KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES

  • 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.
And one more.

[h=1]1 Peter 1:23 King James Version (KJV)[/h]23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
 
KJV1611 said:
I'll have to stick with things I understand. Do you believe the verse below word for word exactly as written or do you change it to mean something else?

Matthew 5:30 King James Version (KJV)

30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Click to expand...
What a silly question - how does this in any way pertain to the KJV being inspired of God and all the other translations being wrong?

The NIV says this:
[FONT=&quot]30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. Matt 5:30 NIV
The same grisly advice!
So, the KJV and the NIV can be interpreted in exactly the same way.
In what way is the KJV superior, inspired of God etc, and the NIV not, according to this verse?

[/FONT]
 
graceNpeace said:
What a silly question - how does this in any way pertain to the KJV being inspired of God and all the other translations being wrong?

The NIV says this:
30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. Matt 5:30 NIV
The same grisly advice!
So, the KJV and the NIV can be interpreted in exactly the same way.
In what way is the KJV superior, inspired of God etc, and the NIV not, according to this verse?
Click to expand...
I'm talking about believing every word without changing it is the key to seeing the KJV is inspired. The verse is not up for interpretation, it says exactly what it means, no interpretation needed.
 
KJV1611 said:
I'm talking about believing every word without changing it is the key to seeing the KJV is inspired. The verse is not up for interpretation, it says exactly what it means, no interpretation needed.
Click to expand...
The NIV (and all the other translations say exactly the same).
Your point is about how you interpret Scripture - it does not prove a KJVO position in any way, shape or form.
This is what is known as a non sequitur....
 
KJV1611 said:
Sure it proves something, it proves you don't believe the bible. You're basing your belief on what you think or what you've been taught rather than believing the text.
Click to expand...
Really!!!!!!
Highly presumptuous statement - again with no proof.
When did I ever say that I do not believe the Bible?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tourist
graceNpeace said:
The NIV (and all the other translations say exactly the same).
Your point is about how you interpret Scripture - it does not prove a KJVO position in any way, shape or form.
This is what is known as a non sequitur....
Click to expand...
Ah so you don't understand that Christ is the hand of salvation and when that right hand was cut off it saved the Body from hell.

Is that what the NIV says, does the the NIV use the same phrases such as right hand from cover to cover so that we can understand dark sentences?

I'm sure it doesn't take inspiration to do that, I mean surely Wescott and Horton knew these things lol.
 
graceNpeace said:
The answer is yes, but that does not in any way prove anything about the KJV now does it?
Click to expand...
That's great! I"m glad you believe it. :) Keep believing the words and promise you God will show you great and mighty things. Things the rest of the world can't see!
 
KJV1611 said:
Ah so you don't understand that Christ is the hand of salvation and when that right hand was cut off it saved the Body from hell.

Is that what the NIV says, does the the NIV use the same phrases such as right hand from cover to cover so that we can understand dark sentences?

I'm sure it doesn't take inspiration to do that, I mean surely Wescott and Horton knew these things lol.
Click to expand...
The only basis you have for your position is your unshakeable belief that the KJV is "right" and therefore by comparison anything that you think differs from the KJV must be wrong... that is all you are saying...

What you are unable to prove is the first assertion: that the KJV is actually correct, inspired etc!
 
graceNpeace said:
The only basis you have for your position is your unshakeable belief that the KJV is "right" and therefore by comparison anything that you think differs from the KJV must be wrong... that is all you are saying...

What you are unable to prove is the first assertion: that the KJV is actually correct, inspired etc!
Click to expand...

My belief is based on experieince... you don't have that experieince and you wont be able to see proof. I could show you stuff all day long and you will dismiss it one after another. I'm a seed planter, if the seed takes, if it don't it don't.
 
KJV1611 said:
My belief is based on experieince... you don't have that experieince and you wont be able to see proof. I could show you stuff all day long and you will dismiss it one after another. I'm a seed planter, if the seed takes, if it don't it don't.
Click to expand...
I am sorry, this is not objective proof, or even evidence...
It may be an appeal to "special knowledge" apparently not available to mere plebs - but that is all!
 
graceNpeace said:
I am sorry, this is not objective proof, or even evidence...
It may be an appeal to "special knowledge" apparently not available to mere plebs - but that is all!
Click to expand...

There you go again "special knowledge".... there is nothing special about the knowledge gained by believing every word in the bible. What really gets my goat is that you in your ignorance lead other people astray and keep them from believing every word is right
 
KJV1611 said:
There you go again "special knowledge".... there is nothing special about the knowledge gained by believing every word in the bible. What really gets my goat is that you in your ignorance lead other people astray and keep them from believing every word is right
Click to expand...
Tell me how this justifies your KJVO stance?
You are making hopelessly unjustifiable personal accusations about me in a very obvious attempt to shield the fact that your KJVO stance has no basis in fact.

Trying to challenge my interpretation of the Bible (incorrectly by the way) does NOT in any way prove a KJVO stance!!!
 
graceNpeace said:
Tell me how this justifies your KJVO stance?
You are making hopelessly unjustifiable personal accusations about me in a very obvious attempt to shield the fact that your KJVO stance has no basis in fact.

Trying to challenge my interpretation of the Bible (incorrectly by the way) does NOT in any way prove a KJVO stance!!!
Click to expand...

Personal experience trumps everything nowadays. :-/
 
graceNpeace said:
Tell me how this justifies your KJVO stance?
You are making hopelessly unjustifiable personal accusations about me in a very obvious attempt to shield the fact that your KJVO stance has no basis in fact.

Trying to challenge my interpretation of the Bible (incorrectly by the way) does NOT in any way prove a KJVO stance!!!
Click to expand...

Yeah this is a waste of time. I quit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back