KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- 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.
You asked whether whether your theology was wrong or your understanding of Physics.
I know your theology is a problem (the physics issue is irrelevant here).
As for the explanation of why - you have already received that in great detail.
Why do I need to rehash everything.
As for you now saying that you believe God is three persons that is decidedly not what you said before.
You most expressly said this: "There is one God period. God is capable of being the Father in heaven at the same time he is the son earth. God is not bound by space time, he is in heaven and in earth at the same time - One God the Father in heaven, One God the son on Earth at the same time. The same being in two places at the same time... this is quantum physics."
That is the unitarian position.
(Apart from the irrelevant reference to quantum physics, that is.)
I remind you that the above quote was your explanation.
I know your theology is a problem (the physics issue is irrelevant here).
As for the explanation of why - you have already received that in great detail.
Why do I need to rehash everything.
As for you now saying that you believe God is three persons that is decidedly not what you said before.
You most expressly said this: "There is one God period. God is capable of being the Father in heaven at the same time he is the son earth. God is not bound by space time, he is in heaven and in earth at the same time - One God the Father in heaven, One God the son on Earth at the same time. The same being in two places at the same time... this is quantum physics."
That is the unitarian position.
(Apart from the irrelevant reference to quantum physics, that is.)
I remind you that the above quote was your explanation.
This expression is valid for eternity because God is out side of time, there is no past, present and future for God. I'm not sure exactly what you're asking, but there is no person number 1, number 2 etc. They are all the same person, ONE GOD, but there are distinctions between each. God is in heaven as the Father but the same ONE GOD was on earth at the same time the Father was in heaven.
The Father in heaven has a specific role, the Son has specifc role so there are distinctions betwen them but they are the same God. This is why I say God exists in a quantum state, he is "the light on and off at the same time". He is Father in heaven at the same time he is Son on earth.
The Father in heaven has a specific role, the Son has specifc role so there are distinctions betwen them but they are the same God. This is why I say God exists in a quantum state, he is "the light on and off at the same time". He is Father in heaven at the same time he is Son on earth.
I like the quote, I meant it exactly as I said and neither of the 2 statements contradict the other... your understanding of the 2 statements may be contradictory but that is irrelevant.
I read up on unitarianism and they DO NOT believe what I said above, not anywhere even remotely close to what I said.
I read up on unitarianism and they DO NOT believe what I said above, not anywhere even remotely close to what I said.
You know, I never thought I'd be "defending" KJV1611, but I think you guys are being nit-picky and harsh for no reason at all... from what I've read, he believes exactly the way scripture states it... at least as far as we humans can comprehend. He's NOT saying anything heretical at all. I suspect you are all saying the same thing, just using different terms.
This silliness needs to stop. Constant nit-picking over jots and tittles.
This silliness needs to stop. Constant nit-picking over jots and tittles.
Originally Posted by KJV1611
This expression is valid for eternity because God is out side of time, there is no past, present and future for God. I'm not sure exactly what you're asking, but there is no person number 1, number 2 etc. They are all the same person, ONE GOD, but there are distinctions between each. God is in heaven as the Father but the same ONE GOD was on earth at the same time the Father was in heaven.
The Father in heaven has a specific role, the Son has specifc role so there are distinctions betwen them but they are the same God. This is why I say God exists in a quantum state, he is "the light on and off at the same time". He is Father in heaven at the same time he is Son on earth.
Me, too! I don't see anything wrong with it! Am I dense? LOL!
This expression is valid for eternity because God is out side of time, there is no past, present and future for God. I'm not sure exactly what you're asking, but there is no person number 1, number 2 etc. They are all the same person, ONE GOD, but there are distinctions between each. God is in heaven as the Father but the same ONE GOD was on earth at the same time the Father was in heaven.
The Father in heaven has a specific role, the Son has specifc role so there are distinctions betwen them but they are the same God. This is why I say God exists in a quantum state, he is "the light on and off at the same time". He is Father in heaven at the same time he is Son on earth.
You know, I never thought I'd be "defending" KJV1611, but I think you guys are being nit-picky and harsh for no reason at all... from what I've read, he believes exactly the way scripture states it... at least as far as we humans can comprehend. He's NOT saying anything heretical at all. I suspect you are all saying the same thing, just using different terms.
This silliness needs to stop. Constant nit-picking over jots and tittles.
This silliness needs to stop. Constant nit-picking over jots and tittles.
“mongenes”: Mono: only, Genes: generation, thus...only begotten.
I believe what is written in the Authorized Version of the Holy Bible.
And that way I avoid all the devilish confusion corrupt bibles and philosophers present.
The confusion many of you posters have seems to arise from at least three errors.
1. Erring in not knowing the holy scriptures.
If you read modern versions you are not reading the scriptures of a God.
2. Erring in not believing what is written.
That is, even when you do read the authorized scriptures you error in not believing what is written.
3. Erring in not knowing the power of God.
For example, some casually say the Holy Spirit this, and Holy Spirit that, not understanding that “Holy Spirit” is found one time in scripture.
And that it occurs only once for a precise reason.
Which understanding never occurs to casual readers such as the haters of the Authorized Version are required to be.
Or, as another example, read the discussion about only begotten Son in this thread. In it a poster claimed monogenes meant unique.
When it’s obvious that, the only begotten Son of God, is unique because of being the only begotten.
But, obviously begotten refers to generation.
As for example... Abraham offered up his only begotten son...Isaac.
Which teaches precisely what God means by Jesus Christ of Nazareth being his only begotten Son.
But someone philosophied that there wasn’t any dna of God involved in Jesus’ birth. Which of course is absurd.
You all know that the woman doesn’t have the male chromosome (Y), right?
So, how was a male body produced in the case of Mary, the virgin?
When you read that the a Holy Ghost “overshadowed” Mary, at the conception, what do you think that means?
It means that you and I have no understanding of that act of conception because it is thing hidden by God.
When you read, Jesus Christ came in the flesh, you should understand that he was already Jesus Christ when he came. He didn’t become Jesus Christ at some later time, such as at his baptism by John the Baptist.
And, it is important to read carefully since, if you reason incorrectly about Jesus Christ having come in the flesh then you end up agreeing with the spirit of antichrist.
Some always say they know about error in the Authorized but they never present a evidence of error.
The Authorized is accurate. And this thread proves what a waste of time it is to search for error in the Authorized Version. But then to turn to modern corrupt versions and swallow the blatant lies in them is shameful.
I believe what is written in the Authorized Version of the Holy Bible.
And that way I avoid all the devilish confusion corrupt bibles and philosophers present.
The confusion many of you posters have seems to arise from at least three errors.
1. Erring in not knowing the holy scriptures.
If you read modern versions you are not reading the scriptures of a God.
2. Erring in not believing what is written.
That is, even when you do read the authorized scriptures you error in not believing what is written.
3. Erring in not knowing the power of God.
For example, some casually say the Holy Spirit this, and Holy Spirit that, not understanding that “Holy Spirit” is found one time in scripture.
And that it occurs only once for a precise reason.
Which understanding never occurs to casual readers such as the haters of the Authorized Version are required to be.
Or, as another example, read the discussion about only begotten Son in this thread. In it a poster claimed monogenes meant unique.
When it’s obvious that, the only begotten Son of God, is unique because of being the only begotten.
But, obviously begotten refers to generation.
As for example... Abraham offered up his only begotten son...Isaac.
Which teaches precisely what God means by Jesus Christ of Nazareth being his only begotten Son.
But someone philosophied that there wasn’t any dna of God involved in Jesus’ birth. Which of course is absurd.
You all know that the woman doesn’t have the male chromosome (Y), right?
So, how was a male body produced in the case of Mary, the virgin?
When you read that the a Holy Ghost “overshadowed” Mary, at the conception, what do you think that means?
It means that you and I have no understanding of that act of conception because it is thing hidden by God.
When you read, Jesus Christ came in the flesh, you should understand that he was already Jesus Christ when he came. He didn’t become Jesus Christ at some later time, such as at his baptism by John the Baptist.
And, it is important to read carefully since, if you reason incorrectly about Jesus Christ having come in the flesh then you end up agreeing with the spirit of antichrist.
Some always say they know about error in the Authorized but they never present a evidence of error.
The Authorized is accurate. And this thread proves what a waste of time it is to search for error in the Authorized Version. But then to turn to modern corrupt versions and swallow the blatant lies in them is shameful.
No it's not. All the major excepted versions have been shown to have inaccuracies, since perfect translation from one language to another is impossible. We all pretty much knew that going into this debate. Whether or not those inaccuracies constitute errors is opinion, not fact. The Onlies have failed to prove that the KJV is the only version in the only language blessed by God. Jesus is still the one and only Savior and way to the Father, according to all the versions.
I suddenly have a craving for popcorn.
I suddenly have a craving for popcorn.
Last edited: