The Error of KJV-Onlyism

  • 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.

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
For sanctification to occur, we need God's word.

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
I 100% agree. The real Word of God (the KJB) will sanctify unlike any other. The Modern Bibles are like a jigsaw puzzle with some pieces that are from the real Word of God and other pieces are false or missing altogether. A person can be saved by hearing the gospel in a Modern Bible, but only the Pure Word will truly sanctify them fully and or correctly. One KJB teacher (Dr. Douglas Stauffer) said that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are like the two Alexandrian ships that Paul traveled on. One headed to Rome, and the other one headed out from Rome according to Acts. How fitting because they teach Roman Catholic doctrines (See page 21-22 of this PDF here).

#1. Acts 27:1 says, “And when it was determined that we should sail into Italy, they delivered Paul and certain other prisoners unto one named Julius, a centurion of Augustus' band.” The Romans had to change ships twice to get Paul to Rome. (Adramyttium Acts 27:2, a ship of Alexandria 27:6, 28:11).

(a) First ship: Acts 27:2 And entering into a ship of Adramyttium, we launched, meaning to sail by the coasts of Asia; one Aristarchus, a Macedonian of Thessalonica, being with us.​
(b) Second ship: Acts 27:6 And there the centurion found a ship of Alexandria sailing into Italy; and he put us therein.​
(c) Third ship: Acts 28:11 And after three months we departed in a ship of Alexandria, which had wintered in the isle, whose sign was Castor and Pollux. Take note that two of these ships are referred to as ships of Alexandria. The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are both Alexandrian manuscripts. These manuscripts disagree with each other in thousands of places, so the translators must continue “switching ships.”​
#2. In the Bible, there are several references that metaphorically compare Scripture or the words of God to a ship. Hebrews 6:19 (KJB): "Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;" While this verse doesn't explicitly mention a ship, it uses the metaphor of an anchor, which is often associated with ships. The idea is that hope serves as an anchor for the soul, providing stability and security in the midst of life's challenges. James 3:4 (KJB): "Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth." This verse compares the tongue to a small rudder on a ship (small helm). It highlights the power of words to guide and direct, emphasizing the importance of using speech wisely and responsibly. 1 Timothy 1:18-19 (KJB): "This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare; Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:" Here, the metaphor of a shipwreck is used to illustrate the consequences of abandoning faith and a good conscience. The Bible says, Faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Jesus (the Living Word) is compared to the Ark in Noah’s flood, and if that is the case, then it makes sense that the words of God are like a ship, too (See here for a parallel of the Living Word with the Communicated Word here).


Article source for Dr. Stauffer talking about the Two Alexandrian ships:
https://web.archive.org/web/2008101...arnthebible.org/bible_from_egypt_to_rome2.htm
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,774
113
Translations can be the inspired words of God.
That would be taking things too far. The inspired Scriptures were written in Hebrew and Greek (with some Aramaic in Daniel). So no translation could be "inspired" after that. There is only one set of original manuscripts, and that disappeared a long time ago, Calling the King James Bible "inspired" simply makes people refuse to take Christians seriously when they say that the KJB is the most faithful and trustworthy translation in English. Here is what the translators said about themselves but made no claim to being inspired:

"...but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark. To that purpose there were many chosen, that were greater in other men's eyes than in their own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise... And in what sort did these assemble? In the trust of their own knowledge, or of their sharpness of wit, or deepness of judgment, as it were in an arm of flesh? At no hand. They trusted in him that hath the key of David, opening and no man shutting; they prayed to the Lord the Father of our Lord, to the effect that S. Augustine did; O let thy Scriptures be my pure delight, let me not be deceived in them, neither let me deceive by them. In this confidence, and with this devotion did they assemble together; not too many, lest one should trouble another; and yet many, lest many things haply might escape them.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
None of those are "Translations." Words have meaning.
I will admit that the LOL Cat Bible, and the Word on the Street Translation are more of a reimagining of what the Bible actually says. They did not actually look to any texts and translate actual words from a previous existing original manuscripts. They are loosely following some of the narratives of Scripture and what it says in English, and radically altering it to fit their agenda to most likely make money and insult God in the process. They are super loose translations of what the Bible says in English. So while they may bare some semblance of what we know Scripture says, it is more of an insulting paraphrase. The others on the list are considered translations by the world of Textual Criticism or Modern Scholarship.
 

NightTwister

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2023
2,098
790
113
65
Colorado, USA
I will admit that the LOL Cat Bible, and the Word on the Street Translation are more of a reimagining of what the Bible actually says. They did not actually look to any texts and translate actual words from a previous existing original manuscripts. They are loosely following some of the narratives of Scripture and what it says in English, and radically altering it to fit their agenda to most likely make money and insult God in the process. They are super loose translations of what the Bible says in English. So while they may bare some semblance of what we know Scripture says, it is more of an insulting paraphrase. The others on the list are considered translations by the world of Textual Criticism or Modern Scholarship.
The "author" of the JW bible admitted that he had no knowledge of the original languages. His work, and the others on this list, are paraphrases of other already translated works.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
That would be taking things too far. The inspired Scriptures were written in Hebrew and Greek (with some Aramaic in Daniel). So no translation could be "inspired" after that. There is only one set of original manuscripts, and that disappeared a long time ago, Calling the King James Bible "inspired" simply makes people refuse to take Christians seriously when they say that the KJB is the most faithful and trustworthy translation in English. Here is what the translators said about themselves but made no claim to being inspired:
God’s Word teaches that copies of His Word are inspired Scripture. If you were to compare the existence of the Isaiah scroll in the New Testament with Luke 4:17, along with the existence of what appears to be another Isaiah scroll in Acts 8:28, Acts 8:32-33, at least one of these scrolls would have to be a copy and not the original. Each of these manuscripts of Isaiah are called Scripture. Timothy had known the Scriptures since he was a child (2 Timothy 3:15). Again, these Scriptures he had would have been copies. 2 Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God. ALL Scripture is inspired, and not just some. Meaning, copies that are called Scripture are given by inspiration of God and not just the originals (See video here to learn more) (Note: Keep in mind that while the author of this video does offer some insightful truths in Scripture, I do not agree with his wrong and hateful attitude at times).

You said:
"...but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark. To that purpose there were many chosen, that were greater in other men's eyes than in their own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise... And in what sort did these assemble? In the trust of their own knowledge, or of their sharpness of wit, or deepness of judgment, as it were in an arm of flesh? At no hand. They trusted in him that hath the key of David, opening and no man shutting; they prayed to the Lord the Father of our Lord, to the effect that S. Augustine did; O let thy Scriptures be my pure delight, let me not be deceived in them, neither let me deceive by them. In this confidence, and with this devotion did they assemble together; not too many, lest one should trouble another; and yet many, lest many things haply might escape them.
The KJB translators also put, "Or, O day star“ in their marginal notes for "Lucifer” in Isaiah 14:12 (Source). It’s not a contradiction or a problem to say that the KJB is perfect and without error. What the translators thought does not matter. The end result is what matters. God can use men despite themselves as we can see with Saul and his men prophesying (1 Samuel 19:24) (1 Samuel 19:20). Also, John the Baptist who was filled with the Holy Spirit said he was not Elijah (John 1:21) And yet Jesus said John was Elijah (Matthew 11:14) (Note: Meaning, John the Baptist came in the spirit of Elijah). The point here is that John the Baptist thought one thing that was incorrect, and yet Jesus had a more fuller knowledge on the matter. It is the same with the King James Bible and its translators. We know the KJB is the perfect Word of God for many reasons. We can see the hand of God was upon this translation being protected from a secret Catholic plot to destroy King James and his translation (i.e., the gunpowder plot). In addition, no other assembly of translators with such impressive credentials had ever been assembled like with the KJB translators in all of history. The fruit of the King James Bible also causing great revivals and leading to become America’s national book (since the 1700s till the early 1960s) also says a lot. The KJB was the Bible in US public schools at one point in time. A lot more could be said about the influence of the KJB and the impact it had on history in a positive way. Even many idioms or phrases in the Bible are popularized by the KJB. There are about 200 or so of them. Biblical numerics also confirm the divine nature of the text, as well.

