Your 37s patterns may be relevant to something, but it would seem that nobody else sees what that something is, and I for one keep hoping you will one day find and give us a clue, because you never seem to know.
Does the Bible claim to be inerrant?
- Thread starter Antony_me
- 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.
Your 37s patterns may be relevant to something, but it would seem that nobody else sees what that something is, and I for one keep hoping you will one day find and give us a clue, because you never seem to know.
Where in scripture is found the philosophy of them who are against the Authorized Version?
Where did you get the idea of error in scripture?
Or, that all translation corrupts scripture?
Where does the idea come from, that all modern bibles are acceptable to God?
I ask this because I hear scripture supporting believing the Authorized Version.
But I don’t hear scripture that presents the many strange ideas of those who are against there being one Holy Bible.
Can you opposers of one Holy Bible present something scriptural as the basis of your ideas?
Where did you get the idea of error in scripture?
Or, that all translation corrupts scripture?
Where does the idea come from, that all modern bibles are acceptable to God?
I ask this because I hear scripture supporting believing the Authorized Version.
But I don’t hear scripture that presents the many strange ideas of those who are against there being one Holy Bible.
Can you opposers of one Holy Bible present something scriptural as the basis of your ideas?
Last edited:
This is another burden-of-proof reversal. You have not quoted anyone saying what you claim is said, yet you make assertions regarding what "they" claim.
How about you support your assertion that there is Scripture "supporting believing the Authorized Version". Remember to include the specific Scripture reference to "Authorized Version" in your response.
There is only one authorized Bible and it will correct any error found in any other bible.
It will correct, reprove, and rebuke all falsehoods found in fake bibles.
What is your standard by which you judge
LOL who authorized this bible? You do know that it is the authorized version not the authorized bible? I seriously doubt that you could even read the authorized 1611 KJV.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
What bible is this and who is the one who authorized it? Everyone can make a claim that the version or translation that they prefer is the only one authorized bible.
You aren’t fooling anyone.
You have no scripture that supports your unbelief in the authorized Holy Bible.
I have asked numerous questions you haters of God’s written word haven’t responded to.
When folks present scripture you haters start obfuscating by any means necessary.
Acting like you can’t read English all of a sudden.
Instead of giving excuses why not establish the truth you claim is more righteous than the faith of them that believe what the authorized Bible says?
You have doubts whether the original scriptures were error free...why would you accept anything concerning the Bible?
You said a mouthful and this what you put forth as biblical evidence? Maybe you should concern yourself less with what I am posting about number patterns in the Bible and examine your beliefs concerning the scriptures based on what the Bible actually says.
Last edited:
7
7seasrekeyed
Guest
stop pretending you don't know which Bible is the glorious one
we all know that King Jimmy authorized it
problem is, he was not God
7
7seasrekeyed
Guest
ummm...I hope this isn't over your head...but:
how could scripture be found to support a king who lived long after the original was written?
questions...soooo many questions
are you sure that the haters are not well represented by your own posts?
whatever happend to giving an answer that displays the fruit of having the Holy Spirit inside of you?
ps...referring to Jesus overturning tables or Paul writing a hasty note of condemnation to the Judaizers, is not an excuse nor is zeal an excuse
do you have an excuse?
God.
The scripture says that God ordained king James the first.
Then you did know that God authorized it by king James the first.
As for version, that proves the authorized Holy Bible, consisting of both Old and New Testaments, is to be found in other languages
a) who authorized the 1769 KJV you are probably reading?
b) why do you think that any authorization of worldly local island king has any significance for a global church or at least for you, being American without any king?
LOL you are chasing unicorns. No one has said that the authorized version is not the bible. God has most certainly protected His word through the millennia. What most protest is elevating one translation one version above another to the point that all others are worthless in comparison.
The original authorized version was translated from the Latin vulgate. Later translated from the Hebrew and Greek. KJV is good and easy to memorize but it is not the only reliable translation available in the English language.
You are arguing that Coke is better than Pepsi. Kind of pointless as it comes down to personal preference.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
The scripture teaches that God ordained the king.stop pretending you don't know which Bible is the glorious one
we all know that King Jimmy authorized it
problem is, he was not God
All other bibles present no evidence of being authorized by God.
A no brainer seems to me.
God ordains all kings both good and bad.
You did get the no brainer part right.
Now can someone get saved if they have a different version of the bible? Is John 3:16 as powerful in the NIV and the KJV? Does the Holy Spirit use the new versions or does the Holy Spirit use only the authorized version?
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Cyrus was ordained beforehand.7seasrekeyed said:
So it is a thing that God has done and can do.
King James the first, king of all English speaking people on earth, was ordained of God to publish the Holy Bible.
The modern bibles are unauthorized by God.
Rates right up there with the Roman Catholic church claim that Peter was the first pope.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Because God ordains kings see Romans 13.
Whereas you have no authority to translate or sit in judgment of what God ordained.
God ordains all governments, not just kings.
But not to authorize Bibles. To protect good people and to punish evil people.
Which king authorized 1769 KJV?
Tell that to apostles that because they were not worldly kings, they had no authority to judge what God ordained.