*sigh* i'm not going to argue anymore... if you think you've found errors... give me the errors, and i'll give an explaination for each one (which may take a while). whether or not you accept these explainations as truth or not is up to you... BUT if i can give an explaination... your error is no longer legit. because it's in some way explainable (regardless if you think it's true or not). in other words... the only way your error can be legit is if i can't find a single possible way of explaining it. so from now on... i'm not arguing. you give your error. i give my explaination. if you don't believe it, oh well... move on to the next "error". now mind you... i won't just make something up out of the blue and say it's an explaination. i will back up any explaination i give with either Bible verses that support me, or scientific theory, or whatever... i will have something to back up my claims. an example of a legit error would be (and this is ONLY AN EXAMPLE). take the NIV Bible (a flawed text)... one verse in Romans 6 (i think that's it) mentions that all those who are saved are sons (or children) of God... meanwhile John 3:16 says that Jesus was the only son of God. this is an unexplainable error (one of the main flaws in the NIV). there is no possible way of me explaining how that's NOT a contradiction. now... if you take that from the KJV, john 3:16 contains a very key word (that the ancient texts also have, and the NIV took out). it says that Jesus was the only begotten son of God. well, now this changes everything. it makes it so both verses are correct, and they don't contradict eachother. i'd just like to re-instate the fact that the flawed texts came from a text that was altered by people who hated the original texts. the KJV is translated from the originals, the newer versions are interpreted from the altered texts.