People who see errors in the Bible only see them because that is what they desire to see. All supposed errors can be explained if one compares Scripture with Scripture. Our faith is a direct result of Scripture (Romans 10:17). We received the words of God, not as the words of men but as the very words of God (1 Thessalonians 2:13).
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
The "author" of the JW bible admitted that he had no knowledge of the original languages. His work, and the others on this list, are paraphrases of other already translated works.
Yes, I know. They still believed they were translating from the original languages nonetheless. Many today do the same. Most act like they know these languages by pointing to some dictionary.
 

NightTwister

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2023
2,098
790
113
65
Colorado, USA
Yes, I know. They still believed they were translating from the original languages nonetheless. Many today do the same. Most act like they know these languages by pointing to some dictionary.
No they didn't. He clearly lied about it. How is that translating? Words have meaning.
 

Jimbone

Senior Member
Aug 22, 2014
2,977
972
113
44
2 Corinthians 2:9-11

9 "For to this end also did I write, that I might know the​
proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.​
10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing,​
to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;​
11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us:
for we are not ignorant of his devices.”​

Matthew 13:19
"When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not,​
then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart.“​

While the Parable of the Sower is primarily referring to somebody that receives the gospel message in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 in that we believe that Christ died for our sins, He was buried, and risen the third day for our salvation, the Parable can also apply to our not receiving other parts of the Bible (i.e., the Word of God). Meaning, if we do not receive the Bible’s teaching on the doctrines of Purity and Preservation, then those words from the Bible on these topics will be snatched out of our heart by the devil.



But you cannot be guided into all truth by the movement started by two heretics named Westcott and Hort. All Modern Bibles ultimately come from them and their work involving the New Testament (and their supposedly better manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus). These men denied the blood atonement, substitutionary atonement, and they were into Catholicism. Hort called the evangelical as perverted. The Nestle and Aland (NT Greek Critical Text) is barely any different from the Westcott and Hort text of 1881 (According to a Modern Textual Critic, Mr. Epp). The Nestle and Aland 27th edition says it was supervised by the Vatican and if you were to Google “Keith Piper NIV” and go to page 21-22 of that PDF, you would see 14 changes that favor the Catholic Church. In fact, the Catholics wanted to take out King James and his translation with a super bomb. It is known as the gunpowder plot. Westcott and Hort denied the deity of Jesus Christ in their own commentaries. Is it not odd that your Modern Bibles that come from them also waters down the deity of Jesus in a big way? Your probably have no clue as to the depth of this. It’s why I am writing my 101 Reasons for the KJB being the Pure Word of God.



I believe we did have the Word perfectly before 1611. There is a good chance the Bible existed perfectly with the Waldenses with their Latin Italic Bible. Unfortunately, most of the Waldenses were wiped out at one point in history by the Catholic Church along with their Bibles being destroyed. This is why there are many Latin manuscripts that agree with the King James Bible. But Modern Scholarship conveniently ignores the Latin manuscripts and they ignore any testimonies from early church fathers that supports the KJB.



While I am sure there were atheists and agnostics before the 1800s (Which caused disagreement with what the Bible said), it was not until the 1800s where Bible believers in the KJB had fought against pre-Westcott and Hort type texts. So KJV Onlyism did not technically exist until the 1800s because people before that time already just accepted the KJB as the Word of God. Yes, you had your small factions like the Puritans who held to the Geneva Bible, but even many of them had eventually abandoned the Geneva Bible over the Anne Hutchinson incident in 1637 (with her trying to push Antinomianism in the Puritan church). One historian notes that this incident was a battle of the Bible translations and the KJB won in the end.

Denying the KJB and it’s preeminence is a denial of history and what the Bible says about itself.
It’s the most printed and influential book in human history.
It is a denial of the doctrines that are changed for the worse and not for the better in Modern Bibles (See here and here for a small list).
Still haven't heard any arguments that lift the KJV above everything else, to be honest not even an attempt at one. You hold up a translation as an idol. That's wrong plain and simple.
 

