The King James Bible

[Willie-T]

"[FONT="]Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

[/FONT]John 5:39

How would any of us even know of Jesus Christ without the scriptures?

That's about the most I have ever heard you say that were your own words. I was beginning to think all you could do was copy numbers a "counting program" spit out, and copy/paste random verses without any explanations.

You just might be able to develop a real life yet.

 

[preacher4truth]

Good Lord son, he never said he thinks he is Sola Scriptura, that is what you called him bird Brain.

"Son?" Wow. I doubt you'd say that to me not behind a monitor.

I just love your mouth, especially when you chime in, in total ignorance, which is often enough.

Saying standing on the Bible alone is "Sola Scriptura." It's what it means, and looky, I don't have to call you names to get my point acrossed.

minutes and seconds of a hour is not based on scripture but you sure do believe in them, lol another drunkard statement.

Apples and oranges. You're grabbing for straws, really reaching to be relevant and right, but you've failed. And then, in callow fashion, offer some more name calling and derogation.

Grow up.

 

[Musicus]

And the way you know about the Savior is through Scripture. The two cannot be separated. When you trusted in the Savior, you were putting your trust in what the Scriptures say about the Savior. Faith come by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

Well, the apostles were leading folks to salvation after Jesus ascended and before the 4 gospels were written, true? I originally put my trust in an idea somebody told me about, but I talked to Jesus after I read about and studied Him, then asked Him to come into my heart, and He did, for real, and the Holy Spirit came into me for real. The faith comes in that I can't see him, but I know he is there, and will always be there, and that he does everything he promises. So I study scripture because it helps to have it all in writing also. But he teaches me things that are not in scripture also, just like my dad taught me things that were just for me, and not my siblings.

Not that scripture is not important, it's very important, just that so many folks today think that all they need is to recite some verses and say a repeat-after-me prayer and they are saved, when they really do have to go to the Father through Jesus, that it's not the words in the book that save them, but the Word (Jesus; John1) in real life. And it's that simple, and all the numbers and patterns in the world won't change this.

 

[IamWhoIam]

"Son?" Wow. I doubt you'd say that to me not behind a monitor.

I just love your mouth, especially when you chime in, in total ignorance, which is often enough.

Saying standing on the Bible alone is "Sola Scriptura." It's what it means, and looky, I don't have to call you names to get my point acrossed.



Apples and oranges. You're grabbing for straws, really reaching to be relevant and right, but you've failed. And then, in callow fashion, offer some more name calling and derogation.

Grow up.

You don't know me very well, Mr. callow son, I have never believed in what you say,, so yea there is no doubt you would think that, hahaha... Behind a monitor yea please don't threaten me with a good time on your exspanse.


lookie lookie wookie he didn't call himself as being sola scriptura, you made a error and your too callow to admit it, marble head.

would like a few more color words, Preacher4false, you Love to use colorful words and it's ok with you as long as your not the target,,, little boy.

 

[wolfwint]

Study the patterns for yourself and pray about. See what happens. My primary goal is to point them out and show that they exist. I hope others will look into it and share what they find.

Why I should waste time for what already is clear revealed. Ore will you say that behind these pattern is an new revealation? Something new? Why you dont give an answer to my questions?

 

[wolfwint]

It proves there is a pattern present when there should be randomness. It is actually quite simple if you take the time to examine it. You seem to be very vocal so do you deny there is any pattern at all? If so put forth the evidence that what I have posted is not accurate. When I have time I will post the patterns in Genesis 1:1, Genesis 2:1, Revelation 22:6; THE ENTIRE CHAPTER OF JOHN 21, Psalm 148:8; Luke 20:37, and Deuteronomy 32. Download the free software "King James Bible Pure Software" and check for yourself. It is free....only cost you some time and effort.

Do you really believe, as christians we need a man made software and a computer for to understand our father? Without the Holy Spirit you can have the most powerful computer and the best software, but you will understand nothing. So for what really we need this pattern. Do they reveal anything what we can not know if we only read the bible?

 

[James37]

Why I should waste time for what already is clear revealed. Ore will you say that behind these pattern is an new revealation? Something new? Why you dont give an answer to my questions?

Why are you even wasting your time asking me questions then?

