The King James Bible

[preacher4truth]

Only an imbecile would promote such nonsense...

The above is uncalled for...and unfortunately representative of the typical vitriol of N6 towards others who don't share his King Jimmyism. Very sad behavior. Thank GOD for better more accurate modern versions!!!!

 

[Nehemiah6]

You didn't exalt King Jimmyism or the King Jimmy crowd enough in the above, so it will be met with disagreement. Or something.

Your mockery of King James is a good indication of how low Christians can go with their insults and forget how offensive they are to God. You are forgetting the Scripture which says to give honor where honor is due.

Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. (Rom 13:7).

God used King James for His own glory, but you cannot see that. Obviously, you have no clue about his understanding of Scripture or what he tried to accomplish at that time. And it is officially "The Authorized Version" or simply "The Holy Bible".

 

[mj007]

 

[Chester]

But there can be only ONE Word of God.

And that one Word of God is the words that God gave to Moses, Paul, and Peter, and not what King James and his crew wrote.

 

[Chester]

God used King James for His own glory, but you cannot see that. Obviously, you have no clue about his understanding of Scripture or what he tried to accomplish at that time. And it is officially "The Authorized Version" or simply "The Holy Bible".

By that basis then I wonder if the "New World Translation" of the JW's will be the one that is used on the New Earth!

 

[Dino246]

Those who are anti-KJV ...

Most of those who are KJV-only refuse to acknowledge the FACT that people who aren't "KJV-only" are NOT "anti-KJV". This is willful misrepresentation.

... simply refuse to acknowledge THE FACT -- not an arrogant claim -- that the Authorized Version was the ONLY BIBLE for all English-speaking and English-reading Christians throughout the world -- North America and the British Empire -- for at least 300 years. All the major Bible study tools, systematic theologies, and recognized commentaries are based upon the KJB.

The KJV was "authorized for use in churches" by King James, the titular head of the Anglican Church in England, so the "authorization" is extremely limited in scope. It did lead to preferential and abundant printing, which made the KJV by far the most common English Bible by default. Certainly there are many references keyed to it, but that fact doesn't mean it is better or more accurate. With computer software, all of those tools can be linked to recent versions as well, and better tools are available.

And all of this is either ignored or dismissed as irrelevant. It is extremely relevant and important to understand today -- in 2018 -- that God used this translation for His glory and for the salvation of souls as no other translation has been used.

The success of a tool in one era in no way restricts or defines what will be successful in a later era. God used the Latin Vulgate for 1300 years and some of the arguments that you use are the same as those leveled against Erasmus.

I already showed you what the Trinitarian Bible Society is doing so that the common people have the genuine Word of God in their hands. No doubt you did not even bother to go to their website and see what they have to say. Thus your false allegation here.

You rudely reject my recommendation to check out a resource for yourself. Instead you find the most vitriolic and biased reviews of it and treat them as reliable fact. Why then should anyone check out a source that you recommend? You're being completely hypocritical!

 

[Dino246]

But there can be only ONE Word of God.

Perhaps you've watched Highlander too many times. Where's your scriptural support for this assertion? I have seen this idea promoted by KJV-onlyists several times, but I have yet to find it in the Bible. It looks to me like an unsupported opinion, asserted boldly to imply that only the KJV is the word of God.

It is historically and logically untenable. If only the KJV is the word of God, then the Geneva Bible, Bishop's Bible, Tyndale, Coverdale, etc. which preceded it are not the word of God, and should not have been used or referenced in the development of the KJV (which they were). King James should not have given direction that the KJV translators follow another version (which he did) except where they could demonstrate a better translation. Further, it requires that only one version of the KJV (there are several) is the word of God. Further, the KJV translators used five printed Greek versions from Erasmus, plus those of Robert Estienne (Stephanus) and Beza. Which of those was the word of God? They couldn't all be, if there can be only one!

 

[RLMM]

If I may...
There is one constant vividly apparent - everyone is passionate for the version of the Bible they hold most dear.
I read, read, and re-read the KJV from the beginning- studied the scriptures - applied what I received from my available mentors and scholars, added carefully the treasured notes/markings/highlights in every available space and also added those that were penned by my father/pastor from the same (Thompson Chain Reference) KJV bible he used from 1958 to 2008. What I have now is a treasure to me. A record of scripture with my personal efforts of study and prayer, revelations and doctrine and interpretations. Be that as it may, and in spite of those with whom we fellowshipped who embraced the KJV as well, didn't prevent diversity/debate of the interpretation of scripture and doctrines.
I can remember so many times my father stressing that the Bible did not come directly from the hand of God - that it contained errors - particularly in reference due to the translators. But, the KJV was considered to be the most accurate for having been written with reaching back to the original manuscripts.
Today, with the multiple Revised Versions, it has reinstituted that already established conflict of interpretation, but now with uncommon points of reference. Something that can still, (albeit with some turbulence) worked around.
I hold and wave my flag for the KJV. But it waves no higher than any other flag which represents any other version of the holy writ which undoubtedly expresses these same passions. I'm satisfied to know we are all committed and moved in our hearts and souls to love and serve the God of Gods, Lord of Lords, Jesus Christ each of us knows within the version we hold dear.

