The King James Only Debate

[KJV1611]

if you mean that Joseph shouldn't be called Jesus' father, this passage is interesting

ST. LUKE 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

I'm glad you brought that up, I put it in my notes. I never understood why Jesus said that, but now i know it's a rebuke against Mary for saying Joseph was Jesus' father.

 

[KJV1611]

And the KJV-onlyists keep on ignoring the facts.

I'm sorry but I missed the facts you presented against the KJV.

 

[Magenta]

I'm glad you brought that up, I put it in my notes. I never understood why Jesus said that, but now i know it's a rebuke against Mary for saying Joseph was Jesus' father.

Jesus also never once in Scripture addresses Mary as His mother...

It is a fact I remind Romanists of when they show up with their disturbing Mariology

(Calling her the queen of heaven and mother of humanity and the second Eve and an
intercessor between God and man among other unholy completely un-Scriptural things.)

 

[The_Bible]

Take... verses.. off... WHAT? Off the KJV? Once again, the KJV is NOT the standard. If KJV-only proponents could just grasp this one simple fact (or at least refrain from trying to argue that it is), it would significantly diminish the divisive rhetoric.

Nice opinion, evidence? I def showed how they take verses off and you still are complaining so your own ignorance is your downfall. But ig you need a video to understand better right?


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I98SDiZC72E

 

[The_Bible]

Ok, if I understand you correctly, we must have the perfect 66 books of the Bible even though we do not need for example half of them.

Just because of the principle that if they would have some error, we cannot rely also on the rest we actually need.

Well, I think that God always preserves what is needed for His people in a specific time. We dont have the perfect Bible because we do not need it. And on the other hand, we have everything we do need today (not talking only about Bible, but about everything).

We need every 66 books ALL OF EM. Would you buy half a Bible for half price? When God is speaking to you, do you block out half of what he says? If he gave us 66 books is bc we NEED all of that. This is the last generation what other era do you think happens after the church age? There are things we need to know based on the OT for example the story of Daniels for the end of times.

Psalm (12:6-7) - The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

GOD'S words will never pass away. Heaven and earth shall pass away: but MY words shall not pass away. (Jesus Christ, Son of God) (Mark 13:31)

Psalm 12:6-7New International Version (NIV)


6 And the words of the Lord are flawless,
like silver purified in a crucible,
like gold[a] refined seven times.
7 You, Lord, will keep the needy safe
and will protect us forever from the wicked,

Ya sure all bibles are not corrupted they all teach the same thing.

 

[Dan_473]

Mary was wrong and Jesus, ever so kindly, corrects her.

Luke 2:49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?

Jesus, referring to His Father, God the Father and not Joseph.

Mary was at Jesus' conception, she knew who Jesus' father and Father was.

she rightly refers to Joseph as Jesus' father, earthly father.

if modern translations do what Mary did, I don't believe that's a problem.

 

[KJV1611]

Mary was at Jesus' conception, she knew who Jesus' father and Father was.

she rightly refers to Joseph as Jesus' father, earthly father.

if modern translations do what Mary did, I don't believe that's a problem.

But realize that Jesus corrected Mary. What Mary did was wrong. This passage shows that it's not proper to call Joseph the father of Jesus.

 

[Dan_473]

If there's one error, only one, then it's not the word of truth. This would mean we do not have something certain to read, study and trust, and to stand up against the world's view.

if one doesn't believe that the children of God are led by the spirit, then you are correct... we have nothing certain.

 

[Dan_473]

I'm glad you brought that up, I put it in my notes. I never understood why Jesus said that, but now i know it's a rebuke against Mary for saying Joseph was Jesus' father.

no, both the kjv and the Niv rightly show Mary saying 'father', small f.

Jesus is talking about his heavenly father, large f.

 

[Dan_473]

Jesus also never once in Scripture addresses Mary as His mother...

It is a fact I remind Romanists of when they show up with their disturbing Mariology

(Calling her the queen of heaven and mother of humanity and the second Eve and an
intercessor between God and man among other unholy completely un-Scriptural things.)

I believe you're correct Jesus doesn't call Mary his mother.

however, Luke does
like here
ST. LUKE 2:51 Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart.

 

[KJV1611]

no, both the kjv and the Niv rightly show Mary saying 'father', small f.

Jesus is talking about his heavenly father, large f.

I see your point.

