Well, we do have different ideas about how God communicates with us.
I'm not saying your ideas are wrong, can you accept that other people's ideas aren't wrong?
The King James Only Debate
- Thread starter calvinsx76
- 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.
Well, we do have different ideas about how God communicates with us.
I'm not saying your ideas are wrong, can you accept that other people's ideas aren't wrong?
First you must determine the difference between blind cult like following and legitimately seeking to know the truth.
Is your KJV bible the sole source of truth?
For the cause of Christ
Roger
D.A. Waite writes, "Do you know how many changes they made? My own personal count, as of August 2, 1984, using Scrivener's Greek New Testament referred to above, was 5,604 changes that Westcott and Hort made to the Textus Receptus in their own Greek New Testament text. Of these 5,604 alterations, I found 1,952 to be OMISSIONS (35%), 467 to be ADDITIONS (8%), and 3,185 to be CHANGES (57%). In these 5,604 places that were involved in these alterations, there were 4,366 more words included, making a total of 9,970 Greek words that were involved. This means that in a Greek Text of 647 pages (such as Scrivener's text), this would average 15.4 words per page that were CHANGED from the Received Text. Pastor Jack Moorman counted 140,521 words in the Textus Receptus. These changes would amount to 7% of the words; and 45.9 pages of the Greek New Testament if placed together in one place.”
You claim there's only a 1% difference? How did you come to that?
Total verses omitted:
Matthew 12:47 - “Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.” (Omitted by RSV and ESV but found in NIV, NASB, NKJV)
Matthew 17:21- “Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.”
Matthew 18:11 - “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.”
Matthew 23:14- “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.”
Mark 7:16 - “If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.”
Mark 9:44 - “Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”
Mark 9:46 - “Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”
Mark 11:26 - “But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespases.”
Mark 15:28 - “And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.”
Luke 17:36 - “Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.”
Luke 23:17 - “For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.”
John 5:4 - “For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.”
Acts 8:37 - “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
Acts 15:34 - “Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.”
Acts 24:6b to 8a - “and would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, Commanding his accusers to come unto thee”
Acts 28:29 -”And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.”
Romans - 16:24 “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.”
I John 5:7-8 - omits the words: “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth”
Portions of Scripture missing just from Matthew:
Matthew5:27 by them of old time
5:44 bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you
5:44 despitefully use you, and
6:13 For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
15:6 or his mother
15:8 draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and
19:9 and whoso marrieth her which is put away- doth commit adultery
19:20 from my youth
20:7 and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive
20:16 for many be called, but few chosen
20:22 and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with
20:23 and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with
22:13 and take him away
23:4 and grievous to be borne
25:13 wherein the Son of man cometh
26:3 and the scribes
26:60 yet found they none
27:35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted My garments among them, and upon MY vesture did they cast lots
28:2 from the door
28:9 as they went to tell His disciples
And that's just one book!
You must realize two important things.
1.
If you take any two manuscripts and compare them, you will find about 10 differences in every chapter.
Two closest manuscripts in existence differ from each other in 2000 places or so.
But 99% of those variants/differences do not have any impact on the text. Wrong letters, words written twice, row written twice, word ommited, punctuation etc.
Only 1% of differences has impact on the meaning.
So even when numbers are high, it is not as serious as your Waite (KJV Only advocate) tries to make it.
2.
If some verses were not in the originals or manuscripts very close to originals, they are not ommited in better edition, but were added in KJV.
Last edited:
Matthew has 1071 verses. You posted 21 changed ones between two most different editions (TR and W/H).
No, I am not getting hysterical yet.
G
GaryA
Guest
The 'crux' of the debate is not so much about this:
as it is about this:
And, I believe they are telling you that the KJV is an accurate translation - whereas, the modern [ English ] versions are not.
And, they are making the point --- if you cannot trust every word of it, how do you know what is correct or incorrect?
And, to that, I will add:
The Holy Spirit cannot use a "corrupted" verse or passage of scripture to convict or teach. Why? Because the Holy Spirit cannot lie! Therefore, to whatever degree a verse or passage contains actual truth - the Holy Spirit can "use it" to convict or teach; however, to whatever degree a verse or passage does not contain actual truth - the Holy Spirit cannot "use it" to convict or teach.
To the degree that verses / passages are "corrupted" -- it will cause "road blocks" and "stumbing blocks" for the reader. The reader will "miss" what is not there if it has been left out, and will have error introduced by whatever has been added or altered - apart from what God originally intended.
So - the answer is:
"No. You cannot teach / instruct / nourish / etc. a soul with a 'corrupted' bible version - nearly as well - as you can with a 'correct' bible version."
THIS is what they are trying to tell you.
And -- the KJV is a correct bible version.
( At the very absolute least -- it is the most correct - and most accurate - English bible version available -- even though the English language has "changed a bit" since it was translated long ago. In "pure-versus-corrupt" terms, it is still the best English bible version available. )
And -- the modern versions are 'corrupt'.
Again -- I offer this chart as a pictorial illustration of what they are trying to get you to see:
as it is about this:
I think that what KJV1611 and john146 are trying to get some / all of you to understand is that -- to whatever degree a verse or passage has been "corrupted" - studying that verse or passage will yield a "corrupted" interpretation of that verse or passage - because, the actual orginal meaning that God intended has been altered - and, in some cases, to the point of being lost completely.
And, I believe they are telling you that the KJV is an accurate translation - whereas, the modern [ English ] versions are not.
And, they are making the point --- if you cannot trust every word of it, how do you know what is correct or incorrect?
And, to that, I will add:
The Holy Spirit cannot use a "corrupted" verse or passage of scripture to convict or teach. Why? Because the Holy Spirit cannot lie! Therefore, to whatever degree a verse or passage contains actual truth - the Holy Spirit can "use it" to convict or teach; however, to whatever degree a verse or passage does not contain actual truth - the Holy Spirit cannot "use it" to convict or teach.
To the degree that verses / passages are "corrupted" -- it will cause "road blocks" and "stumbing blocks" for the reader. The reader will "miss" what is not there if it has been left out, and will have error introduced by whatever has been added or altered - apart from what God originally intended.
So - the answer is:
"No. You cannot teach / instruct / nourish / etc. a soul with a 'corrupted' bible version - nearly as well - as you can with a 'correct' bible version."
THIS is what they are trying to tell you.
And -- the KJV is a correct bible version.
( At the very absolute least -- it is the most correct - and most accurate - English bible version available -- even though the English language has "changed a bit" since it was translated long ago. In "pure-versus-corrupt" terms, it is still the best English bible version available. )
And -- the modern versions are 'corrupt'.
Again -- I offer this chart as a pictorial illustration of what they are trying to get you to see:
Last edited:
G
GaryA
Guest
If someone reads the koran -- can the Holy Spirit "use it" to convict or teach the reader regarding the ways of God and His Christ?
Where do you draw the line?
( I say this to make a point. )
How do you determine and define just-exactly-what-is-and-what-is-not - the "pure" - unadulterated - Word of God?
If someone reads the koran -- can the Holy Spirit "use it" to convict or teach the reader regarding the ways of God and His Christ?
Where do you draw the line?
( I say this to make a point. )
How do you determine and define just-exactly-what-is-and-what-is-not - the "pure" - unadulterated - Word of God?
Hi garee,
Comparing different translations of the word of God to the Koran is not a good comparison. I have read many translations and it hasn't kept me from understanding the truth of God's word. On the other hand, the Koran is not God-breathed and therefore does not contain the truth, nor does any of the other books of the worlds pagan religious systems.
G
GaryA
Guest
Anyone who cannot see and understand what that chart I posted is illustrating -- there is no hope for them to [ truly ] understand this issue -- unless-and-until they fully "grasp" the fact that Satan has been working very hard to "invalidate" / "weaken" / "water-down" / etc. the Word of God.
On that chart -- the left side is God at work -- the right side is Satan at work.
On that chart -- the left side is God at work -- the right side is Satan at work.
G
GaryA
Guest
It is a very good comparison to make -- when making the point I was making.
Using your above illustration of 'God-breathed' -- the modern bible versions - at best - might be considered to be the 'breath' of God - after having been passed through a germ-and-disease infected screen... ( altering the 'effectiveness' of His Word as His "pure" breath is "corrupted" as it passes through the screen )
If someone reads the koran -- can the Holy Spirit "use it" to convict or teach the reader regarding the ways of God and His Christ?
Where do you draw the line?
( I say this to make a point. )
How do you determine and define just-exactly-what-is-and-what-is-not - the "pure" - unadulterated - Word of God?
Quoran is a different book.
Changes between Textus Receptus and modern eclectical text changing meaning are about 1%.
Can you live with 99% of God's Word? Yes, I think so.
There could be a problem if some theological doctrine was based only one one specific verse and this verse would be changed between editions. But theology based on one verse only is almost everytime wrong.
Last edited:
Anyone who cannot see and understand what that chart I posted is illustrating -- there is no hope for them to [ truly ] understand this issue -- unless-and-until they fully "grasp" the fact that Satan has been working very hard to "invalidate" / "weaken" / "water-down" / etc. the Word of God.
On that chart -- the left side is God at work -- the right side is Satan at work.
We both want the word that is the most precise and closest to originals. The purpose of eclectical critical editions is not to destroy the Word of God, but to clean human additions and bring forth something that is more close to original Word of God.
Please do not call this work "satanic" etc. The opposite is true.
I don't get the cult thing. I don't see my view on the KJV any different than other peoples view of all translations being inspired. I don't believe the KJV is the sole source of truth, but I do believe it's the sole source of complete truth. I'll give you an example.
There is some truth in Psalm 34:2 in the NASB, but one single wrong word "it's", completely removes our ability to understand the marriage relationship between Christ and the church. I'm a man and I am married to Christ, Christ is not a homosexual and Psalm 34:2 in the KJV show's why.
Psalm 34:2New American Standard Bible (NASB)
2 My soul will make its boast in the Lord;
The humble will hear it and rejoice.
Psalm 34:2King James Version (KJV)
2 My soul shall make her boast in the Lord: the humble shall hear thereof, and be glad.
Try reading the first part of Romans 7 with the understanding that the woman in those verses is your soul... it will blow your mind. You will know exactly why we are dead to the law by the body of Christ.
The 'crux' of the debate is not so much about this:
as it is about this:
I think that what KJV1611 and john146 are trying to get some / all of you to understand is that -- to whatever degree a verse or passage has been "corrupted" - studying that verse or passage will yield a "corrupted" interpretation of that verse or passage - because, the actual orginal meaning that God intended has been altered - and, in some cases, to the point of being lost completely.
And, I believe they are telling you that the KJV is an accurate translation - whereas, the modern [ English ] versions are not.
And, they are making the point --- if you cannot trust every word of it, how do you know what is correct or incorrect?
And, to that, I will add:
The Holy Spirit cannot use a "corrupted" verse or passage of scripture to convict or teach. Why? Because the Holy Spirit cannot lie! Therefore, to whatever degree a verse or passage contains actual truth - the Holy Spirit can "use it" to convict or teach; however, to whatever degree a verse or passage does not contain actual truth - the Holy Spirit cannot "use it" to convict or teach.
To the degree that verses / passages are "corrupted" -- it will cause "road blocks" and "stumbing blocks" for the reader. The reader will "miss" what is not there if it has been left out, and will have error introduced by whatever has been added or altered - apart from what God originally intended.
So - the answer is:
"No. You cannot teach / instruct / nourish / etc. a soul with a 'corrupted' bible version - nearly as well - as you can with a 'correct' bible version."
THIS is what they are trying to tell you.
And -- the KJV is a correct bible version.
( At the very absolute least -- it is the most correct - and most accurate - English bible version available -- even though the English language has "changed a bit" since it was translated long ago. In "pure-versus-corrupt" terms, it is still the best English bible version available. )
And -- the modern versions are 'corrupt'.
Again -- I offer this chart as a pictorial illustration of what they are trying to get you to see:
"The Holy Spirit cannot use a "corrupted" verse or passage of scripture to convict or teach."
actually, the Spirit can. Here, a Greek poet is used
THE ACTS 17:28 ’For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ’We are his offspring.’
If someone reads the koran -- can the Holy Spirit "use it" to convict or teach the reader regarding the ways of God and His Christ?
Where do you draw the line?
( I say this to make a point. )
How do you determine and define just-exactly-what-is-and-what-is-not - the "pure" - unadulterated - Word of God?
I don't draw the line, the spirit does.
do you believe Christians are led by the spirit?
ROMANS 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
The chart doesn't display in my browser. Is there a URL for it?Anyone who cannot see and understand what that chart I posted is illustrating -- there is no hope for them to [ truly ] understand this issue -- unless-and-until they fully "grasp" the fact that Satan has been working very hard to "invalidate" / "weaken" / "water-down" / etc. the Word of God.
On that chart -- the left side is God at work -- the right side is Satan at work.
You know what he used, he used the Old Testament.... You guys act like the Old Testament says something different than the New Testament. The gospel is all over the Old Testament, it's just harder to see.
yes, and similarly, multiple versions are good
2 CORINTHIANS 13:1 This will be my third visit to you. "Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses."