To KJV-Onlyist.

  • 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.
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
And like I said earlier, the original Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek was the Word of G-d for FAR longer. When are you going to learn Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek?
I don't have to I have a true translation of the Word in mine language!!! PRAISE THE LORD !!!!!!!!!
 
G

greatkraw

Guest
If the KJV was perfect there would be no reason to "attack" it.
wrong - the fact that it is attacked so vehemently indicates that people feel threatened by it

I have heard stories of it being used in exorcisms where the use of a new version does not have the same power
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
To be quite honest I didn't know that gods and angels could be used interchanged like that. If I could be confused by that, then many other people could be, too. To me, gods means something entirely different than angels.

there is a big difference in saying do not touch me and do not cling to me. If I went to hug my husband because I was sad he was leaving, and he said Don't touch me, it would mean something ENTIRELY different than if he said do not cling to me. By using touch instead of cling to like the original really means, the context and meaning is completely changed.


You tell me I should study the English language a little more, but I shouldn't have to be an English major to understand the Word of God, which is why we have modern translations that make it easier for us to understand what is going on. Even as such I still don't understand what you are trying to get at with the definition of remission and the definition of peresis, because they have two different meanings.Paresis does not mean the same as remission, so they can't be used interchangedly...to pass over or disregard something is entirely different than to release or discharge something. One has a very "look the other way" vibe, while the other has a very "actively relinquishing or pardoning" vibe. The NJV used the wrong word.

I'm also quite glad you aren't me. Mind you, you are accusing me of quite a bit telling me that I should be ashamed, etc. How dare you point a finger at me for showing you evidence of something and telling you that these are the ideas of someone else? How dare you tell me I should be ashamed for something someone else said? Who are you to not be blameless and tell me to lower my head? Who are you to admonish me for having an opinion and giving you evidence to support it? You've said there are flaws in the NIV, and I haven't told you that you are shaming God, I haven't told you that you are an awful, misleading person who should feel guilty for showing those flaws. I think you need to step outside of yourself and make sure you dont' have a plank in your eye.
there is a big difference in saying do not touch me and do not cling to me. If I went to hug my husband because I was sad he was leaving

so in the process of hugging your husband would you not touch him, so where is the big difference, When you hug you touch. you can nick pick on words if you want but my point was this is no error as you have laid charge to the word of God as having errors but these examples you have used are wrong not the Holy Word of God. I used to think of you as a intelligent young lady, but as you dive into this mission you have of proving that the word of God is wrong, and you don't even check what you post to see if it is right, you have read it somewhere and because it supports what you want to believe that the KJB is a translations full of errors then you bite into it and it lies, that is not using that other ugly organ ( brain) that God has blessed you with.......
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
There is evidence from professionals who study languages that say the KJV has translation errors, it's not attacking God's Word to say hey, this translation has some errors. God's word was originally in a different language...that is the only copy that is flawless because it is the original. Anything else is going to have errors...that's not an attack on God's Word, that is just how it happens when we translate into different languages.
oh so there is some atheist professionals who have said that there is no god . so wow it must be true there is no god , WRONG!!!!!!!! there is a God and the point is, not if the King James Bible has errors. the Point is the KJB was and still is the authorized word of God, the God inspired Word in the english language and you are attacking it, do you even know the History of the english Bible where that people were burnt at the stake so the we could have a true Holy Bible in our language, they gave all they had so that you could learn about God and you spit on their graves with all your post in here on this subject , you should to read the foxes book of martyrs, maybe you would then be a little more thankful for the King james Bible
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
So how come He'll forgive you when you make a mistake, but He won't forgive us for reading something that has mistakes in it?

could you show me where that i have ever said that God would not forgive His children for anything we do against Him, maybe you keep forgetting that I believe Once saved always saved, ?????????? the thing I don't understand is how those that claim to love God so much, are so willingly ready to tear down His Word, just to be able to say that I am just, even if I use a translation that does not always agree with the Authorized english Word of God.
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
The problem is Thad is making the exact same kinds of arguments the early Catholic church made when the only bible the people had was the Latin Vulgate, and since the general populace didn't speak Latin and the priests did, reading the Word and interpretation of the Word was entirely based off of what the priest told you. The people weren't allowed to have the bible in any other language.

It's the same with Thad. Either you accept the olde English of the KJV, or you're not reading the right, authoritative version of G-d's Word. Which is absolutely absurd of an idea, because G-d wants ALL people to read and study and meditate on His Word in ways they can best understand it.
No once again someone assumes something someone else has, I have stated before, I would have no problems with any translation that just takes out the thee's and thou's , ye's, but when it does not agree with the Bible that was THE BIBLE for almost 400 years now, that is when I have a problem with it. although I have not found one of the new modern (so called) Bibles that has not had some major doctrinal errors in them!!! but once again let me say that I have not studied all of them. so what I am saying is if you want to up date the language,so be it, but if we do, please keep in mind that this Is the WORD OF GOD, so if we do it, let's us do it right, by the Guidance Of the Holy Ghost, and if this is done then all Bibles should agree with each other!!! not cause confusion as we have now.
 
