Why the king james?

[KJV1611]

Not true. You can check it out, its in Septuagint:

Is 53:1
ΚΥΡΙΕ, τίς ἐπίστευσε τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν?
Lord, who has believed our report?

So which one is right, the vine of Christ, the vine of Sodom or the Septuagint? You don't have the original copies nor could you understand what they said if you had them. You base "truth" on what James Strong or even better yet what a non-Christian translator say a word in a dead language meant thousands of years ago.

Do you really think that's the way God intended for you to "study the scriptures to show thyself approved"? Think about.

 

[fredoheaven]

Not true. You can check it out, its in Septuagint:

Is 53:1
ΚΥΡΙΕ, τίς ἐπίστευσε τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν?
Lord, who has believed our report?

BINGO! that's it what I am saying...well you have to go back from other previous posts. To add a little your LXX contains pseudo writings and who is pushing this kind of corrupt manuscript? you can find that in many Bibles of RCC. That all folks, In chess game, they call it CHECKMATE...

 

[KJV1611]

Thats a Straw-man fallacy - we are not talking about what God is able to do, but whether your statements about KJV are true.

Strawman? I dont find that in the bible. My beliefs come from the bible, I don't see anything in the bible that says God's word would corrupt or go into disarray or be lost and scattered... can you show me that verse in the bible? Can you show me a verse in the bible that says God is not capable of translating his word into other languages? Or a verse where God said he didn't want us to have his perfectly preserved word???? You can't do it because they don't exist. You know where that came from? It came from men who never believed the bible to start with. It came from men who crept in unawares, teaching damanable heresies, wolves in sheeps clothing. Basically what they did is they took the bible from you and you don't even know it happened!

 

[Dino246]

Is it coincidence that the KJV capitalized exactly 13 words describing The Harlot in Revelation 17:5 or did someone put their signature on the bible? ... and you want to tell me the KJV isn't inspired... man please, get real!

Revelation 17:5 KJV
And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH .

In Genesis in the KJV the serpent spoke exactly 46 words to Eve in the garden. Is that coincidence or did someone who knew about DNA hide that knowledge in the KJV?

This is utter foolishness. It is ridiculous speculation to look at a translation, find a few coincidences, and conclude that the translation is inspired. If and only if the encoding is in the original language(s), can it be claimed where it appears in a translation (such as the abundance of sevens in the plain text). Otherwise, it's hogwash, codswollop, and sheep dip.

Let me put it to you in painfully simple terms: if your "secret messages" don't work in EVEN ONE other language into which the Bible has been (or could be) translated, they aren't valid. The onus is on you to provide the evidence. My suggestion is that your time could be spent better in focusing on Jesus rather than on this silly crusade of yours.

 

[KJV1611]

This is utter foolishness. It is ridiculous speculation to look at a translation, find a few coincidences, and conclude that the translation is inspired. If and only if the encoding is in the original language(s), can it be claimed where it appears in a translation (such as the abundance of sevens in the plain text). Otherwise, it's hogwash, codswollop, and sheep dip.

Let me put it to you in painfully simple terms: if your "secret messages" don't work in EVEN ONE other language into which the Bible has been (or could be) translated, they aren't valid. The onus is on you to provide the evidence. My suggestion is that your time could be spent better in focusing on Jesus rather than on this silly crusade of yours.

What's secret about the message?

 

[Dino246]

BINGO! that's it what I am saying...well you have to go back from other previous posts. To add a little your LXX contains pseudo writings and who is pushing this kind of corrupt manuscript? you can find that in many Bibles of RCC. That all folks, In chess game, they call it CHECKMATE...

You have yet to prove the assertion of corruption regarding the LXX or the Alexandrian manuscripts. Stating it (and repeating it) doesn't make it so. Burden of proof is on you. The pro-KJV coalition hasn't managed to prove any corruption, but you all keep asserting it as though you have. No checkmate in sight, and it looks like you don't even have the necessary pieces on the board to achieve one.

