Why the king james?

[KJV1611]

You wish My argument is based on what Jesus and apostles said about Old Testament. That differs from what you have in your KJV testament.
I am surprised it takes you so long to realize my point.

My point is (again) this: If apostles have another version of OT than you have in your KJV, you cant say your KJV is perfect. In that case you would have better Scripture than apostles.

Trofimus I don't understand why you're saying Jesus and the Apostles had a different Old Testament than what's written in the KJV.... how do you know that?

 

[KJV1611]

In fact, I was defending the discussion with you

And again, you used a straw-man fallacy. We never said Bible is wrong. We said KJV translation is wrong.
You obviously have a problem to distinguish between these two things.

You say NIV is wrong. Is it the same as saying Bible is wrong? If not, why do you use same logic for your opponents, who say KJV is a wrong translation and why do you change "KJV" for "Bible"?

There aren't multiple versions of the bible, they all contradict each other. There is only one bible and many false bibles. The bible scholars that wrote the definitions for the words that you say are inerrant are the ones saying there is not inerrant bible.

 

[KJV1611]

So.. to believe the Greek Bible that apostles used is a cult, but to believe English bible that is very different from the Bible apostles used is a good thing, this is what you mean?

Maybe you don't realize this, but you don't know ancient Greek, you don't know what those Greek words mean. You know what some "bible scholar" thinks those Greek words meant. You don't have the inerrant word of God in Greek and Hebrew, you have the word of the Geek word definers. Do you see what I'm saying?

According to the bible nobody can translate the bible but God himself... it violates scripture. Words can't be translated unless they are first interpretted.

2 Peter 1:20 KJV
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

[KJV1611]

Originally Posted by Grace777x70

They had to use the wrong scriptures as there is only the KJ "version" that is real...what deception and spiritual foolishness this whole thread has been. You can't be born-again nor have the same Christ if you read another version of the scriptures other then the KJV...I'm still shaking my head over the complete spiritual ignorance of such statements.


You guys can prove that the scriptures are the scriptures and it still will not change the KJV "only" mindset. It's like trying to tell an atheist through intellect that God is real. He just won't understand nor agree with the truth. You are flogging a dead horse here I'm afraid. But great job though and honest people can see the truth of what you are conveying about the scriptures!..it might be better just to let them be with their beliefs.....

Ok, you're an expert on the second birth right? I mean that's what your implying by saying that it's "spiritual deception" to believe that the bible we read determines who our spiritual man is.

First of all, could you explain what the second birth is? No religious BS please. Just explain in simple terms because it is that simple.

Can you please give your understanding of being born again by the word of God.

1 Peter 1:23 KJV
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

 

[Agricola]

OK so the apostles all spoke and wrote in 17th Century English... RIGHT?

 

[KJV1611]

OK so the apostles all spoke and wrote in 17th Century English... RIGHT?

What's your point?

 

[circles]

A couple excellent lectures on this subject (from a Protestant perspective).

Battle of the Bibles (part 1)
Changing the Word (part 2)

You will be shocked, especially with what Wescott and Hort have done.

 

[Agricola]

What's your point?

Whats yours?

 

[KJV1611]

A couple excellent lectures on this subject (from a Protestant perspective).

Battle of the Bibles (part 1)
Changing the Word (part 2)

You will be shocked, especially with what Wescott and Hort have done.

I've seen those videos, Walter Veith does an excellent job, I highly recommend them.

 

[KJV1611]

Whats yours?

My point was your question was silly why did you ask it?

 

[KJV1611]

Here's another proof the KJV got it right and the NIV is a New Age bible. For my biblically illiterate friends, the mountian is the condemenation of the law and Zerubbabel is Jesus. Jesus destroyed the condemnation and brought forth the HEADSTONE to it's grave. The NIV says that Zerubbabel (Jesus) is going to bring out the CAPSTONE with shouts of God bless the capstone... the capstone is the stone that goes atop the pyramid on the back of the one dollar bill!

Zechariah 4:7King James Version (KJV)

7 Who art thou, O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it.


Zechariah 4:7New International Version (NIV)

7 “What are you, mighty mountain? Before Zerubbabel you will become level ground. Then he will bring out the capstone to shouts of ‘God bless it! God bless it!’”

 

[Agricola]

Here's another proof the KJV got it right and the NIV is a New Age bible. For my biblically illiterate friends, the mountian is the condemenation of the law and Zerubbabel is Jesus. Jesus destroyed the condemnation and brought forth the HEADSTONE to it's grave. The NIV says that Zerubbabel (Jesus) is going to bring out the CAPSTONE with shouts of God bless the capstone... the capstone is the stone that goes atop the pyramid on the back of the one dollar bill!

Zechariah 4:7King James Version (KJV)

7 Who art thou, O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it.


Zechariah 4:7New International Version (NIV)

7 “What are you, mighty mountain? Before Zerubbabel you will become level ground. Then he will bring out the capstone to shouts of ‘God bless it! God bless it!’”

Holy Mackerell you really are brainwashed, the delusion in your head is plain for all to see. This is tinfoil hat stuff and should be in conspiracy forum. How is anyone to take your claims about over other versions such as the NIV seriously when all you can do is bring out ridiculous claims such as this.