Jimbone

Senior Member
Aug 22, 2014
2,977
972
113
44
What language was Joseph speaking in the following passage? The words of Joseph was Egyptian, and yet, the "original" had Joseph's words translated into Hebrew, and that translation into Hebrew is the inspired words of God. Shall I give you more examples throughout scripture? Translations can be the inspired words of God. Words matter to God, not just meaning or intent. Anyway, how can we truly know the meaning or intent without the correct words? We do not need a word for word translation, just the precise words in English.

Genesis 42
18 And Joseph said unto them the third day, This do, and live; for I fear God:
19 If ye be true men, let one of your brethren be bound in the house of your prison: go ye, carry corn for the famine of your houses:
20 But bring your youngest brother unto me; so shall your words be verified, and ye shall not die.
And they did so.
21 And they said one to another, We are verily guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the anguish of his soul, when he besought us, and we would not hear; therefore is this distress come upon us.
22 And Reuben answered them, saying, Spake I not unto you, saying, Do not sin against the child; and ye would not hear? therefore, behold, also his blood is required.
23 And they knew not that Joseph understood them; for he spake unto them by an interpreter.
Yeah but what those that promote this KJV only nonsense lack is the justification of WHY? How do you know the KJV is the "only real Gods word"? Where in scripture does God tell us the KJV is His official version? It's like one of your biggest traditions can't be shown in Gods word. Weird right? You hold so tightly to something not found in His word that you're willing to split the body and call other brothers and sisters false and wicked that disagree with you. (for the record I am not talking about you guys here, I've just seen many that hold this belief do so, I was not accusing anyone here of doing that to be clear)

I've heard the arguments for KJV only and against it and find that when I weighed everything out as a whole I found it lacking. Again it's Gods word, but you guys take that to the extreme to the point you lose sight of reality.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
Still haven't heard any arguments that lift the KJV above everything else, to be honest not even an attempt at one.
Ten Main Categories That Defend The King James Bible:

#1. Manuscript Witnesses (Majority of manuscripts or witnesses favor the KJB). Compare 5,800 manuscripts for the TR with only 45 or so for the Alexandrian texts. In the mouth of two or three witnesses let every word be established. There are four gospels, etcetera. In Textual Criticism they say the old is better after having tasted the new. Also, just because something is older does not mean it is better. A pagan religious document that would predate the Incarnation of Christ is not better just because it is older to the NT Scriptures. In fact, Paul said that even in his time, the Scriptures were being corrupted. Is it not odd that this very verse that talks about this corruption is altered in Modern bibles?

#2. Doctrinal (The KJB is doctrinally superior. Meaning, doctrines that are vitally important are found in the KJV, but yet, they are missing in the Modern Bibles. Also, Modern bibles teach false doctrines, as well).

#3. Influence or Fruit (The KJB is the most printed book in the world and it had the greatest influence positively in history leading to many great revivals whereas the Modern Bibles are tied to this recent Laodician church age). (a) There are 200 plus idioms or phrases in the English speaking world that are found in the KJB. (b) Here in America, the KJB has had an amazing impact or influence. In America: The first printed English Bible (including the OT and NT) was the King James Bible that was endorsed by Congress (i.e., the Aitken’s Bible). The KJB became the dominant translation here in America since the 18th century and the early 1960s. Lincoln was gifted a King James Bible by the black community and he spoke highly of it and the famous Gettysburg address was peppered with language of the KJB. Other US presidents in history spoke highly of the King James Bible, and it had significant impact here in America; Especially around the timing of the 300th anniversary of the KJB. Two US presidents spoke in high regards of the KJB a few days apart from the KJB anniversary.

#4. Biblical; The Word of God speaking about the Word (Meaning, the Bible supports that there is a book, and it is perfect, and would be preserved forever - which aligns with the KJB belief; Whereas Textual Criticism cannot be demonstrated by Scripture).

#5. Historical: Comparing the Origins of Each (One can see the hand of God upon the origins of the KJB, and it had the best translators, whereas with the Modern Translation movement, its origins are tied to deceptions, Catholicism, Unitarianism, liberalism, and other problems; In short, the KJB has noble and good origins and the Modern Bibles have dark origins).

