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.
As long as the correct manuscripts were used, not the corrupt Alexandrian texts.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
even if it does not say the very same thing?
Then how could we know which one was right?
And by the way, You can not prove those scripture are any more corrupt than the textus receptus.. All you have is opinion.. no one was alive back then to know which one is the correct one.
If we had the original preservation of God's words in Hebrew and Greek...what would all the people in the world do who don't speak Hebrew and Greek?
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
No No No, Don;t go there, stick to the question.. Your the one who said God would give us a perfect bible in our own language. not me.
L
LeeUK
Guest
Sorry to jump into your discussion, but I believe that different versions of the Bible are acceptable depending on the reader and their purpose. For instance if you are a new Christian who wants to begin by focusing on the gospels and how Jesus says we should live, usually the message is similar in many translations just worded differently and there is no problem choosing a version according to your understanding.
However as you grow in the Lord and seek Him further you may want to study His Word in depth, then you would need to use versions close to the Hebrew/Greek text such as the KJV or even the original text if you want to get even closer. God Bless!
However as you grow in the Lord and seek Him further you may want to study His Word in depth, then you would need to use versions close to the Hebrew/Greek text such as the KJV or even the original text if you want to get even closer. God Bless!
I grow tired of seeing this repeatedly. Either give clear evidence in support of this assertion, or stop using it. Circumstantial evidence is not sufficient. I've directed you to evidence against it, which you have not refuted.
Thanks for your input, Lee! I agree with you. The problem is, a few people on here argue that the KJV is the only legitimate Bible in English. Most of us don't accept that, with good reasons.
That's a dodge. You asserted that James White is a liar and deceiver, then quoted a part of his web site that is itself a quote of someone else's material.
A liar is one who knowingly presents false information as true. If Dr. White believes what is on his web site, he is not a liar. A deceiver is one who intentionally allows others to believe something which he knows is not true. If Dr. White is not intentionally allowing others to believe something which he himself knows is not true, he is not a deceiver. On both counts, you have not shown him guilty of intentionally misrepresenting the truth. All you have done is show part of his site with which you disagree, and even at that you misrepresented his material (note I didn't say 'misquoted').
How about dealing with the evidence regarding the KJV-only position which Dr. White puts forth in his book instead of worrying over whether he himself is (in your opinion) orthodox. His position on the existence of God's preserved Word is, in fact, secondary to the discussion here. The evidence is primary.
No lets be honest here. You thought I quoted Psalm 12 to show the 7 revisions of the KJV proves its the inerrant word.... I didn't. So again I ask you "qualifies for what"?
Judge the book by it's fruits. All other Bible versions compare themselves to the KJV. I wonder why?
For starters, look to the Bible for evidence. Alexandria is a picture of the sinful world, corrupt. Antioch is center of the Christian church. Shouldn't the Bible be the center of the Christian church?
The early church rejected the Alexandrian texts because they were known to be corrupt. The Received Text or Majority Text was what was used.
The early church rejected the Alexandrian texts because they were known to be corrupt. The Received Text or Majority Text was what was used.
LOL yet another good avoidance to answer the question, you seriously telling me you have never ever used THis verse EVER in defence of King James? Your cult uses this as one of the core verses, or are you now moving the goal posts.
Yet again please provide 100% concrete irrefutable evidence from the the Bible that the King James is the perfect English version.
I didn't state that White has evidence that the KJV is wrong. I stated that he presents evidence regarding the King James Only movement. However, that same source shows shortcomings in the KJV.
Whether he is an authority is irrelevant. The evidence which he has assembled is relevant.
John146 said:
No, Jesus Christ should.
People, please read The King James Only Controversy by James White. It contains a wealth of information regarding this subject, is well-written, and is worth the few hours it will take to read. The evidence it contains addresses most, if not all, of the claims made by people advocating a KJV-only position.
The only way we know about Jesus Christ is through the Bible. How does the Christian grow? Through the Bible. How do we renew our minds? Through the Bible. If Jesus Christ is center, then the Bible will be center. "Thou hath magnified thy word above all thy name."