 

[John146]

What language did Joseph speak when he was at Egypt? He spoke Egyptian to his brothers at first and they had to have a translator. But yet, these Egyptian words are in the Bible...hmmmmm...Do you think God can translate from any language He wants into any language He wants and still call it Holy Scripture? Did He preserve what Joseph originally said in Egyptian into the Hebrew language? Was there any thing lacking?

OK so the apostles all spoke and wrote in 17th Century English... RIGHT?

 

[KJV1611]

Holy Mackerell you really are brainwashed, the delusion in your head is plain for all to see. This is tinfoil hat stuff and should be in conspiracy forum. How is anyone to take your claims about over other versions such as the NIV seriously when all you can do is bring out ridiculous claims such as this.

When I read your response I thought of the verse below. Are you able to see Jesus in any of the Old Testament?

John 5:39 KJV
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

 

[fredoheaven]

The same response like to KJV1611 - what are you trying to prove?

Is it in some version of Old Testament? Yes (in LXX).
Is it confirmed by Holy Spirit and apostles that is should be there? Yes, it is, in New Testament.

So what are you trying to prove, that Holy Spirit and apostles chose to use wrong version? What kind of CHECKMATE are you trying to do?

TO DIno, Trifumus and others about LXX

The Septuagint, Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament which according to most sources, it was produced by seventy-two Jewish translators in Alexandria, Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285-246 B.C.). In his introduction to the translation of the Greek Septuagint, Sir Lancelot Brenton states, “We need not wonder that but little is known with accuracy on this subject; for, with regard to the ancient versions of scriptures in general, we possess no information whatever as to the time or place of the execution, or by whom they were made.”
Historical Account of the Septuagint Version

The modern translations of the Septuagint (abbreviated LXX) are not from 285 BC, 100 BC, or even 100 AD. Rather, what scholars refer to as the “Septuagint,” come from 4th century texts. However,

1. We know that God committed the preservation of the Old Testament to the Jews, Romans 3:1-2. If the LXX versions were inspired Old Testament, then, the preservation of the LXX, must be credited to the Christian Church, not to the Jews.
2. God ruled out any Egyptian translation of the OT in Jeremiah 44:26.
3. Only those priestly tribe of Levi were to copy the scriptures-Deut. 17:18; 31:25,26; 33:10 1 Chron. 16:4; Ezra 7:1-6; Malachi 2:7

BTW, the LXX contained Apocrypha except II Esdras, a prophetic book. For the sake of others who do not know the listings of Apocrypha who rest their faith in LXX are herein below:

a. Wisdom of Solomon 30 BC Didactic
b. Ecclesiasticus 32 BC Didactic
c. Tobit c.200 BC Religious
d. 1 Esdras c. 150BC Historic
e. 1 Maccabees c. 110 BC Historic
f. II Macabees c. 100 BC Historic
g. Judith c. 150 BC Romance
h. Baruch c. 100 BC Prophetic
i. Letter of Jeremiah c. 200 BC Prophetic
j. II Esdras c. 100 AD Prophetic
k. Addition to Esther c. 130BC Legendary
l. Prayer of Azariah c. 100 BC Legendary
m. Susanna c. 100 BC Legendary
n. Bel and Dragon c. 100 BC Legendary
o. Prayer of Manasseh c. 150 BC Legendary

Acceptance of LXX which contained the above list is to accept RCC system.

 

[TMS]

A couple excellent lectures on this subject (from a Protestant perspective).

Battle of the Bibles (part 1)
Changing the Word (part 2)

You will be shocked, especially with what Wescott and Hort have done.

I watched them and they are Great,

 

[TMS]

If someone is new the the faith then any Bible can change their life for the better. You will find salvation in all Bibles, But some are better than others. I have found mistakes in the KJV but i believe it is the best version to use. We have no excuse because there is so much information today and if we have any doubts we have lots of ways to research.

 

[John146]

You have found mistakes because you know what God had originally said? Are you more intelligent that the 54 bible scholars that translated the KJV? Did God use them or not? Or is God using you to correct His word?

If someone is new the the faith then any Bible can change their life for the better. You will find salvation in all Bibles, But some are better than others. I have found mistakes in the KJV but i believe it is the best version to use. We have no excuse because there is so much information today and if we have any doubts we have lots of ways to research.

 

[author]

If someone is new the the faith then any Bible can change their life for the better. You will find salvation in all Bibles, But some are better than others. I have found mistakes in the KJV but i believe it is the best version to use. We have no excuse because there is so much information today and if we have any doubts we have lots of ways to research.

I find it very interesting that you have found mistakes in the KJV. Could you please enlighten us pure mortals by describing those mistakes. Hmmmm

 

[tanakh]

On my walk today I was talking to God and the subject of the king james only group popped up, now I have read it and while old english gives it a sense of uniqueness I asked God why the king james only group believe their bibles are the only true bible and others arent, then I remembered one of these people telling me it's because the kj is the closest to the original scriptures written I know the OT was in hebrew and I think the NT was in greek but even if the kj is the closest to the original script it still isn't the original is it?

Is there another reason for kj only people to believe their version is the only true word of God? I am just trying to understand the reason behind this

There are no ''original'' scriptures. They turned to dust centuries ago. All we have are copies of copies. Even the Dead sea Scrolls are copies. So to say that the KJV is the closest to the originals is wishful thinking.