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
Certainly.

And Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh king of Egypt.
You said a purposed marriage. The answer is an alliance.
I long after you all in the bowels of Jesus Christ.
You said intestines. The answer is affections.
And from thence we fetched a compass.
You said a round trip. The answer is a circuit or circle.
Now there came a dearth over all of Egypt.
You said a drought. The answer is a famine.
Which is the earnest of our inheritance.
You said determined. The answer is guarentee.
Stay me with flagons.
You said a liquor flask. The answer is raisins.
Withersoever the governor listeth.
You said the captain of a ship. The answer is a pilot.
Let them implead one another.
You said to sue. The answer is to accuse.
But you have set at nought all my counsel.
You said "no". the answer is to ignore.
Jacob was a plain man, dwelling in tents.
You said lived on flat lands. The answer is quiet.
With the verses and a dictionary is took you two hours. You are a pastor who handles the word of God skillfully. How would a member of your congregation fare? What about a new convert? What about a person seeking salvation? Over four hundred years the language has changed. It is not my language nor yours. This is no disrespect, this is reality.
 
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
but it is not - it largely reflects the majority of manuscripts
That is no longer true, not that it ever was entirely. The KJV does not reflect the majority. A case in point is the verse in I John, in which the vast majority of transcripts do noty say "there are three that witness in heave, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit." This does not make the KJV corrupt, not does it reflect negatively upon the translation. Just on the arguement against having a newer translation.
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
I think everyone in here is getting a little "testy" to say the least, accusing people and telling people they should be ashamed of what they are saying and telling people out right that they are wrong, who are you all to judge who is right and who is wrong? You are all man, man is not perfect. Who are you all to judge or say that the translations of the Bible are wrong? Only God can judge. I think you all may need to step back take a breather and realize what you are all saying before you say it. You are all not being very meek, Jesus was a meek man and we should strive to be as much like him as we can "Mat 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth."

You all are arguing and attacking each other because of one another interpretation of the Bible. We all have our own interpretation, and we will not all agree with each other. No one knows which version of the Bible is best, it was written over 1600 years ago. Things get lost in translation, whether it be the KJV or the NIV or the NJV etc etc...
shame on you Dmurray, this is not about a person being right or wrong but rather the Holy Word of God being right or wrong, so if the KJB says :
2ti 3:16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
and other translations says :

2 Timothy 3:16 (New International Version)

16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

2 Timothy 3:16 (New American Standard Bible)


16(A)All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;



2 Timothy 3:16 (New King James Version)

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

2 Timothy 3:16 (New Living Translation)

16 All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right.


2 Timothy 3:16 (The Message)


14-17But don't let it faze you. Stick with what you learned and believed, sure of the integrity of your teachers—why, you took in the sacred Scriptures with your mother's milk! There's nothing like the written Word of God for showing you the way to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. Every part of Scripture is God-breathed and useful one way or another—showing us truth, exposing our rebellion, correcting our mistakes, training us to live God's way. Through the Word we are put together and shaped up for the tasks God has for us.



then all these should agree with the other and if not then all can not be God inspired or God-breathed
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
With the verses and a dictionary is took you two hours. You are a pastor who handles the word of God skillfully. How would a member of your congregation fare? What about a new convert? What about a person seeking salvation? Over four hundred years the language has changed. It is not my language nor yours. This is no disrespect, this is reality.
ok so in your opinion, i am stupid, or I am weak, i could not take the solid two hours to focus on this test for it took me awhile trying to respond to others in here, to get to where you showed where there were in scritpures, i hope your pastor does not claim to know everything there is to know about scriptures , i hope he is still seeking knowledge , one of the verses that i have chosen to be my goal is in acts where the scribes said that they knew peter and John were unlearned men, but they could tell they had been around Jesus. so thank you for pointing out that I have achieved part of that verse already that i am unlearned. but I have checked several sources and none of them has said that a flagon is a raisin, and all the other words have more than one meaning i gave one and you gave another, does not make you right and me wrong or you wrong and me right, but look for governor i said captain of the ship you said pilot I updated the word because most folks put a pilot as one who flys not sails and you used the old meaning of the word, but I am wrong in doing so by up dating to clear it up , but we can up date the holy Word with corrupt text and that is ok with you......

this is not Bible but it is a true saying " God does not call the qualified but rather qualifies the called "
 
Last edited:
D

Dread_Zeppelin

Guest
If it is translated that Jesus is the Son of God, that He came down and died for my sins so that I can be saved, and all that general idea- why would I care about a few words? This topic, to me, is the king of splitting fine hairs. If you're not sure about the verse (here's an idea!) ask......GOD? He wrote it.
 