#6. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 1) There is no singular standard and everyone does what is right in their own eyes. They have phantom bibles that exist only in their own minds or the minds of their chosen respected scholars. Dan Wallace does not agree with James White. They cannot actually point to a singular book and say it is the Word of God or the Bible (a.k.a. the Book of the Lord as mentioned in Isaiah 34:16). They become the authority or the scholar becomes the authority when they find what they believe is an error in God’s Word. There is no true reverence for the words of God when the Bible warns not to add or take away from his words and Jesus tell us His words would not pass away.

#7. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 2) The Men Attached to Modern Scholarship. Check out this PDF by WayofLife.

#8. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 3) Deceptions in Textual Criticism (See my post here).

#9. Unique superior qualities of the KJB. (a) Thous, and Thees help you to distinguish between a singular person being spoken to vs. two or more people. Many Modern bibles do not have this distinction or quality. (b) The KJB was not originally created with a copyright and so its creation was not motivated by one, unlike Modern Translations. (c) The KJB has italicized words, which shows the honesty of the translators. (d) KJB is easier to memorize (e) KJB was designed to be spoken and heard by the ear.

#10. Divine Nature of the Text: Biblical Numerics (The King James Bible is the only Bible that has amazing unexplainable numerical patterns within it that can only be the hand of God upon such a book; Note: Rather than go into detail myself about this point, I would recommend checking out several videos on the topic instead to truly see the magnitude and depth of this topic fully). See this video here to start.

You said:
You hold up a translation as an idol. That's wrong plain and simple.
This is like some kind of mantra your side says mindlessly. Yet, you do not know what idolatry is if you say this.
Was Moses making God’s words an idol because he carried the perfect words of God (written by the hand of God) on two tablets with the Ten Commandments? No. So just because one has a perfect set of God’s words does not mean it is an idol unless you are going to condemn Moses for having the perfect words of God. This is why your claim is unbiblical and silly. Most KJB translators do not bow down to the KJB as if it was the essence of God itself. That is what we would have to do in order for it to be an idol. Most KJB believers hold to the view that God is a spirit being and He is a Trinity. The believe the Bible are the expressed thoughts of God. But if you believe that having a perfect set of God’s words is idolatry, then why does Scripture say the following?

Psalms 119:140
"Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.”

So are you saying that the Psalmist here is committing idolatry because they love God’s word because it is very pure?
Pure is suggesting that it is perfect.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
Still haven't heard any arguments that lift the KJV above everything else, to be honest not even an attempt at one. You hold up a translation as an idol. That's wrong plain and simple.
A List of Doctrines Changed in God's Word:
(Between the KJB and Modern Translations):

#1. Doctrine of The Trinity is Affected; For the Only Verse (1 John 5:7) That Point Blank Tells Us About the Trinity is Removed:
Also, the word “Godhead”(Meaning Trinity) is also changed to mean something else. So all direct references of the Trinity are gone. If I were on an island and had no clue about Christianity, the odds of my understanding of the Trinity would be better if I had a King James bible vs. a Modern Translation bible that removes this valuable truth about knowing the Trinity. So this proves that Modern Translations are less helpful for me to understand the Trinity by using the Bible alone.

#2. The Doctrine of Fasting To Cast Out Persistent Demons is Removed:
Matthew 17:21 tells us that casting out persistent or really strong devils is by prayer and fasting. Yet, Matthew 17:21 is oddly removed in Modern Translations. Mark 9:29 mentions that you can pray to remove these kinds of devils, but it does not mention fasting. So the key doctrine of fasting to cast out really strong demons is gone. So the enemy wins if a person only adheres to the Modern Translations and they have a "hate on" for the KJV. For if you have ever encountered strong demonic activity like this before, you know that fasting does actually help greatly, and not just prayer alone.

#3. The Full Version of the Doctrine of Having "No Condemnation" According to Romans 8:1 is Removed:
Romans 8:1 says, "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Modern Translations leave out the part that says, "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." The KJV says, as a part of having no Condemnation: We have to (a) Be in Christ Jesus, AND: (b) Walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit. The enemy wants Christians today to justify sin instead of battling against it. So the enemy will do everything he can to give a person a water-down version of His holy Word to promote the idea that they do not need to worry about sin destroying their soul.

#4. In Genesis 3:16, the ESV (Which is one of the most popular Modern Translations) Doctrinally Changes the Nature of the Truth in the KJV by Saying that Eve's (the wife's) Desire is Contrary To Her Husband's.



#5. 2 Corinthians 3:12, and Habakkuk 2:2 is Altered by Modern Translations To Eliminate How God Uses Plainness of Speech.

This is important because Modern Translation believers prefer to look to the original languages to understand God's Word as their only go-to source. While I am not against original language word studies, I believe this should be done occasionally or when the text is difficult. But some in the Modern Translation movement will make it seem like you cannot truly understand God's Word just by reading the Bible in English. This is not the plainness of speech that God employs. While God can speak in metaphor or parables, He also speaks in plainness of speech, too. This has to apply to our life today in some way. Surely it is not a coincidence that these two key verses are eliminated in their favored Modern Translations (that influences their way of thinking).

#6. Philippians 2:7 Changes Doctrine by Removing an Aspect of the Deity of Christ During His Earthly Ministry.
Philippians 2:6-7 says correctly,

6 “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:” (Philippians 2:6-7).
King James correctly says that Christ made himself of no reputation.

Different Modern Translations say that He “emptied himself” (ESV), and the NLT says that “he gave up his divine privileges;” (Philippians 2:7). This is false, and it is a denial of the deity of Christ. God cannot cease to become God. God cannot cut out an aspect of who He is at His core in having divine power and yet still be God. That would be a contradiction. The Modern Translations teach a gnostic heresy in denying that Jesus has power as God. Granted, Jesus had grown in wisdom (See: Luke 2:52), but I believe this was not an elimination of His divine powers as God, but it was a suppression of them (See: John 17:5, Habakkuk 2:14). For Jesus needed to be a like figure or type of Adam; For Adam also was limited in knowledge when He was in a right relationship with God before the Fall (See: 1 Corinthians 15:45-47). However, Jesus clearly had power as God as a man before the cross. For...

Jesus had power as God:
(during his earthly ministry):

#1. Jesus said He has the power to raise the dead to life just as the Father had the power to raise the dead (John 5:21).​
#2. Hebrews 1:3 talks about how Christ held all things together by the word of His power when He purged us of our sins.​
#3. Jesus said He would raise up this Temple (His body) three days later (John 2:19).​
#4. Jesus had the power to forgive sins and give eternal life (Mark 2:7) (Luke 7:44-50) (John 14:6).​
#5 Jesus had the power to take away the entire world's sins (John 1:29).​
#6. Jesus Christ said wherever two or three are gathered in my name, there I am among them (Matthew 18:20). This was said to the people he was around and not to just us today.​
#7. Jesus knew men's thoughts (Matthew 9:4) (Matthew 12:25) (Mark 2:8) (Luke 5:22) (Luke 6:8) (Luke 9:47) (Luke 24:38).​
#8. Jesus knew about the lives of others (John 2:24) (John 4:17-18) (John 4:29) (John 6:64).​
So Modern Translations are wrong. In fact, many Christians today think Jesus gave up His divine powers; This is because of the wrong teaching (or wrong doctrine) behind Modern Translations.​

(Continued in next post):
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
#9. Modern Bibles falsely teach Jesus had faith.

Hebrews 12:2 (NRSV)
“looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, who for the sake of the joy that was set before him endured the cross, disregarding its shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God.”

The King James Bible correctly renders Hebrews 12:2.

Hebrews 12:2 (KJB)
“Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.”

Jesus is the author or the creator of our faith because He is God. God or Jesus gave us the words of eternal life to believe in Him. He created the faith for us to believe in Him, and trust in Him for salvation, and to trust in His words. Jesus is not the pioneer of our faith. That’s a false teaching from Modern Bibles that was influenced by Westcott, Hort, and Catholicism. Granted, if you believe in Westcott, Hort, and or Catholicism, I mean no offense. I just disagree with their beliefs, and I consider them to be unbiblical.