 

[Dino246]

Nice opinion, evidence? I def showed how they take verses off and you still are complaining so your own ignorance is your downfall. But ig you need a video to understand better right? ...

You completely missed the point of my post.

 

[KJV1611]

An individual [ who is, or who has been ] 'born-again' ( born "of the Spirit" - John 3 ) - [ is, or has been ] "sealed" with / by the Spirit of God.


Ephesians 1:

[SUP]12[/SUP] That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. [SUP]13[/SUP] In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, [SUP]14[/SUP] Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Ephesians 4:

[SUP]30[/SUP] And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.


The "sense and tense" of the words "after that ye believed" in verse 13 above ( the whole phrase comes from a single word in the greek - meaning "to have faith" ) - is, in this context - "having believed" or "upon believing" - and, does not allow for a time span that would suggest that "ye were sealed" could occur "some time later"; rather, it indicates that "ye were sealed" occurs at the time of the believing.

( i.e. - in the English, the word 'after' would be considered to be in a 'condition-based' sense rather than in a 'time-based' sense. )

In other words, we are 'born-again' at the time we [ truly ] believe and [ place our ] trust in God and His Christ.

The word 'sealed' in the above verses is a form of "marked" - as in - upon believing / trusting in God / Christ - God 'seals' / 'marks' / 'makes-a-claim-upon' us ( for Himself ) - and "keeps" us ( by His Holy Spirit ) "unto the day of redemption"...


"Beautiful, isn't it...?"

I disagree. Being sealed and born again are not the same. True a believer is sealed at salvation but the second birth is not the sealing and it comes later. We are born again by words, not actions.

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.

I was saved having never read the bible in my life. Years later as I began to study the bible I became born again, I could see the kingdom of heaven. Which by the way is evidence of the second birth.

John 3:3 KJV
Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

It's a complicated concept that is hard to put into words but even so, the second birth is the Christ formed in us, it is the spirit of Christ, created by the words that we read.

 

[Dan_473]

But realize that Jesus corrected Mary. What Mary did was wrong. This passage shows that it's not proper to call Joseph the father of Jesus.

Mary rightly uses Joseph as Jesus' legal father, as Luke does

23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being
(as was supposed)
the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

supposed by who? well... Luke, here. He spends lots of verses giving us Jesus' legal genealogy.

 

[KJV1611]

Mary rightly uses Joseph as Jesus' legal father, as Luke does

23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being
(as was supposed)
the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

supposed by who? well... Luke, here. He spends lots of verses giving us Jesus' legal genealogy.

This is not important to me lol. I'm sure most people thought Jesus was an illegitimate son of Joseph and Mary.

 

[Dan_473]

This is not important to me lol. I'm sure most people thought Jesus was an illegitimate son of Joseph and Mary.

it's not important to me, either... it sounded like some folks thought the niv said joseph was Jesus' father, and this was a sign it was demonic.

 

[KJV1611]

it's not important to me, either... it sounded like some folks thought the niv said joseph was Jesus' father, and this was a sign it was demonic.

I see it as a recurring theme in the NIV, the more revisions it goes through the more the divinity of Jesus gets blurred. That's just my opinion.

 

[Dan_473]

when I read it, I don't see any blurring...



say, about Neb saying he saw a son of the gods...

here's another pagan king who says wrong stuff about God

15 Now therefore let not Hezekiah deceive you, nor persuade you on this manner, neither yet believe him: for no god of any nation or kingdom was able to deliver his people out of mine hand, and out of the hand of my fathers:

how much less shall your God deliver you out of mine hand?

17 He wrote also letters to rail on the Lord God of Israel, and to speak against him, saying, As the gods of the nations of other lands have not delivered their people out of mine hand,
so shall not the God of Hezekiah deliver his people out of mine hand.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2 Chronicles+32&version=KJV

 

[grahampaul]

hello.interesting debate.
i for one have allways used the kjv as a main stay.have read other versions though not many yet allways find myself pulled back to the kjv,it is a very populer version in this country,the uk.i find it nice when in a group the folk have the same version (any mainstream version)it being easier to follow along.Having used it for so long i have no problem with its wordage.as for "doing an eve" adding a word changing a word or taking a word it can be fun finding out who, what, where and when.after all it surely is "study to show thyself approved"(timothy) God bless all

 

[The_Bible]

You completely missed the point of my post.

I didn't miss your point, bc there wasn't any, that's why I asked for evidence of what you wrote.