For my KJB supporting brethren
- Thread starter South_FLA
- 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.
That's cute, isn't it? The fact is you'll give an account for your slander of brothers and sisters who love the LORD and their Scriptures in whatever version they use. We have the true Word of God, and we're knowledgeable enough to know that the Greek cannot be conveyed perfectly word for word to English, thus the several good modern versions.
Which is, let's see, how all translations have come into being via mss. But, somehow magically, if the translators spoke the Queens English, and corrupted word usages to cover their unbiblical mode of baptism, it's all good, and "voila!" a perfect word for word from Greek to English tranlsation!!! LOL!
There are zero differing truths in Modern Versions except for the fact they notate where the corrupt KJV has added in verses that are not in extant mss.
KJV corrupts the purity of God's holy word by using "strain at a gnat;" Matthew 23:24, and "Jesus" where it should read "Joshua" to maintain consistency, but it makes this error, and corrects it orally, while pretending it isn't an error. Now, if a Modern Version rendering was corrected orally, the KJVO cultist would decry it as a corruption -- huge double-standard, and that is a fact. It is pure Pharisaical hypocrisy.
There are more issues.
Then there is "Which one is the most pure out of the two corrupt KJV versions; the Oxford or the Cambridge?"
We don't believe in luck, or any other incantations (but those who believe in the many KJVO conspiracies, lunacies, numerical nonsense, acrostic algebra, who concentrate on Satan more than on Christ in their mad endeavor to slam the Word in other versions, who look for a devil under every page of Scripture among many other silly teachings to bolster their "faith" in a version) probably would believe in such an incantation.
We have that, there is much more unity among those who do not use the corrupt KJV as a measure of division as the KJVO cultist do.
I know this as a firsthand fact, having had these types in my ministry, who've caused much division, sowed much discord, all over their cultic views of a version, while they gossiped, lied, deceived, among many other things. That is what KJVO'ers call "unity."
All that was "OK" because they were "KJVO" and they were excused because they had the "perfect Word of God." In fact, they attempted to end my ministry because I showed them they don't use the 1611 they use the 1769, and out of their ignorance, spite, hate and delusion they almost lost their faith when they opened the first pages of their corrupt Bibles to see it said "1769" not "1611." They were shocked to the core and went into full attack mode.
There is much more unity and freedom among those not shackled to a cult and one version, who have and employ several good translations which convey God's Word to them much better than the KJV.
May God bless (not "luck", "bless") each and every one of them, and may He save His people out of the KJVO cult.
Which is, let's see, how all translations have come into being via mss. But, somehow magically, if the translators spoke the Queens English, and corrupted word usages to cover their unbiblical mode of baptism, it's all good, and "voila!" a perfect word for word from Greek to English tranlsation!!! LOL!
There are zero differing truths in Modern Versions except for the fact they notate where the corrupt KJV has added in verses that are not in extant mss.
KJV corrupts the purity of God's holy word by using "strain at a gnat;" Matthew 23:24, and "Jesus" where it should read "Joshua" to maintain consistency, but it makes this error, and corrects it orally, while pretending it isn't an error. Now, if a Modern Version rendering was corrected orally, the KJVO cultist would decry it as a corruption -- huge double-standard, and that is a fact. It is pure Pharisaical hypocrisy.
There are more issues.
Then there is "Which one is the most pure out of the two corrupt KJV versions; the Oxford or the Cambridge?"
We don't believe in luck, or any other incantations (but those who believe in the many KJVO conspiracies, lunacies, numerical nonsense, acrostic algebra, who concentrate on Satan more than on Christ in their mad endeavor to slam the Word in other versions, who look for a devil under every page of Scripture among many other silly teachings to bolster their "faith" in a version) probably would believe in such an incantation.
We have that, there is much more unity among those who do not use the corrupt KJV as a measure of division as the KJVO cultist do.
I know this as a firsthand fact, having had these types in my ministry, who've caused much division, sowed much discord, all over their cultic views of a version, while they gossiped, lied, deceived, among many other things. That is what KJVO'ers call "unity."
All that was "OK" because they were "KJVO" and they were excused because they had the "perfect Word of God." In fact, they attempted to end my ministry because I showed them they don't use the 1611 they use the 1769, and out of their ignorance, spite, hate and delusion they almost lost their faith when they opened the first pages of their corrupt Bibles to see it said "1769" not "1611." They were shocked to the core and went into full attack mode.
There is much more unity and freedom among those not shackled to a cult and one version, who have and employ several good translations which convey God's Word to them much better than the KJV.
May God bless (not "luck", "bless") each and every one of them, and may He save His people out of the KJVO cult.
Not at all, brother.... the silliness begins when you believe you have the only word of God...
Most of us understand that God preserved His word for us in many translations, not just in old/middle English.
I trust every word of the Bibles I read, as well. I have seen nothing in any mainstream translation that will alter the message... the words of God.
I don't get hung up on punctuation or one word being different from another.... If a version tells me that there were unicorns "back then", I know enough to research it, and compare that version to other translations, to gain insight into what was being said.
There is NO translation that has the exact, perfect "words of God" exactly the way the original inspired writers wrote it.
Most of us understand that God preserved His word for us in many translations, not just in old/middle English.
I trust every word of the Bibles I read, as well. I have seen nothing in any mainstream translation that will alter the message... the words of God.
I don't get hung up on punctuation or one word being different from another.... If a version tells me that there were unicorns "back then", I know enough to research it, and compare that version to other translations, to gain insight into what was being said.
There is NO translation that has the exact, perfect "words of God" exactly the way the original inspired writers wrote it.
B
There has not been one bible that has this account correct, ALL bible are flawed in one way or another.
example:
you can not have Jesus walking by the sea in (Mark) and (Matthew) meeting Simon and his brother on the shore then Jesus going on from there then meeting John and his brother James, while in (Luke) Jesus is standing by the lake and then climbs into Simon peters boat and cast off on to the lake and then Simon Peter calls over his companions John and his brother James in the other boat to help with the catch of fish.
Mark and Matthew state Jesus met Simon and Andrew first then John and James after moving on from the spot he met Simon and Andrew to find John and James.
Luke has well at least three of these guys all together, interesting that Luke doesn't even mention Simon peters brother Andrew, Yo bone head Luke what happened to Andrew did you forget to write him in, I'll give him a break he does say we we..
So yea every last bible of the NT is flat out flawed.
Luke 5:1~11
Jesus Calls His First Disciples
Lk 5:1 One day as Jesus was standing by the Lake of Gennesaret, the people were crowding around him and listening to the word of God.
2He saw at the water’s edge two boats, left there by the fishermen, who were washing their nets.
3He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon, and asked him to put out a little from shore. Then he sat down and taught the people from the boat.
4When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, “Put out into deep water, and let down the nets for a catch.”
5Simon answered, “Master, we’ve worked hard all night and haven’t caught anything. But because you say so, I will let down the nets.”
6When they had done so, they caught such a large number of fish that their nets began to break.
7So they signaled their partners in the other boat to come and help them, and they came and filled both boats so full that they began to sink.
8When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus’ knees and said, “Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!”
9For he and all his companions were astonished at the catch of fish they had taken,
10and so were James and John, the sons of Zebedee, Simon’s partners. Then Jesus said to Simon, “Don’t be afraid; from now on you will fish for people.”
11So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.
Mark 1:16~20
Jesus Calls His First Disciples
Mk 1:16 As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen.
Mk 1:17 “Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will send you out to fish for people.”
Mk 1:18 At once they left their nets and followed him.
Mk 1:19 When he had gone a little farther, he saw James son of Zebedee and his brother John in a boat, preparing their nets.
Mk 1:20 Without delay he called them, and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired men and followed him.
Matthew 4:18~22
Jesus Calls His First Disciples
18As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen.
19“Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will send you out to fish for people.”
20At once they left their nets and followed him.
21Going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James son of Zebedee and his brother John. They were in a boat with their father Zebedee, preparing their nets. Jesus called them,
22and immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him.
example:
you can not have Jesus walking by the sea in (Mark) and (Matthew) meeting Simon and his brother on the shore then Jesus going on from there then meeting John and his brother James, while in (Luke) Jesus is standing by the lake and then climbs into Simon peters boat and cast off on to the lake and then Simon Peter calls over his companions John and his brother James in the other boat to help with the catch of fish.
Mark and Matthew state Jesus met Simon and Andrew first then John and James after moving on from the spot he met Simon and Andrew to find John and James.
Luke has well at least three of these guys all together, interesting that Luke doesn't even mention Simon peters brother Andrew, Yo bone head Luke what happened to Andrew did you forget to write him in, I'll give him a break he does say we we..
So yea every last bible of the NT is flat out flawed.
Luke 5:1~11
Jesus Calls His First Disciples
Lk 5:1 One day as Jesus was standing by the Lake of Gennesaret, the people were crowding around him and listening to the word of God.
2He saw at the water’s edge two boats, left there by the fishermen, who were washing their nets.
3He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon, and asked him to put out a little from shore. Then he sat down and taught the people from the boat.
4When he had finished speaking, he said to Simon, “Put out into deep water, and let down the nets for a catch.”
5Simon answered, “Master, we’ve worked hard all night and haven’t caught anything. But because you say so, I will let down the nets.”
6When they had done so, they caught such a large number of fish that their nets began to break.
7So they signaled their partners in the other boat to come and help them, and they came and filled both boats so full that they began to sink.
8When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at Jesus’ knees and said, “Go away from me, Lord; I am a sinful man!”
9For he and all his companions were astonished at the catch of fish they had taken,
10and so were James and John, the sons of Zebedee, Simon’s partners. Then Jesus said to Simon, “Don’t be afraid; from now on you will fish for people.”
11So they pulled their boats up on shore, left everything and followed him.
Mark 1:16~20
Jesus Calls His First Disciples
Mk 1:16 As Jesus walked beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother Andrew casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen.
Mk 1:17 “Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will send you out to fish for people.”