 

[Dino246]

No, you don't stand alone on the word of God, the BIBLE!

Let me tell you why you think you're being Sola Scriptura, or, that your standing on Scripture alone, when you in fact are not.

Um, I suspect you are directing your criticism at the wrong person. John146, while a KJV-only advocate, is not James37, who is the OP and sharer of number patterns.

 

[preacher4truth]

Um, I suspect you are directing your criticism at the wrong person. John146, while a KJV-only advocate, is not James37, who is the OP and sharer of number patterns.

LOL!!!!!!!!!! My bad! I stand corrected, long day. Thanks for that bro!

 

[oldethennew]

only if some would 'read' and know and 'read history, that 'king-james' loved 'boys',
but, would this ever take away what our Holy Saviour puts inside of the hearts
whom He has (called-elected-chosen)???

 

[IamWhoIam]

Um, I suspect you are directing your criticism at the wrong person. John146, while a KJV-only advocate, is not James37, who is the OP and sharer of number patterns.

That is his game, he does it all the time, I just got a few bad points against me, but I don't care this place is a joke. the mods let things go on here that isn't Christian at all and I'm supposed to act like a Christian here, this place is joke it's not a Christian site, but a money hungry pit. they don't care about God they care about your donations.

masterbation thread really, your a joke Modder.

 

[IamWhoIam]

LOL!!!!!!!!!! My bad! I stand corrected, long day. Thanks for that bro!

Why don't you step up to the plate and apologize to the person you did that too, it's just another display of you belittling people because they don't say everything you believe.

 

[Angela53510]

Look at the 153rd book of the the Old Testament and the 153rd book of the New Testament. When we first began the discussion I pointed out that the word "find" in John 21 was found 47 times in the NT (the right side of the book where we cast our net so to speak). I talked about events in Genesis 2 and 3 that led us to 1 Corinthians 4:11 and 2 Corinthians 5:3. Notice that 2 Corinthians 5:1 begins with the phrase "Let us therefore" meaning we need to examine what was said in chapter 4. 2 Corinthians 4 is the 153rd book of the New Testament and is where I believe the key to answering the question of the number 153. Study it and maybe there is "treasure" to be found.

Since there are only 66 books in the entire Bible, how do you get 153 books in the OT and 153 in the NT?

OR are you talking chapters, invented 8 centuries after the Bible was written? And not always divided in the best places.

(Sorry if someone already caught this, I"m just trying to catch up, not going to go forward and then come back!)

 

[James37]

Since there are only 66 books in the entire Bible, how do you get 153 books in the OT and 153 in the NT?

OR are you talking chapters, invented 8 centuries after the Bible was written? And not always divided in the best places.

(Sorry if someone already caught this, I"m just trying to catch up, not going to go forward and then come back!)

I was in a hurry at work...I meant "chapter."

 

[posthuman]

While I am sure many people came to know salvation through Christ apart from reading Torah when He was walking among us, and throughout the ages when it wasn't available to read, and among those illiterate, we have the scripture, and it is probably how all of us came to hear of Him, and it is through what was already written about Him before He came that the disciples taught of Him to others after He came.

 

[SovereignGrace]

"Son?" Wow. I doubt you'd say that to me not behind a monitor.

I just love your mouth, especially when you chime in, in total ignorance, which is often enough.

Saying standing on the Bible alone is "Sola Scriptura." It's what it means, and looky, I don't have to call you names to get my point acrossed.



Apples and oranges. You're grabbing for straws, really reaching to be relevant and right, but you've failed. And then, in callow fashion, offer some more name calling and derogation.

Grow up.

Meggido has changed usernames, not personalities it seems.

 

[fredoheaven]

Modern Cambridge and Oxford editions of the KJV do not say of Jesus, “he was afterward hungred; they say, “he was afterward an hungred.”

Well, I am not saying the Modern Cambridge and Oxford editions of the KJV.I am basically using the Cambridge Edition Published by the Trinatarian Bible Society (TBS) which says “he was afterward an hungred.” In 1769, at the height of spelling regularization, Dr. Blaney has retained the original 1611 KJV English of this mention text. It seems you are trying to make me believe that Modern KJV’s you are referring to which actually the one being referred by me but that was not even my point. Herewith is my observation to different publishers which changes the spelling, though spelling per se has no impact theologically. But for the sake of discussion, I am well please to present different American Publisher that changes the 1611 KJV British English in addition to what you have posted. Interestingly most American Publisher Americanized, the Brit English which you failed to discuss. I have more than one (1) KJV in my bookshelf but the one I used is the TBS Cambridge in my own Bible Study. Here are some of the few KJV Bible I do have:

1) Cornerstone Bible Publisher follows the Standard Text(Cambrige/Oxford) “an hungred”
2) Criswell Study Bible follows the non Standard Text “an hungered”
3) KJV Study Bible by Thomas Nelson used the non Standard “an hungered”
4) KJV published by the UBS has “ahungered”
5) Giant Print by Zondervan has “an hungered”
6) KJV Gift and Award by Zondervan has changes to “a hungered”
7) The New Scofield Reference Text has “hungry”

So from the abovementioned Study Bible and Publisher has gone to variety of the American English Text not the British English Text whereupon the original 1611 KJV and the 1769 by Blaney and the Cambridge are the same. You have to note the accusing the KJV is at fault or in error due to the simple misunderstanding on the orthography or of the Brit English word is… I have already pointed out that the Brit English word “hungred” is the same as “hungry”. I have yet to check the Unabridged OED in our local Library but the fact that Mr. Webster has already defined it, so is enough to silence critics of the KJV with such a “strain at a gnat”.

Here was the digitized Cambridge Winsor and the 1769 Oxford publication.

Matthew 4:2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-4/


Mathew 4:2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.

Gospel According To Matthew

 

[fredoheaven]

It is the English construction “an hungred” that is especially obscure, and the meaning of the English particle “an” in this context is what is debated.

The English construction of the KJV English was written in England, the progenitor of English not in America or in Australia or in Canada. You should have lectured me with this because, I am a Filipino. But let me try to fix this for you with common learner error as shown in my dictionary -Cambridge Learner’s Dictionary 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] Ed. P. 1 It says:

“Remember to use an in front of words which begins with a vowel sound. These are words which start with the letters a, e, i, o, u, or a sound like those letters.”

So the KJV English rendering is precise. There is no debate here because you are accusing the Brit English is in error when the fact is the KJV 1611 was written in England.

 

[fredoheaven]

Furthermore, neither Merriam-Webster nor Oxford University recognizes the lexeme “hungred” as a word. The KJV uses it to translate a Greek verb as is correctly shown in the Text Analysis, but in the English sentence, “hungred” necessarily functions as an adjective modifying the pronoun “he.”

Woo, The Greek text analysis was posted for a purpose. It was shown that the analysis if correct then the KJV reading of the text is quite closer that the NASB as you are trying to presumed where the Greek verb tenses has nothing to do with the English. The Greek verb tenses is now being debated by most scholars even today and there are no fix or standard rules. Getting me into a Greek game do not bothers me. Look, the NASB added “became” where no Greek text has been found. Let me diagram the Text Analysis:

[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]5305 [e]
[/TD]
[TD]hysteron
[/TD]
[TD]ὕστερον
[/TD]
[TD]afterward
[/TD]
[TD]Adv
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3983 [e]
[/TD]
[TD]epeinasen
[/TD]
[TD]ἐπείνασεν.
[/TD]
[TD]he was hungry.
[/TD]
[TD]V-AIA-3S
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

The English text Analysis says “afterward he was hungry”

[TABLE="align: left"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: left"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]



The KJV English Text says: “ he was afterward an hungred” = the same with the Greek text analysis
The NASB English Text says: “he then became hungry” = with added words not found in Greek. The added words is unnecessary as per Text analysis.

 

[fredoheaven]

KJV: “he was afterward an hungred.” = unintelligible babble
NASB: “He then became hungry” = a statement that is so easy to understand that a three-year-old child could understand it; and a very accurate translation of the original

Of course KJV says I need to study. You are offering me a statement that there’s a no need to study. Better is that we need studying. The KJV says God has stamped approval to those who study 2 Timothy 2:15 “Study to shew thyself approved unto God”, what about yours?