The King James Only Debate
- Thread starter calvinsx76
- 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 try to simplify things too much.
I will ignore the historical debate about Erasmus, versions of TR etc, because it is fruitless and everybody can use google and find out the facts.
To your question:
"They got 1/4 of the whole bible missing what are you suppose to do with that?"
Its hard to say what you are meaning by "they". The codex sinaiticus?
If so, the response is - do not think you can compare one codex with the critical edition of multiple codexes like TR, Byzantine Majority Text, NA27 or Tischendorf.
In every manuscript some parts are missing, wrong, destroyed etc. Its not any "devilish" and deceiving intentional corruption, its just the work of time.
Thats why we need textual criticism to reconstruct the text by comparing as many manuscripts as possible.
I will ignore the historical debate about Erasmus, versions of TR etc, because it is fruitless and everybody can use google and find out the facts.
To your question:
"They got 1/4 of the whole bible missing what are you suppose to do with that?"
Its hard to say what you are meaning by "they". The codex sinaiticus?
If so, the response is - do not think you can compare one codex with the critical edition of multiple codexes like TR, Byzantine Majority Text, NA27 or Tischendorf.
In every manuscript some parts are missing, wrong, destroyed etc. Its not any "devilish" and deceiving intentional corruption, its just the work of time.
Thats why we need textual criticism to reconstruct the text by comparing as many manuscripts as possible.
Last edited:
Instead of flinging back accusations, how about responding carefully and honestly to the charge that the KJV added verses? You made the assertion that newer versions took away verses, and I have explained clearly how the charge is baseless without an external source against which to compare both the KJV and the newer Bibles. So... get some intellectual integrity and deal with the issue properly, instead of with silly blustering, avoiding, and bringing up other issues. Stop using this burden-of-proof reversal and back up your claims, or retract them.
Regarding Sinaiticus missing part of the Bible, I haven't read anywhere that anyone has claimed it is complete. Your point is moot.
Regarding Sinaiticus missing part of the Bible, I haven't read anywhere that anyone has claimed it is complete. Your point is moot.
Yea and by your own admission Lexicons or dictionaries are not inspired. I see it differently as far as the discussion is concerned. It’s not about Biblical Hermeneutics; it’s more than just that. It’s about how the Bible came to us, more so on the Doctrine of Bibliology.
The Bible interprets itself, that’s good but there are times difficult words in the Bible has define itself long before good dictionaries like OED, Webster Dictionary defines them
It is a must battle cry of every Bible Believer as per discussion is that God’s word is pure, preserved and “is given by the inspiration of God”. I do believe, the KJV is given to us by inspiration. If not, then God lie. He can’t keep His promise. But why be afraid to call KJV is given by inspiration when in fact you do find using it. I see your concern; you are trying to do a police work. But there is no middle ground when it comes to words of God. Any sort of mental reservations does no good in God’s eye. You see, God is the God of truth and man is a liar so we cannot change the truth, the truth is God’s words not a mere man opinion. The fact still remain that KJV is written scriptures and if it is scriptures, it is the words of God therefore it is “given by inspiration of God and is profitable…”
I do believe that preservation extend not only the copies of the originals that was read by young Timothy. Preservation of the words of God extends to us today. The extent of preservation is not just the original language. It goes to the translation. Every word precisely translated is God’s word. Translated/ transliterated words is/are God’s words. The originals are no longer with us. A repetitive declaration that KJV is a translation of the original manuscripts is not true. In front of the title of the KJV says, it is “translated out of the original tongue, diligently compared…”
That’s right we are not talking about salvation in here. There’s no room for us to judge others about their salvation. It is with a hope that we are all saved here and we can know for sure…seems you’re quite correct here about winning more souls for Christ and I say Praise the Lord! Amen! Alleluia! But there are times we need to defend the words of God. King Solomon says “there is a time for everything”
God bless
The Bible interprets itself, that’s good but there are times difficult words in the Bible has define itself long before good dictionaries like OED, Webster Dictionary defines them
It is a must battle cry of every Bible Believer as per discussion is that God’s word is pure, preserved and “is given by the inspiration of God”. I do believe, the KJV is given to us by inspiration. If not, then God lie. He can’t keep His promise. But why be afraid to call KJV is given by inspiration when in fact you do find using it. I see your concern; you are trying to do a police work. But there is no middle ground when it comes to words of God. Any sort of mental reservations does no good in God’s eye. You see, God is the God of truth and man is a liar so we cannot change the truth, the truth is God’s words not a mere man opinion. The fact still remain that KJV is written scriptures and if it is scriptures, it is the words of God therefore it is “given by inspiration of God and is profitable…”
I do believe that preservation extend not only the copies of the originals that was read by young Timothy. Preservation of the words of God extends to us today. The extent of preservation is not just the original language. It goes to the translation. Every word precisely translated is God’s word. Translated/ transliterated words is/are God’s words. The originals are no longer with us. A repetitive declaration that KJV is a translation of the original manuscripts is not true. In front of the title of the KJV says, it is “translated out of the original tongue, diligently compared…”
That’s right we are not talking about salvation in here. There’s no room for us to judge others about their salvation. It is with a hope that we are all saved here and we can know for sure…seems you’re quite correct here about winning more souls for Christ and I say Praise the Lord! Amen! Alleluia! But there are times we need to defend the words of God. King Solomon says “there is a time for everything”
God bless
Hi Sir,
Okay, I see your point. But historically does not fit what you are trying to draw. Wescott and Hort and others founded the” ghostly guild” to do just the opposite and to dethrone the words of God. The occult movement operates just like that.