 

[KJV1611]

This is utter foolishness. It is ridiculous speculation to look at a translation, find a few coincidences, and conclude that the translation is inspired. If and only if the encoding is in the original language(s), can it be claimed where it appears in a translation (such as the abundance of sevens in the plain text). Otherwise, it's hogwash, codswollop, and sheep dip.

Let me put it to you in painfully simple terms: if your "secret messages" don't work in EVEN ONE other language into which the Bible has been (or could be) translated, they aren't valid. The onus is on you to provide the evidence. My suggestion is that your time could be spent better in focusing on Jesus rather than on this silly crusade of yours.

So you really think it's a coincidence that DNA is hidden in Genesis? Was it also coincidental that it took 40 and 6 years to build the temple, that temple which was a shadow of the human body.... do you really think that's a coincidence? Now keep in mind that the "secret message" was in the originals.

 

[KJV1611]

You have yet to prove the assertion of corruption regarding the LXX or the Alexandrian manuscripts. Stating it (and repeating it) doesn't make it so. Burden of proof is on you. The pro-KJV coalition hasn't managed to prove any corruption, but you all keep asserting it as though you have. No checkmate in sight, and it looks like you don't even have the necessary pieces on the board to achieve one.

You can't prove inerrancy to biblically illiterate people.

 

[Dino246]

What's secret about the message?

Whatever. Emphases, codes, special messages. 46 words being related to DNA, 13 bolded words in Revelation. Try to understand the gist of my post rather than getting hung up on a single word. The context explains the meaning quite adequately.

 

[KJV1611]

Oh here's another "coincidence"... DNA again mentioned in the bible.

Psalm 139:16King James Version (KJV)

16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

Oh wait a minute, you don't get the "secret message" in the NIV.. those idiots didn't translate it right.

Psalm 139:16New International Version (NIV)

16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be

 

[KJV1611]

Whatever. Emphases, codes, special messages. 46 words being related to DNA, 13 bolded words in Revelation. Try to understand the gist of my post rather than getting hung up on a single word. The context explains the meaning quite adequately.

No, the gist of your message was that I have secret knowledge. The gist of my post was there is nothing secret about it, it's there, it's not hidden and neither of those facts can be denied. Don't think these are just random coincidences, those things are all over the KJV, but like I said, you can't prove these things to biblically illiterate people. And I'm not being rude, that's just the truth. You act like you know the KJV forwards and backwards and yet you don't know the simplest things like the numbers. I just dont see how you with your very limited knowledge of the KJV can tell other people beyond the shadow of a doubt that the KJV is not inspired.

 

[fredoheaven]

You have yet to prove the assertion of corruption regarding the LXX or the Alexandrian manuscripts. Stating it (and repeating it) doesn't make it so. Burden of proof is on you. The pro-KJV coalition hasn't managed to prove any corruption, but you all keep asserting it as though you have. No checkmate in sight, and it looks like you don't even have the necessary pieces on the board to achieve one.

Well Dino, there is no need to prove you on that, they have already been proven false before you know it, even before this thread has been posted. I think there's no need of wasting time of such as this because you too won't listen. We care for you yet you don't care for His Words. I don't want even to suggest websites that can free you on this subject. I think you have all yours to find. The "LXX now" considers by many scholars have its origin from "ORIGEN". It's all your to believe. I have in my notes but I think it is not necessary to type in here maybe some later time.

A rehash Wescott and Hort has been refuted by Dean John Burgon, Hoskier, Edward F. Hills, Dr. Herb Evans once said to me it's all in the KJB, I have also have a communication with Dr. Baker, a very helpful for me in this issue is Brother Will Kenny. I confess I am new to this site but I am not new to this subject.

 

[KJV1611]

Oh here's another "coincidence"... DNA again mentioned in the bible.

Psalm 139:16King James Version (KJV)

16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

Oh wait a minute, you don't get the "secret message" in the NIV.. those idiots didn't translate it right.

Psalm 139:16New International Version (NIV)

16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be

Also, not only is this the book of DNA for David, it's also the book of DNA for the man David was foreshadowing... Jesus Christ. In that book of DNA, aka the Lamb's book of life, aka the word of God are all the members of His body written. For those of you who don't get that, that would be us Christians. The inerrant pure book of DNA is the word of God, it is the spiritual DNA that creates the believer.

Don't let anyone EVER convince you that your DNA is corrupt.

 

[trofimus]

So which one is right, the vine of Christ, the vine of Sodom or the Septuagint? You don't have the original copies nor could you understand what they said if you had them. You base "truth" on what James Strong or even better yet what a non-Christian translator say a word in a dead language meant thousands of years ago.

Do you really think that's the way God intended for you to "study the scriptures to show thyself approved"? Think about.

I dont understand your point.
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?

 

[trofimus]

BINGO! that's it what I am saying...well you have to go back from other previous posts. To add a little your LXX contains pseudo writings and who is pushing this kind of corrupt manuscript? you can find that in many Bibles of RCC. That all folks, In chess game, they call it CHECKMATE...

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?

 

[trofimus]

Strawman? I dont find that in the bible. My beliefs come from the bible, I don't see anything in the bible that says God's word would corrupt or go into disarray or be lost and scattered... can you show me that verse in the bible? Can you show me a verse in the bible that says God is not capable of translating his word into other languages? Or a verse where God said he didn't want us to have his perfectly preserved word???? You can't do it because they don't exist. You know where that came from? It came from men who never believed the bible to start with. It came from men who crept in unawares, teaching damanable heresies, wolves in sheeps clothing. Basically what they did is they took the bible from you and you don't even know it happened!

You should look up what does "strawman" stand for. Its one of the logical fallacies in discussions.

We are not talking about what God is capable to do, but if what you think He did is what He really did.
So far you have ignored all the facts we have given you that KJV is NOT the perfect Bible translation.

 

[Grace777x70]

I dont understand your point.
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?

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.....

 

[trofimus]

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.....

Yes, its always hard to change a mindset of closed-minded people. Worse, if it is religious mindset, because in that case they see the possible change as the faith failure. That is how the brain operates - when he meets some worldview that collides with his belief system, he immediately start to fight that. Its the root of all fanatism and cults all over the world. People from the "outside" can see how foolish it is, but people inside will have real problem to get out and see that.

But this discussion does not have to have such a big goal - to change somebody who does not want to be changed. It can be just useful to read the arguments and to make a picture why various people believe what they believe.

 

[KJV1611]

You should look up what does "strawman" stand for. Its one of the logical fallacies in discussions.

We are not talking about what God is capable to do, but if what you think He did is what He really did.
So far you have ignored all the facts we have given you that KJV is NOT the perfect Bible translation.

I know what a strawman argument is and it has nothing to do with my argument. My argument is based on what the bible says about the bible.Your argument is based on what other people tell you about the bible. You wont find the doctrines that you teach in the bible. You wont find the doctrine of the word of corrupting in the bible.

 

[John146]

It's not foolishness to believe God has preserved His words for us in the English language. It's not foolishness to believe you can have the words of God and they can be trusted, every word. It's not putting faith in man. It's not putting faith in the Greek. It's placing your faith in the Lord and His promises. You can be born again reading the gospel message on a t-shirt if the Lord convicts you of sin, but I wouldn't necessarily call it Holy Scripture. God's words are holy, pure, without mixture and error. Do we have them?

What you guys don't want to give up is final authority. You want to always be able to reply, "Well I like the way this version has said it. Or, I looked it up in the Greek and it should be...." Shouldn't we be Bible believers and not Bible correcters?

You use the NASB, am I correct? I believe the same about the NASB as you. It's not the pure words of God. It may contain much of the message, but's it's not God's Holy Word you can trust 100%.

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.....