Mk 1:18 At once they left their nets and followed him.
Mk 1:19 When he had gone a little farther, he saw James son of Zebedee and his brother John in a boat, preparing their nets.
Mk 1:20 Without delay he called them, and they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired men and followed him.
Matthew 4:18~22
Jesus Calls His First Disciples
18As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen.
19“Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will send you out to fish for people.”
20At once they left their nets and followed him.
21Going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James son of Zebedee and his brother John. They were in a boat with their father Zebedee, preparing their nets. Jesus called them,
22and immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him.
B
Indeed I agree and as well of the orginal language of Aramiac and Hebrew of the disciples and Jesus that in which they spoke, were just fragments some with only a few verses, Matthew being the oldest found fragments of the old scrolls and letters,
and today it's probably out of fear that these first disciples accounts haven't been fixed. I haven't seen any bible attempted it so far. lol
and today it's probably out of fear that these first disciples accounts haven't been fixed. I haven't seen any bible attempted it so far. lol
Clearly you have no idea nature of the problem.
If you claim that the KJV is corrupt what you are actually saying is that God allowed millions and millions of people all over the world, and over hundreds of years, to rely on a corrupt English translation, and you are the "prophet" par excellence who has discovered this amazing truth and brought it to light. Do you see how silly your statement sounds? And then a few have given you "likes" when they should have censured you.
On the other hand, when the first corrupt critical Greek text and its correspondingly corrupt Revised Version were published in 1881, they were immediately exposed as fraudulent, so Christians would not be deceived. Which means that God used capable textual scholars to prevent Christians from going after corrupt Bibles. However (and sadly) their warnings and exposes were generally ignored because theological liberalism had entered into the seminaries and churches of the Western world. At the same time Bible publishers were eager to generate more revenues and went along with all the hoopla about "newer and better" (as though the Bible was a commercial product).
If you claim that the KJV is corrupt what you are actually saying is that God allowed millions and millions of people all over the world, and over hundreds of years, to rely on a corrupt English translation, and you are the "prophet" par excellence who has discovered this amazing truth and brought it to light. Do you see how silly your statement sounds? And then a few have given you "likes" when they should have censured you.
On the other hand, when the first corrupt critical Greek text and its correspondingly corrupt Revised Version were published in 1881, they were immediately exposed as fraudulent, so Christians would not be deceived. Which means that God used capable textual scholars to prevent Christians from going after corrupt Bibles. However (and sadly) their warnings and exposes were generally ignored because theological liberalism had entered into the seminaries and churches of the Western world. At the same time Bible publishers were eager to generate more revenues and went along with all the hoopla about "newer and better" (as though the Bible was a commercial product).
B
I've seen some say the first written NT bible was in Greek, this may be correct in a sense of all in one book per say, but there was other writings before that most of what was translated came from scrolls etc.. you can see that in the koine Greek by the use of Aramiac and Hebrew wording, a example is the use of (Bar) this is a Aramiac phrase for (son of) in Hebrew it is (Ben)
The NLT is a "thought for thought" translation, so the wording of some scriptures are somewhat different, as the translators were trying to get the thought across, instead of the (almost) exact wording.
I like the NLT for just reading, as it seems to be more in line with the way I talk. If I am doing research, or more in depth study, I go with the NASB. It is probably the best "word for word" translation available.... to people who speak 21st century English.
I like the NLT for just reading, as it seems to be more in line with the way I talk. If I am doing research, or more in depth study, I go with the NASB. It is probably the best "word for word" translation available.... to people who speak 21st century English.
B
I can see that, and I'm not completely against any bible, I think they all have a plus and minus things about them. It all comes down to what a person likes and understands. though that being said just got to be attentive to the verses that may not fully explain the word completely. The only thing I like about the NIV are the chapter titles they do, I think that would be good for all bibles to do, IMO that was a good addiction helpful indeed though the context within each chapter title is highly debatable lol.
I like James Murdock Syriac peshito but who reads that bible unless your into big words like me, lol
I like James Murdock Syriac peshito but who reads that bible unless your into big words like me, lol
Last edited:
Is it not possible with God to give us the exact English words we need? Who cares about word for word. If God has given me His words in English, I don't give a hoot what the Greek and Hebrew say. I have something better. God's words in my language.
God has done it in His word. He has taken what was said in one language, had it translated into Hebrew, and that Hebrew translation is holy Scripture.
God has done it in His word. He has taken what was said in one language, had it translated into Hebrew, and that Hebrew translation is holy Scripture.
B
I've read a lot of the NIV, and from my perspective it gets way off coarse on many things. On the surface it's seems ok but once you dig into it, it's full of errors for sure, but I do like the chapter headers for the accounts no much else lol.
I haven't read much of NLT though I've dabbled with it here and there but some things seems off as well, maybe it's from wanting to explain it in detail or get the point across but somehow ended up saying more than what was needed in some cases.
I haven't read much of NLT though I've dabbled with it here and there but some things seems off as well, maybe it's from wanting to explain it in detail or get the point across but somehow ended up saying more than what was needed in some cases.
Last edited: