Why the king james?

  • 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.
Dino246 said:
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.
Click to expand...

I watched James White on youtube make mistakes and have documented the mistakes.
The scholars I accept can't make mistakes like that.
In order to be the best, you have to be right on the money.

White is the director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, a presuppositional apologetics organization based in Phoenix, Arizona. He received a BA from Grand Canyon College, an MA from Fuller Theological Seminary, and aThM, a ThD and a DMin from Columbia Evangelical Seminary (formerly Faraston Seminary),[SUP][1][/SUP] an unaccredited distance-learning school
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_White_(theologian)

What do you think about his doctorate degree if his school is unaccredited?
What should we think about your judgment if you are trusting someone who is unaccredited?
 
WE must be very skeptical of new translations of the bible. Avid atheist have been trying to pervert the scriptures since the 1960's. Say that they will change the meaning of the scriptures in an effort to thwart the the church. Google and search Doctor David Day an Atheist from the 1960's and you will see their motive. The King James is sound and true and proven by the test of time. Most of Modern Protestant churches are founded on the basis of the King James Bible. In an attempt to make the word of God more understandable, men have taken the privilege to change the scripture into modern day words. However, To make a new bible you must change the meaning of the text or its plagiarism which is a crime. But at the same time there are good translations that have know evil intent. The Lord will lead and guide if we ask Him.
 
Satan has been trying to change God's word from the garden. There's a reason why the KJV stands alone and all others attack it.

RobbyEarl said:
WE must be very skeptical of new translations of the bible. Avid atheist have been trying to pervert the scriptures since the 1960's. Say that they will change the meaning of the scriptures in an effort to thwart the the church. Google and search Doctor David Day an Atheist from the 1960's and you will see their motive. The King James is sound and true and proven by the test of time. Most of Modern Protestant churches are founded on the basis of the King James Bible. In an attempt to make the word of God more understandable, men have taken the privilege to change the scripture into modern day words. However, To make a new bible you must change the meaning of the text or its plagiarism which is a crime. But at the same time there are good translations that have know evil intent. The Lord will lead and guide if we ask Him.
Click to expand...
 
Maybe attack is a strong word, but when one doubts it, whines about its "hard to understand" language, or claims it has mistakes, I see this is an attack on the word of God.

Agricola said:
Who attacks the KJV? I see no one attacking KJV on here.
Click to expand...
 
It has stood the test of time. There is not one word that has proven to been wrong, only empty attacks like the serpent in the garden trying to get man to doubt the truth of God's word.

Agricola said:
please provide 100% concrete irrefutable evidence from the the Bible that the King James is the perfect English version.
Click to expand...
 
John146 said:
Maybe attack is a strong word, but when one doubts it, whines about its "hard to understand" language, or claims it has mistakes, I see this is an attack on the word of God.
Click to expand...

John146 said:
It has stood the test of time. There is not one word that has proven to been wrong, only empty attacks like the serpent in the garden trying to get man to doubt the truth of God's word.
Click to expand...

It is this blind fanaticism which is another indicator that you are part of a cult. Someone stating they struggle with getting head around 17th century English is not attacking God or the Bible, its a statement of fact that after 500 years English langauge has evolved.

The King James is not perfect. No English version can be any more perfect than the original writings, the King James is a good translation, but not perfect.


Chuckt said:
Isn't this threat a subtle attempt to discredit the KJV? You didn't say anything negative?
Click to expand...

Not at all, it is a question which I continually ask as well but never get a conclusive concrete irrefutable reply, at best a few cherry picked verses and claims that simply because its been around for 500 years makes it perfect . No one is trying to discredit the King James, only the cult who think it has some special divine status above all over writings.

I love the King James Bible, I have nothing against it, what I do have an objection to is the Cult of King James Onlyism and its insistence that we should only read that version and anyone who dosn't is not spiritually mature and can not know HOly Spirit or that I they are not enlightened enough for God to reveal the Bible issue, that is utterly disgusting and is something that only a cult would claim.
 
The KJ is not perfect as it was written by men, However, it is the closet thing to the original manuscripts. But it is the only translation that God moved upon a king to have written. Not to say that others are at fault. I like Young's literal translation. But as for the living and amplified and the NSB or NIV. No likey from me.
 
Agricola said:
please provide 100% concrete irrefutable evidence from the the Bible that the King James is the perfect English version.
Click to expand...

Your argument is flawed. The oneness is on you to prove that the other versions are better.
 
The "originals" were written by men.

RobbyEarl said:
The KJ is not perfect as it was written by men, However, it is the closet thing to the original manuscripts. But it is the only translation that God moved upon a king to have written. Not to say that others are at fault. I like Young's literal translation. But as for the living and amplified and the NSB or NIV. No likey from me.
Click to expand...
 
Chuckt said:
I watched James White on youtube make mistakes and have documented the mistakes.
The scholars I accept can't make mistakes like that...
What should we think about your judgment if you are trusting someone who is unaccredited?
Click to expand...

First, I didn't state that I trusted him. Second, I said nothing about his accreditation, other than referring to him as "Dr. White." Third, I directed the readers of this thread to his book, which is extensively footnoted. If you don't like him because of his accreditation or his mistakes, fine, but don't blow off the evidence he has collected for those reasons. If you flatly refuse to read the evidence, and just argue against the man, that is intellectual dishonesty.

As to accreditation, Moses, Samuel, David, Ezra, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, John the Baptist, John the Revelator, Matthew, Luke, Apollos, Timothy and Jesus Himself were all "unaccredited" (Paul may have been, as a Pharisee). Accreditation, by itself, is no guarantee of truth, and lack of it is no guarantee of error.
 
RobbyEarl said:
The KJ is not perfect as it was written by men, However, it is the closet thing to the original manuscripts. But it is the only translation that God moved upon a king to have written. Not to say that others are at fault. I like Young's literal translation. But as for the living and amplified and the NSB or NIV. No likey from me.
Click to expand...

How would you know? Have you ever seen an original manuscript?
 
John146 said:
The "originals" were written by men.
Click to expand...

True but in Ancient Hebrew as the Holy Spirit searched there vocabulary and gave them the best words to write. The bible is written by men under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Paul was writing in Greek by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The King James was written under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Do you no what a cockatrice is or have you experienced a threshing floor? The Holy Spirit reveals the the Word of God to the Individual. However, There are many translations that lead astray. The King James has stood the test of time and many can say that. The Holy Spirit has thrusted the King James in English speaking coutries as never before or since.
 
Imean really when God told Moses that His name is I AM THAT I AM. What is that in modern English
 
John146 said:
It has stood the test of time. There is not one word that has proven to been wrong, only empty attacks like the serpent in the garden trying to get man to doubt the truth of God's word.
Click to expand...

The KJV has stood the 'test of' less time than its primary predecessor. The "test of time" is not valid evidence of truth; you keep stating that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are corrupt, and yet, they still exist, well over a thousand years later. So this line of argument is faulty.
 
Dino246 said:
The KJV has stood the 'test of' less time than its primary predecessor. The "test of time" is not valid evidence of truth; you keep stating that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are corrupt, and yet, they still exist, well over a thousand years later. So this line of argument is faulty.
Click to expand...

How many of you have read the Vaticanus and Sinaitcus and how many millions have read the King James.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back