ended the stranglehold of the Catholic Church on the people. Anyway, the King James Bible is difficult to understand and more modern versions are a great help.

Don't take this wrong, but if I can understand the K.J.B., of course with a great deal of effort, anyone can. The question is, "How much effort does a person wish to put into understanding it?"

How can people today understand the King's English?

It's easy, buy a concordance, a few well-recognized commentaries; Matthew Henry, Adam Clark, and Walvoord and Zuck etc.

You say they would if they weren't lazy? How can a person know what a "shambles" is unless he stops and does intense research?

Hmm! How much time is it worth to save your soul?

Well, that definition has already been ascertained by more modern translators. Why not be grateful for the research already done?

If you examine the recent history of modern versions, you will find there have been too many cooks in the kitchen; too much mudslinging; and too many copywriters.

All right. To each his own. You prefer the KJV, I prefer the New American Bible; American Standard Version; Young's Literal Translation; and the NASB.

Are there are no variances to many translations? Why not verify them to the Hebrew or Greek text where they source from.
I prefer to visit the sources sometimes. KJV has its Strong Concordance, Hebrew and Greek lexicons for further guidance also.

[onewithhim]

What needs to be understood, until the 16th century, the Catholic church had a stranglehold on ownership of Bibles. Only their clergy were allowed to have Bibles, and only in Latin. At that time, the Catholic church ruled all of Europe, parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Russia. If you were caught with a Bible written in English by men like Tindal, or Wycliff, you would be strangled or put to the stake and burned alive. King James was directly responsible for overturning the Catholic dominance. Also, until the Guttenberg Press was invented in the 15th century, the Bible was written by hand. Also, the majority of the common people in the so-called Holy Roman Empire were uneducated and few able to read. The condition of the working class was horrible back then, and those in authority, especially in Rome, their Popes ruled with an iron fist. Tindal's last prayer has been recorded in history. it went something like this, "Lord Jesus, open up the eyes of the king."

It was King James and the King James Bible that opened up to a dumbed-down Christian world, the word of God. For that reason alone, I believe the King James Bible is the finished work of the Holy Spirit. All these other new renderings of the Bible came out around 1950 or later. Easier to read, "Yes" if you're lazy. The problem is corruption enters the picture. Money was the driving force behind these newly revised editions of the Bible. Read about the corruption of Wescott and Hort, and those that followed that put their dirty hands on the world of God. Soon after, America was being settled, Christianity spread like wildfire, the preferred Bible for the next 450 years was/is the King James Bible.

I thought it was King Henry VIII that up-ended the stranglehold of the Catholic Church on the people. Anyway, the King James Bible is difficult to understand and more modern versions are a great help.

Don't take this wrong, but if I can understand the K.J.B., of course with a great deal of effort, anyone can. The question is, "How much effort does a person wish to put into understanding it?"

How can people today understand the King's English?

It's easy, buy a concordance, a few well-recognized commentaries; Matthew Henry, Adam Clark, and Walvoord and Zuck etc.

You say they would if they weren't lazy? How can a person know what a "shambles" is unless he stops and does intense research?

Hmm! How much time is it worth to save your soul?

Well, that definition has already been ascertained by more modern translators. Why not be grateful for the research already done?

If you examine the recent history of modern versions, you will find there have been too many cooks in the kitchen; too much mudslinging; and too many copywriters.

All right. To each his own. You prefer the KJV, I prefer the New American Bible; American Standard Version; Young's Literal Translation; and the NASB.

Are there are no variances to many translations? Why not verify them to the Hebrew or Greek text where they source from.
I prefer to visit the sources sometimes. KJV has its Strong Concordance, Hebrew and Greek lexicons for further guidance also.

I have an Interlinear Bible that shows the collaboration between the original languages and English. It is not a JW translation. It simply goes back to the original languages. I don't need the opinion of the Strong Concordance. I can see for myself what the relation is between the original languages and English.

[Capbook]

What needs to be understood, until the 16th century, the Catholic church had a stranglehold on ownership of Bibles. Only their clergy were allowed to have Bibles, and only in Latin. At that time, the Catholic church ruled all of Europe, parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Russia. If you were caught with a Bible written in English by men like Tindal, or Wycliff, you would be strangled or put to the stake and burned alive. King James was directly responsible for overturning the Catholic dominance. Also, until the Guttenberg Press was invented in the 15th century, the Bible was written by hand. Also, the majority of the common people in the so-called Holy Roman Empire were uneducated and few able to read. The condition of the working class was horrible back then, and those in authority, especially in Rome, their Popes ruled with an iron fist. Tindal's last prayer has been recorded in history. it went something like this, "Lord Jesus, open up the eyes of the king."

It was King James and the King James Bible that opened up to a dumbed-down Christian world, the word of God. For that reason alone, I believe the King James Bible is the finished work of the Holy Spirit. All these other new renderings of the Bible came out around 1950 or later. Easier to read, "Yes" if you're lazy. The problem is corruption enters the picture. Money was the driving force behind these newly revised editions of the Bible. Read about the corruption of Wescott and Hort, and those that followed that put their dirty hands on the world of God. Soon after, America was being settled, Christianity spread like wildfire, the preferred Bible for the next 450 years was/is the King James Bible.

I thought it was King Henry VIII that up-ended the stranglehold of the Catholic Church on the people. Anyway, the King James Bible is difficult to understand and more modern versions are a great help.

Don't take this wrong, but if I can understand the K.J.B., of course with a great deal of effort, anyone can. The question is, "How much effort does a person wish to put into understanding it?"

How can people today understand the King's English?

It's easy, buy a concordance, a few well-recognized commentaries; Matthew Henry, Adam Clark, and Walvoord and Zuck etc.

You say they would if they weren't lazy? How can a person know what a "shambles" is unless he stops and does intense research?

Hmm! How much time is it worth to save your soul?

Well, that definition has already been ascertained by more modern translators. Why not be grateful for the research already done?

If you examine the recent history of modern versions, you will find there have been too many cooks in the kitchen; too much mudslinging; and too many copywriters.

All right. To each his own. You prefer the KJV, I prefer the New American Bible; American Standard Version; Young's Literal Translation; and the NASB.

Are there are no variances to many translations? Why not verify them to the Hebrew or Greek text where they source from.
I prefer to visit the sources sometimes. KJV has its Strong Concordance, Hebrew and Greek lexicons for further guidance also.

I have an Interlinear Bible that shows the collaboration between the original languages and English. It is not a JW translation. It simply goes back to the original languages. I don't need the opinion of the Strong Concordance. I can see for myself what the relation is between the original languages and English.

I mean Strong's Numbers that are an index of every word in the original biblical manuscript texts. Each Strong's Number links the root meaning of the words of the Bible back to the original meanings in the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts from which they were translated. This helps us locate the original words of Hebrew and Greek as only few can read or familiar with pure Hebrew or Greek.