Faith is the common denominator in ALL religions. Certainly, the unity of faith in the Christian people can/will be achieved so the fullness of truth will be restored to the (Universal) Church. I have faith that it's going to happen.

The Very Best In Christ To All

 

[Nehemiah6]

It is historically and logically untenable. If only the KJV is the word of God, then the Geneva Bible, Bishop's Bible, Tyndale, Coverdale, etc. which preceded it are not the word of God, and should not have been used or referenced in the development of the KJV (which they were).

We are not even discussing these other Bibles which are all connected to the KJV.

The issue is between modern versions starting from 1881 and coming right down to our time. No matter what their differences are, they are ALL based on the same corrupt critical texts, relying on the same handful of corrupt manuscripts.

We know that Origen in Palestine, Lucian at Antioch, Hesychius in Egypt, “revised” the text of the N. T. Unfortunately, they did their work in an age when such fatal misapprehension prevailed on the subject, that each in turn will have inevitably imported a fresh assortment of monstra into the sacred writings.

Add, the baneful influence of such spirits as Theophilus (sixth Bishop of Antioch, A.D. 168), Tatian, Ammonius, &c., of whom we know there were very many in the primitive age,—some of whose productions, we further know, were freely multiplied in every quarter of ancient Christendom:—add, the fabricated Gospels which anciently abounded; notably the Gospel of the Hebrews, about which Jerome is so communicative, and which (he says) he had translated into Greek and Latin:—lastly, freely grant that here and there, with well-meant assiduity, the orthodox themselves may have sought to prop up truths which the early heretics (Basilides, A.D. 134, Valentinus, A.D. 140, with his disciple Heracleon, Marcion, A.D. 150, and the rest,) most perseveringly assailed;—and we have sufficiently explained how it comes to pass that not a few of the codices of primitive Christendom must have exhibited Texts which were even scandalously corrupt.

“It is no less true to fact than paradoxical in sound,” writes the most learned of the Revisionist body, “that the worst corruptions, to which the New Testament has ever been subjected, originated within a hundred years after it was composed: that Irenæus [A.D. 150] and the African Fathers, and the whole Western, with a portion of the Syrian Church, used far inferior manuscripts to those employed by Stunica, or Erasmus, or Stephens thirteen centuries later, when moulding the Textus Receptus.”

And what else are codices Aleph B C D but specimens—in vastly different degrees—of the class thus characterized by Prebendary Scrivener? Nay, who will venture to deny that those codices are indebted for their preservation solely to the circumstance, that they were long since recognized as the depositories of Readings which rendered them utterly untrustworthy? (Revision Revised ,pp 55,56)

 

[Dino246]

We are not even discussing these other Bibles which are all connected to the KJV.

The issue is between modern versions starting from 1881 and coming right down to our time. No matter what their differences are, they are ALL based on the same corrupt critical texts, relying on the same handful of corrupt manuscripts.

It is intellectually dishonest (and cowardly) to post a bold statement, and then claim that a refutation of that statement is off-topic.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Those who are anti-KJV simply refuse to acknowledge THE FACT -- not an arrogant claim -- that the Authorized Version was the ONLY BIBLE for all English-speaking and English-reading Christians throughout the world -- North America and the British Empire -- for at least 300 years. All the major Bible study tools, systematic theologies, and recognized commentaries are based upon the KJB. And all of this is either ignored or dismissed as irrelevant. It is extremely relevant and important to understand today -- in 2018 -- that God used this translation for His glory and for the salvation of souls as no other translation has been used.

The "traditions of men" have absolutely nothing to do with recognizing and upholding the true Word of God in English. We are dealing in FACTS. The traditional Hebrew and Greek texts have nothing to do with the "traditions of men" but with the Divine preservation of Scripture. Until the 19th century all Christians acknowledged that the traditional Masoretic Hebrew and traditional Byzantine Greek texts of the Scripture represented the original autographs, since THE MAJORITY of extant manuscripts supported them.

How can a steadfast belief in the inspiration, inerrancy, infallibility, and Divine preservation of Scripture be a "religious dogma"? You either do not understand what a religious dogma is, or you do not understand the significance of the Divine preservation of Scripture.

