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.
In Deuteronomy God demonstated that man does not live by bread alone. He wasn't making a statement like Jesus did in Matthew, God proved to the children of Israel that man doesn't live by bread alone.
Deuteronomy 8:3 KJV
And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live.
Deuteronomy 8:3 KJV
And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live.
Can you see the two different gospels in these two versions. In the KJV Abraham is justified, in the NIV Abraham was considered righteous by hiw works. Can you see how the NIV would cause great confusion and even mislead the reader into works salvation? I'm telling you, a there's a different spirit and a different gospel in the newer translations.
James 2:21King James Version (KJV)
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:21New International Version (NIV)
21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?[
James 2:21King James Version (KJV)
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:21New International Version (NIV)
21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?[
i would not disagree that the original manuscripts are Scripture and people who spoke those languages would benefit from them. But there is no such thing as the originals in existance today. You do realize that what people call the originals are just copies, and copies from different manuscript lines that don't agree with one another.
I haven't been spoon fed anything, I used to be just like you until I started reading and believing the KJV. You accuse me of whacky ideas, please tell me what whacky ideas I've brought up on this thread.
I haven't been spoon fed anything, I used to be just like you until I started reading and believing the KJV. You accuse me of whacky ideas, please tell me what whacky ideas I've brought up on this thread.
To all the sane, non-KJVcultists on this thread, it was either Proverbs, or maybe Dick Van Patten that said, "never argue with a fool... he'll just drag you down to his level, and then beat you with experience"....
I think we've all arrived at that point....
I think we've all arrived at that point....
Oh sure I've found something wrong. People saying all versions say the same thing is wrong. because they don't. People who worship the original copies are wrong, it's a waste of time and nobody this day and age has ever benefitted from the Greek and Hebrew. If you disagree, please show me the earth shattering revelations you have found. If you cannot produce that then don't bother arguing over the Greek being superior.
C
Isn't is shocking.
To be honest with the words, to me, means to be honest with the doctrines of God.
So, I don't choose to have many translations side by side for comparison for "deeper meaning" or "easier" understanding or a different "sense", that is not what the "comparison" method of approach to bible study is.
Just as you share above, those are by far two different doctrines.
I only compare bibles to discard what is unreliable, so I can rely on one bible that is good for the doctrines of God. We only need one bible, we only need the word of God, imo.
Last edited:
I want to give one of my faviorite examples of understanding scripture by believing every word written, not taking anything away nor adding anything to it.
In verse 13 mockers said these men are full of new wine. Then in verses 14 and 15 Peter stood up and said these men are not drunken.... that's all he said, he did not say the men were not full of new wine, that's because they were full of new wine. New wine is the New Testament scripture. Yes it most certainly is, read Matthew 9:17. New wine is put in new bottles, Gentiles instead of Jews and both the wine (word of God) and the bottles (people) are preserved.
Matthew 9:17 KJV
Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.
If you believe every word in those verses is right and you don't take anything away from the verse you get the message God intended to be given there. Now take that knowledge and read the book of Joel, Isaiah, Hosea and Haggai.
Acts 2:13-15 KJV
Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
[14] But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
[15] For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
In verse 13 mockers said these men are full of new wine. Then in verses 14 and 15 Peter stood up and said these men are not drunken.... that's all he said, he did not say the men were not full of new wine, that's because they were full of new wine. New wine is the New Testament scripture. Yes it most certainly is, read Matthew 9:17. New wine is put in new bottles, Gentiles instead of Jews and both the wine (word of God) and the bottles (people) are preserved.
Matthew 9:17 KJV
Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.
If you believe every word in those verses is right and you don't take anything away from the verse you get the message God intended to be given there. Now take that knowledge and read the book of Joel, Isaiah, Hosea and Haggai.
Acts 2:13-15 KJV
Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
[14] But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
[15] For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.
Last edited:
I should have added - or you could read it from the NIV and get no understanding whatsoever because they don't use consistent terminology.... I don't think the translators knew what new wine is, they just said wine which obliterates the meaning of the verse.
Or you could waste several hours sudying concordances and lexicons to find out what new and wine meant in ancient Greek. People open your eyes, God hid his word in his word, you're not going to find meaning in Greek dictionaries.
Or you could waste several hours sudying concordances and lexicons to find out what new and wine meant in ancient Greek. People open your eyes, God hid his word in his word, you're not going to find meaning in Greek dictionaries.
E
see this is the problem.
Even when you are shown differences, You ignore them.
If they disagree or go against you, it is just a minor difference, But if it agrees wiht you, it is a major difference. In other words, your not being honest.
as for this post, There is a huge difference between the words.
You create something that has never been made before.
You make things which were already created by someone else.
Even when you are shown differences, You ignore them.
If they disagree or go against you, it is just a minor difference, But if it agrees wiht you, it is a major difference. In other words, your not being honest.
as for this post, There is a huge difference between the words.
You create something that has never been made before.
You make things which were already created by someone else.
E
Actually they say the same thing.
1. KJV uses a word for word interpretation. thus justified is the word to translate.
2. NIV uses a word which actually interpreted the word justified (declared or considered righteous) which actually makes the NIV more helpfull in its interpretation. since the word "justified" is not a well known term used today.
saying the words "justified by work" KJV or "considered righteous by his works" are saying the same thing.. the term "justified" would actually be more confusing to a young english reader who is not versed in biblical language.