KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
You really know how to miss meaning don't you!!!?!
The issue was never whether the gospel was preached in the OT or not!
The issue was that you made accusations that there were errors in the NIV - and used the thing about the gospel being preached in the OT as an example...
I quote:
Is this really the best that you can do - to make silly accusations that I said things I did not?
I am still waiting for you to provide any evidence of the so-called errors of doctrine in translations other than the KJV.
Put up or shut up!
The issue was never whether the gospel was preached in the OT or not!
The issue was that you made accusations that there were errors in the NIV - and used the thing about the gospel being preached in the OT as an example...
I quote:
Is this really the best that you can do - to make silly accusations that I said things I did not?
I am still waiting for you to provide any evidence of the so-called errors of doctrine in translations other than the KJV.
Put up or shut up!
With the greatest respect, nothing in the KJVO stance as expressed in this and other threads is the slightest bit respectful to Christianity - even to the point of claiming that those who read other translations cannot know God and cannot be saved.
In addition, given the wild claims made the lack of any evidence for these claims and aggression shown in defending these fantasies is disturbing.
The moderators have had plenty of opportunity to shut down threads and ban advocates of an extremely divisive heretical fantasy, yet choose not to.
The KJVO heresy is much more dangerous than many people realise and it should not go unchallenged...
In addition, given the wild claims made the lack of any evidence for these claims and aggression shown in defending these fantasies is disturbing.
The moderators have had plenty of opportunity to shut down threads and ban advocates of an extremely divisive heretical fantasy, yet choose not to.
The KJVO heresy is much more dangerous than many people realise and it should not go unchallenged...
Be that as it may, you should know by now that the BDF is the least respectful forum on this site. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. As for the mods, there are only 1 or 2 other than Oncefallen, who venture in here, and even then, that's on a once in a blue moon basis..
But anyhoo, if you want them to respect Christianity, then shouldn't YOU be respectful of them even though you disagree with what they say?
But anyhoo, if you want them to respect Christianity, then shouldn't YOU be respectful of them even though you disagree with what they say?
Be that as it may, you should know by now that the BDF is the least respectful forum on this site. It would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. As for the mods, there are only 1 or 2 other than Oncefallen, who venture in here, and even then, that's on a once in a blue moon basis..
But anyhoo, if you want them to respect Christianity, then shouldn't YOU be respectful of them even though you disagree with what they say?
But anyhoo, if you want them to respect Christianity, then shouldn't YOU be respectful of them even though you disagree with what they say?
Extremists
Pastor to Host Halloween Bible-Burning Event
Published October 22, 2009 Fox News
Pastor to Host Halloween Bible-Burning Event | Fox News
A North Carolina pastor plans to host a Halloween event at his church to burn heretical books. At the top of the list — the Bible.
Pastor Marc Grizzard claims the King James version of the Bible is the only true word of God, and that all other versions are "satanic" and "perversions" of God's word.
On Halloween night, Grizzard and the 14 members of the Amazing Grace Baptist Church will set fire to other versions of the scripture, as well as music and books by Christian authors.
“We are burning books that we believe to be Satanic,” Pastor Grizzard said.
“I believe the King James version is God’s preserved, inspired, inerrant, infallible word of God… for English-speaking people."
All other religious or Christian texts are sacreligious, the pastor insists. The list of books being burned will include works written by "a lot of different authors who we consider heretics, such as Billy Graham, Rick Warren… the list goes on and on,” Pastor Grizzard said.
Also on the pastor's list of heretical authors — Mother Teresa, according to a full list that was previously available at the Amazing Grace Baptist Church's Web site. The Church's Web site — which is no longer available — calls the event 'Burning Perversions of God's Word,' and urges parishioners to "come celebrate Halloween by burning Satan's bibles." Calls to the Amazing Grace Church were not returned Thursday.
Some in the pastor's community support the event.
"In my opinion, the King James Version is the only version," Sissy Messer said.
But not all residents of Canton, N.C. agree with the bonfire of the profanities.
“I think some of the newer versions make it easier for people to understand,” said resident Judy Kirby.
The book-burning is being promoted as a social event with a barbecue dinner. The event will run from "7 p.m.- Till," according to the announcement previously posted on the Web site.
Pastor to Host Halloween Bible-Burning Event
Published October 22, 2009 Fox News
Pastor to Host Halloween Bible-Burning Event | Fox News
A North Carolina pastor plans to host a Halloween event at his church to burn heretical books. At the top of the list — the Bible.
Pastor Marc Grizzard claims the King James version of the Bible is the only true word of God, and that all other versions are "satanic" and "perversions" of God's word.
On Halloween night, Grizzard and the 14 members of the Amazing Grace Baptist Church will set fire to other versions of the scripture, as well as music and books by Christian authors.
“We are burning books that we believe to be Satanic,” Pastor Grizzard said.
“I believe the King James version is God’s preserved, inspired, inerrant, infallible word of God… for English-speaking people."
All other religious or Christian texts are sacreligious, the pastor insists. The list of books being burned will include works written by "a lot of different authors who we consider heretics, such as Billy Graham, Rick Warren… the list goes on and on,” Pastor Grizzard said.
Also on the pastor's list of heretical authors — Mother Teresa, according to a full list that was previously available at the Amazing Grace Baptist Church's Web site. The Church's Web site — which is no longer available — calls the event 'Burning Perversions of God's Word,' and urges parishioners to "come celebrate Halloween by burning Satan's bibles." Calls to the Amazing Grace Church were not returned Thursday.
Some in the pastor's community support the event.
"In my opinion, the King James Version is the only version," Sissy Messer said.
But not all residents of Canton, N.C. agree with the bonfire of the profanities.
“I think some of the newer versions make it easier for people to understand,” said resident Judy Kirby.
The book-burning is being promoted as a social event with a barbecue dinner. The event will run from "7 p.m.- Till," according to the announcement previously posted on the Web site.
This is a 2-way street. I don't know why people can't just read whatever Bible translation they feel led to read and leave it at that without all the insults being hurled around.
I have read the KJV since I was 5 years old. I have memorized much of it and so I feel more comfortable reading it. Then I come on here and see some folks saying things that almost make it seem like if you read the King James then you are somehow less of a Christian. And vice versa. This whole thing is sad...Just Saying...
I have read the KJV since I was 5 years old. I have memorized much of it and so I feel more comfortable reading it. Then I come on here and see some folks saying things that almost make it seem like if you read the King James then you are somehow less of a Christian. And vice versa. This whole thing is sad...Just Saying...
Generally, we should look to context within Scripture first to understand what a word or phrase means, both in terms of the immediate context of the word in question, and how it is used elsewhere in Scripture. The challenge with this being the only approach is two-fold: there are quite a few words that appear only once; and we may assume the meaning of a word incorrectly.
With the first issue, there are many words appearing only once in the KJV... such as "collops" and "molid". You may get a sense of the meaning from context... but not necessarily the correct sense. Then we have a word such as authentein in 1 Timothy 2:12. It appears only once in the Greek and its meaning was not consistent in contemporary writings... so even a lexicon may not provide a certain definition. The meaning of the word is heavily coloured by one's belief about the role of women, and it becomes a circular argument.
With the second issue, there is another legitimate concern in that we assume the meanings of familiar words have not changed. Case in point: the word "conversation", in Ephesians 4:11. In 1611 it meant "character" or "the manner of one's life". Now it means "discussion". Such changes could lead to misunderstanding and even false doctrine. Having come across a few such words, I would be inclined to check most words against 1600's definitions (only available outside of Scripture) to ensure correct understanding.
With the first issue, there are many words appearing only once in the KJV... such as "collops" and "molid". You may get a sense of the meaning from context... but not necessarily the correct sense. Then we have a word such as authentein in 1 Timothy 2:12. It appears only once in the Greek and its meaning was not consistent in contemporary writings... so even a lexicon may not provide a certain definition. The meaning of the word is heavily coloured by one's belief about the role of women, and it becomes a circular argument.
With the second issue, there is another legitimate concern in that we assume the meanings of familiar words have not changed. Case in point: the word "conversation", in Ephesians 4:11. In 1611 it meant "character" or "the manner of one's life". Now it means "discussion". Such changes could lead to misunderstanding and even false doctrine. Having come across a few such words, I would be inclined to check most words against 1600's definitions (only available outside of Scripture) to ensure correct understanding.
whats the big deal with translation here?QUESTION IS DO YOU REALLY RELY ON TE SCRIPTURE AND CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS WRITTEN ON IT? kjv hard to understand like me at this age to hard for that translation...important is which standard you wil understand God's word easily not the translation of the Bible
Context is important, but when we do not understand words, we cannot understand the context in the first place.
"God so loved xxxxx that he sent his only son..."
Context will not help us what the xxxxx means, if world or men or children or seas or land or animals or wisdom etc. Many things can fit in and so make us confused. We need a dictionary or updated translation.
"God so loved xxxxx that he sent his only son..."
Context will not help us what the xxxxx means, if world or men or children or seas or land or animals or wisdom etc. Many things can fit in and so make us confused. We need a dictionary or updated translation.
I do get what you are saying here, and every KJV I have ever owned has a T for thesaurus ( I assume that's what it stands for) on most of the outdated words or ones in which the meaning may have changed a little. At the end of the verse, it has modern synonyms or some definitions for the words...and I think that feature does come in handy.
Yes we do need a dictionary that is concurrent with the writing of the book we seek to understand. This is true of the KJV as we do have dictionaries from 1604.
This is not true of the Greek or Hebrew. I haven't researched it but I have asked on this forum if it exists and no one has been able to show its existence.
This is not true of the Greek or Hebrew. I haven't researched it but I have asked on this forum if it exists and no one has been able to show its existence.