This is not a matter of "forcing" anything on anyone, but of EXPOSING THE GREAT BIBLE VERSION HOAX. You already know that the theory of evolution is a hoax, and so is global warming. But most Christians are not aware that a major hoax was perpetrated on the Christian world by Westcott & Hort, and they got away with it. The hoax was to label the pure Bible texts as corrupt, and the corrupt Bible texts as pure! Who do you think was behind this attack on the written Word of God? Satan won a tremendous victory by sowing the seeds of confusion and dissension through the dozens of translation all claiming to be "the Word of God" and all at odds with each other.

I already showed you what the Trinitarian Bible Society is doing so that the common people have the genuine Word of God in their hands. No doubt you did not even bother to go to their website and see what they have to say. Thus your false allegation here.

You have two options before you: (1) search out the truth of the matter or (2) go along with the delusion which has been promoted by those opposed to the KJB and promoting the corrupted Bibles.

You are seeped in old teachings and traditions ABOUT the Bible. And you hold those in higher regard than The Word of God itself.

We are dealing in FACTS. The traditional Hebrew and Greek texts have nothing to do with the "traditions of men"

Are you claiming that only the KJV has been translated from the Hebrew and Greek texts?

 

[fredoheaven]

I didn't say anything about the plurality of the verb; I demonstrated the fact that the verbs are different. One is "created" - ex nihilo; the other is "made" - a reordering of already-created matter. Your post to which I was responding claimed that God "created" one heaven in verse 1 and "created" two other heavens later in the chapter. God only "created" in the first verse. After that, He "made". You aren't going to get away with arguing the exactitude of terminology in one place, and disregarding it in another where it's inconvenient to your position.

This was my position when am new in the Bible version issue, that created is something different form that of made, however, this is not so according to the words of God. The two are interchangeable. Why created is synonymous to made, here are the following reasons:

1. Taking that position will lead to the gap theory.
2. Taking most of the lexicon means the words are just the same
3. Taking from the most English Dictionaries, the two words are but the same
4. But the very best way to explain that the two words definition is the same is the Bible. Even critical text says they can be used interchangeably. (NKJV, NLT, NIV, RSV, CSB, NASB, RSV,YLT etc.)

KJV Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

NASB Gen 1:26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the [fn]sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

KJV Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them

NASB Gen 1:27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

God bless

 

[fredoheaven]

While I disagree with your KJVO position, I respect you as one of the few who articulately defend your position without twisting meanings or subterfuge.

A common ground, respect...

God bless

 

[Nehemiah6]

It is intellectually dishonest (and cowardly) to post a bold statement, and then claim that a refutation of that statement is off-topic.

There's no call for insults. You tried to present a conflict between the KJV and Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew's, Bishop's, Geneva, etc. when they all are in the same family as the KJV. In fact you introduced a red herring to deflect from the real issue. So that was indeed off topic.

Now that you have seen the source of corruption for the critical texts and the modern versions, its time to man up and admit that you are in favor of corrupted Bibles.

 

[Ugly]

There's no call for insults.

Bolded by yourself.

Only an imbecile would promote such nonsense.

 

[fredoheaven]

You are seeped in old teachings and traditions ABOUT the Bible. And you hold those in higher regard than The Word of God itself.

I view the truth to be never be an obsolete!...

God bless

 

[fredoheaven]

By that basis then I wonder if the "New World Translation" of the JW's will be the one that is used on the New Earth!

In actuality, the JW's New World Translation was mainly based on the Westcott and Hort text.

 

[Nehemiah6]

You are seeped in old teachings and traditions ABOUT the Bible. And you hold those in higher regard than The Word of God itself.

More nonsense.

Are you claiming that only the KJV has been translated from the Hebrew and Greek texts?

What I am stating -- as a matter of fact -- is that the modern versions are based upon CORRUPTED Hebrew and Greek texts whereas the Reformation Bibles (KJV included) are not. See my post above on the corruption of the Greek NT.

 

[Dino246]

You tried to present a conflict between the KJV and Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew's, Bishop's, Geneva, etc. when they all are in the same family as the KJV. In fact you introduced a red herring to deflect from the real issue. So that was indeed off topic.

You stated, "There can be only one Word of God." I took your statement at face value and clearly demonstrated that it was untenable. There is nothing off-topic about doing so. Either you mean "only one" or you don't mean "only one". You did not state, "there is only one family of Bibles that are God's word".

Now that you have seen the source of corruption for the critical texts and the modern versions, its time to man up and admit that you are in favor of corrupted Bibles.

That statement is a non-sequitur.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I view the truth to be never be an obsolete!...

God bless

And truth is contained in the word of God, just not one antiquated bible. The others are just as viable.