Why the king james?
- Thread starter Blain
- 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.
Ok here's the way you know which bible is God's inerrant word but you will never get past step 1.
1) You have to believe the bible is true and every word is right. You believe the bible when it says God preserves his word.
2) You read different bibles.
3) You throw out the bibles that have errors and contradictions because they aren't the inerrant word God promised to preserve.
I assure you if you follow that formula, the only bible left standing is the KJV. But of course that would be true, there is only one Christ and many anti-christs and you know that right? Why would you think God's word is any different? Don't you understand the character of God? There aren't multiple Christs, there aren't multiple Holy Spirits, there aren't multiple fathers, there aren't multiple ways heaven.
1) You have to believe the bible is true and every word is right. You believe the bible when it says God preserves his word.
2) You read different bibles.
3) You throw out the bibles that have errors and contradictions because they aren't the inerrant word God promised to preserve.
I assure you if you follow that formula, the only bible left standing is the KJV. But of course that would be true, there is only one Christ and many anti-christs and you know that right? Why would you think God's word is any different? Don't you understand the character of God? There aren't multiple Christs, there aren't multiple Holy Spirits, there aren't multiple fathers, there aren't multiple ways heaven.
In 1611 the King James Version was "as out of date" as it is today. Compare the writings of Shakespeare, Ben Jonson, King James I, and John Lyly with the King James Version and this becomes quickly apparent. The translators avoided the speech of their day for a basic English which would be simple, TIMELESS AND BEAUTIFUL, and they succeeded. Their version spoke from OUTSIDE THEIR AGE AND TRADITION with elemental simplicity. Their wisdom here exceeds that of their successors. Nothing seems more ridiculous than an outdated modern translation....The issue is not that the Bible should speak our every-day language, for THIS INVOLVES DEBASEMENT.
The KJV is innocent until proven guilty.
The KJV is innocent until proven guilty.
If we don't have a perfect Bible we can trust every word, then we lose against the world.
(Bob is saved, but uses a modern version.)
Bob: "Hey world, can I show you from my Bible what Jesus did for you?"
World: "Your Bible? Is it trustworthy? You don't really believe that book do you?"
Bob: "Well, I believe most of it to be true."
World: "If you don't believe all of it, then why believe what it says about this Jesus?"
Bob: "Oh, because that part is true."
World: "So I'm supposed to trust what you say about a book you don't even believe is 100% trustworthy? No thanks."
Bob would lose the argument every time unless he has a final authority to appeal to. I'm not saying that one cannot get saved reading a modern version or a tract for that matter. The problem is facing a world with something we don't trust 100% to be the words of God.
(Bob is saved, but uses a modern version.)
Bob: "Hey world, can I show you from my Bible what Jesus did for you?"
World: "Your Bible? Is it trustworthy? You don't really believe that book do you?"
Bob: "Well, I believe most of it to be true."
World: "If you don't believe all of it, then why believe what it says about this Jesus?"
Bob: "Oh, because that part is true."
World: "So I'm supposed to trust what you say about a book you don't even believe is 100% trustworthy? No thanks."
Bob would lose the argument every time unless he has a final authority to appeal to. I'm not saying that one cannot get saved reading a modern version or a tract for that matter. The problem is facing a world with something we don't trust 100% to be the words of God.
Oh boy, well yes I get past step 1 I read KJV NIV and RSV versions. I have no problem and I see no errors in those.
Going back to my question, in light of what you say about every word having to be perfect and exact, if I pick a King James and it says COLOUR in one version and in another it says COLOR which is correct and which one should I throw away and burn for being perverted?
Going back to my question, in light of what you say about every word having to be perfect and exact, if I pick a King James and it says COLOUR in one version and in another it says COLOR which is correct and which one should I throw away and burn for being perverted?
It dosn't though, English language has done very well without using Thou or Thee etc for hundreds of years without any confusion, the word "Thou" went out of use of in English language in the late 17th Century.
What about other languages which use this word in a singular and plural form?
Can you also give an example where using You etc instead of Thou totally corrupts a message in a block of verses?
What about other languages which use this word in a singular and plural form?
Can you also give an example where using You etc instead of Thou totally corrupts a message in a block of verses?
um, it is not a given. saying this equals saying" well, if you do use the KJV then you are not a true Christian". you ,me, anyone else does not have to use a certain translation of the Word to be a true believer. if you chose to use the 1611 version, that is fine. but implying that every one does is garbage. stop making an idol out a book. worship the God that the book is about.
Why do you have to continually reply with a question? It was a straightforward "Yes" or "No" answer to my question.
As for your question, the word Dung is still in common usage so there is no need to change it, the word Thou and Thee have not been used in common everyday speech for hundreds of years, people stopped saying "Thee and Thou" in late 1600's these words only appear in the occasional literally work such as poems and plays.
As for your question, the word Dung is still in common usage so there is no need to change it, the word Thou and Thee have not been used in common everyday speech for hundreds of years, people stopped saying "Thee and Thou" in late 1600's these words only appear in the occasional literally work such as poems and plays.