Kakashi

Senior Member
Jan 3, 2007
626
2
0
36
If it is translated that Jesus is the Son of God, that He came down and died for my sins so that I can be saved, and all that general idea- why would I care about a few words? This topic, to me, is the king of splitting fine hairs. If you're not sure about the verse (here's an idea!) ask......GOD? He wrote it.
Exactly, as long as the main ideas are preserved, that's what's most important. Make everything is consistant with the entire word of God.

I think the KJV is worshiped instead of God sometimes....
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
That is no longer true, not that it ever was entirely. The KJV does not reflect the majority. A case in point is the verse in I John, in which the vast majority of transcripts do noty say "there are three that witness in heave, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit." This does not make the KJV corrupt, not does it reflect negatively upon the translation. Just on the arguement against having a newer translation.

You just don't grasp what we are saying do you? we are not saying that the kjb goes along with the majority of the translations printed today, But in the Days tHat the KJB the 1611 kjb was translated It was taken from The maunuscripts that were used 99% of the time, the MAJORITY of the Time, the manuscripts were used to translate to english in those days,was the one that the translators of the KJB used. We are not saying That the kjb fits in with the majority of bibles that we have today, that is our whole point of this debate, that it does not agree with the modern day bibles.. when we say manuscripts you must take it that we mean bible or something.
 

Kakashi

Senior Member
Jan 3, 2007
626
2
0
36
wrong - the fact that it is attacked so vehemently indicates that people feel threatened by it

I have heard stories of it being used in exorcisms where the use of a new version does not have the same power

Who would be threatened by the KJV? It's just one version of many. if anything many people just can;t read it very well. Listen the KJV does NOT hold power in and of itself. it's all God. This completely proves my point in the post above.
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
If it is translated that Jesus is the Son of God, that He came down and died for my sins so that I can be saved, and all that general idea- why would I care about a few words? This topic, to me, is the king of splitting fine hairs. If you're not sure about the verse (here's an idea!) ask......GOD? He wrote it.
ok so in order for Jesus to be the one that died for you, that you might have life. He had to be the Perfect One. He had no sin! agree so far. ok let's look at what a few words can do or a lack of few words can do ..

Matthew 5:22 (King James Version)


22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.



Matthew 5:22 (New International Version)

22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother[a]will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,[b]' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.



Footnotes:
  1. Matthew 5:22 Some manuscripts brother without cause
  2. Matthew 5:22 An Aramaic term of contempt
so the Niv points out that some manuscripts says" without cause" , but the manuscripts that they use don't or their verse would have read who is angry with his brother without cause will be subject to judgement. no big real here with you right, I mean so we have a cause to have anger or not what difference does it make. to you and me you may be right. But to someone who has to be perfect without sin , that will put him under that judgement it is a really BIG deal , so look at this.

Matthew 5:22 (New International Version)

22But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother[a]will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,[b]' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.



Footnotes:
  1. Matthew 5:22 Some manuscripts brother without cause
  2. Matthew 5:22 An Aramaic term of contempt
Mark 3:4-5 (New International Version)



4Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent. 5He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts, said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." He stretched it out, and his hand was completely restored.


the NIv just said that Jesus was subject to judgement, yeah a few words can mean or make a big difference, If Jesus sinned as the Niv said here then he was not the messaih. the one who could take away our sins, so what do you think now ????? now the Kjb still has Him without sin For he had cause to have anger at these doubtors, so one says that he sinned, one says that he is still perfect, there is a difference!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
Exactly, as long as the main ideas are preserved, that's what's most important. Make everything is consistant with the entire word of God.

I think the KJV is worshiped instead of God sometimes....
well we certain know that the Bible speaks against being two-faced as you have showed yourself, please see the above post to Dread_Zeppelin, I think the main idea was changed and to you and dread this is not the only time many more with complete/ whole verses ommited the Blood left out and on and on.
 
C

carpetmanswife

Guest
dude..name calling....:rolleyes:
 

Kakashi

Senior Member
Jan 3, 2007
626
2
0
36
well we certain know that the Bible speaks against being two-faced as you have showed yourself, please see the above post to Dread_Zeppelin, I think the main idea was changed and to you and dread this is not the only time many more with complete/ whole verses ommited the Blood left out and on and on.
In what way have I been two faced?

EDIT: other than my profile picture. that does not count lol