Perhaps many are unaware and sometimes Christians get deceive by the works of the devil. “For we are not ignorant of his devices..” Also try to consider, not to put blame on KJVO’s for I know many KJVO’s who are humble to say “We love God and obey His words, the Bible, The true Bible” I should have re-think what our Lord Jesus Christ says in John 14 "if you love me, keep my commandments..."
God bless
Okay, I see your point. But historically does not fit what you are trying to draw. Wescott and Hort and others founded the” ghostly guild” to do just the opposite and to dethrone the words of God. The occult movement operates just like that.
Perhaps many are unaware and sometimes Christians get deceive by the works of the devil. “For we are not ignorant of his devices..” Also try to consider, not to put blame on KJVO’s for I know many KJVO’s who are humble to say “We love God and obey His words, the Bible, The true Bible” I should have re-think what our Lord Jesus Christ says in John 14 "if you love me, keep my commandments..."
God bless
Hi Sir Dino,
Thank you and I’m glad for your response. What I really mean is that we need to study the verse I mentioned as compared with the others like NIV, ESV or even the JW. It may be a surprise why I connected JW’s own bible with the two? It is because they came from almost same line of manuscript authority the Wescott and Hort. If you find some time looking at the Foreword of the JW’s bible then you will find W_H.
Now, considering what the NIV and the ESV of having not the word “Christ “ as in the KJV, do we really think the idea is still the same?
Here as I said “every word is pure” and “every word” is important and how important is the the word “Christ”? Well, the conceptual approach of inspiration may not just be good for the KJVO’s. Many of the KJVO’s I know believe in the plenary-verbal inspiration. Well, I said we need to “study” the single verse. Oh I need to study more about English or needed to refine it. But what should we do when we study?
Studying the Book of 1 John tells us that there are forces that work against Christ even denying the full deity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Gnostics were around the corner during that time and John is indeed battling Gnosticism. In every sort of his written letter, Beloved John is very careful to what the leading of the Holy Spirit of telling that Jesus is the Christ. A very stern warning that anyone who does not recognize Jesus is “the Christ” is an anti Christ and is a liar. So we find that in all of the chapters of the Book of1 John, that Beloved John has this word concerning about our Lord Jesus is “Christ”, Altering it defeats it purpose. Here is the KJB look and why it is correct than we are trying to compare and how important is the word Christ. Question is who exalts our Lord Jesus Christ more?
1 John 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
1 John 2: 1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 John 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1 John 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
1 John 5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
1 John 5:6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
1 John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
God bless
Thank you and I’m glad for your response. What I really mean is that we need to study the verse I mentioned as compared with the others like NIV, ESV or even the JW. It may be a surprise why I connected JW’s own bible with the two? It is because they came from almost same line of manuscript authority the Wescott and Hort. If you find some time looking at the Foreword of the JW’s bible then you will find W_H.
Now, considering what the NIV and the ESV of having not the word “Christ “ as in the KJV, do we really think the idea is still the same?
Here as I said “every word is pure” and “every word” is important and how important is the the word “Christ”? Well, the conceptual approach of inspiration may not just be good for the KJVO’s. Many of the KJVO’s I know believe in the plenary-verbal inspiration. Well, I said we need to “study” the single verse. Oh I need to study more about English or needed to refine it. But what should we do when we study?
Studying the Book of 1 John tells us that there are forces that work against Christ even denying the full deity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Gnostics were around the corner during that time and John is indeed battling Gnosticism. In every sort of his written letter, Beloved John is very careful to what the leading of the Holy Spirit of telling that Jesus is the Christ. A very stern warning that anyone who does not recognize Jesus is “the Christ” is an anti Christ and is a liar. So we find that in all of the chapters of the Book of1 John, that Beloved John has this word concerning about our Lord Jesus is “Christ”, Altering it defeats it purpose. Here is the KJB look and why it is correct than we are trying to compare and how important is the word Christ. Question is who exalts our Lord Jesus Christ more?
1 John 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
1 John 2: 1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 John 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1 John 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
1 John 5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
1 John 5:6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
1 John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
God bless
Accusations... regarding the Sinaiticus. What you provided is undeniable proof that there are verses in the KJV which aren't in some newer versions. That doesn't prove addition (in the KJV) or deletion (in the newer) either way. The other way to deal with the situation is exactly as I have described it... find an objective source external to both and compare both to it.
In debating, if you make an assertion, you must support it. Your "opponent" has no obligation to prove you wrong; you must prove yourself right. Otherwise what you are making is a burden-of-proof reversal, which is not valid. So, at this point, the burden is on you to prove that the verses actually should be there, and were removed when they shouldn't have been. Merely showing that they aren't there in the newer versions does not prove your assertion. By the way, you can't assert that the KJV is perfect, preserved, or inspired to prove your point, for that would be circular reasoning, which is also logically flawed.
In debating, if you make an assertion, you must support it. Your "opponent" has no obligation to prove you wrong; you must prove yourself right. Otherwise what you are making is a burden-of-proof reversal, which is not valid. So, at this point, the burden is on you to prove that the verses actually should be there, and were removed when they shouldn't have been. Merely showing that they aren't there in the newer versions does not prove your assertion. By the way, you can't assert that the KJV is perfect, preserved, or inspired to prove your point, for that would be circular reasoning, which is also logically flawed.