#10. The False Belief that Jesus is a second-created god is taught in Modern Bibles:

Modern Bibles wrongfully teach the demi-god Jesus viewpoint in that they wrongfully imply the Eternal second PERSON of the Trinity (the Living Word) had a beginning point in time in being a created being. In John 1:18, in the King James Bible, it correctly says: “the only begotten Son,” but this is changed in corrupted Modern bibles to say: "The only begotten God" (LSV) (BLB) (AMP) (NAS1977) (NAS1995). In Micah 5:2, in the King James Bible, it correctly says that the Living Word (or the Messiah) is: “from everlasting,” but this is changed in the corrupted Modern bibles to: “from ancient times” or “from ancient days” or “distant past.” (Suggesting that the second person of the Trinity did not exist from eternity’s past but had a beginning).

#11. The Truth That God Will Not Reward Us Openly By Our Doing Works in Secret For Him is Erased.

In Matthew 6:1, Matthew 6:6, and Matthew 6:18, Modern Bibles remove the point about how God will reward us openly (publicly or among others) if we give alms in secret, pray in secret, and we fast in secret. This is sad because it shows that God can reward us openly today in our lives and not just in the afterlife. It shows God is actively involved in our lives, and He cares for us in our day-to-day lives.

#12. Important Key Words in the Lord’s Prayer are Removed.

In Matthew 6:13 (in the Lord’s Prayer): Modern bibles remove the words, “..For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.” This is the model prayer Jesus gave to us, and it is subtly attacked in one part here in Modern Bibles. We are to say to God the Father in our own words, "Your's is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever, Amen.” I believe one way to understand what is being said here is in the fact that this is an expression of a position of humbleness before God in our worship of Him and what is owed to Him. God deserves all the glory and power because He is God, and we are just mere human beings (i.e., the creation).

#13. The Great Commission in Mark is Questioned.

Modern Bibles footnote Mark 16:9-20 and say these verses were not in the earliest manuscripts. This affects doctrine. Mark 16:15 says, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” So the great commission is not only teaching all nations (as Matthew 28 says), but it is also preaching the gospel to every creature (person). This shows the importance and focus of the gospel as a part of our Lord’s great commission (But such a beautiful thing is cast into doubt with Modern bibles).

#14. God magnifies His Word above His own name Is Removed in Modern Bibles.

Psalms 138:2 says, “I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.” Yet, the underlined part of this verse is neutered like a cat in Modern Versions. You don’t really know the full depth of how God regards His Word if you have a Modern Bible.

#15. In Modern Bibles, You are Not Taught About Knowing the Certainty of the Words of Truth.

Proverbs 22:21 says, “That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?” Yet, knowing the certainty of the words of truth is removed in Modern Bibles. This is strange because those who hold to Modern Bibles generally believe there are errors in all Bibles, and there is no real certainty of the words of truth.

#16. Doubt is Cast on the Depth of Christ’s Sacrifice Involving the Substitutionary Atonement.

In Luke 22:43-44, this passage is bracketed in the NASB, NET, and footnoted in the NIV (suggesting that this verse is not in the earliest manuscripts). Jesus sweats great drops of blood, and He is strengthened by an angel in his prayer, which shows the magnitude of the kind of prayer He was making. This was no small matter. Jesus was to take on the sins of the whole world in that cup within the garden of Gethsemane. The Modern Bibles (which removes these truths) is a subtle attack against the “Substitutionary Atonement” and the level of Jesus's sacrifice. For Jesus sweating great drops of blood and being strengthened by an angel shows the depth of what Christ was going through when He was taking on our sins that were in that cup of which the Father gave to Him.

#17. The False Demi-God Jews View.

The false demi-god Jesus view (i.e., Jesus did not exist eternally in the past) is wrongfully promoted in certain Modern bibles (AMP, AMPC, LSB, NASB1995, NTE). John 1:18 "the only begotten Son" (KJB) is wrongfully changed to “The only begotten God.” But God is not begotten. God is eternal. In addition, Micah 5:2 in Modern Bibles changes the eternal nature of Christ that says: “from everlasting” to “from ancient times” or “from ancient days” or “distant past.” This, again, is an attack upon the eternal nature of God or Jesus Christ.

#18. Leaving Room for Abortion.

Certain Modern Translations Leave Room for a Person to Commit Abortion. For example, Luke 1:15 in certain Modern Translations such as the CEV, GNT, ICB, PHILLIPS, MSG, NCV, NLV, and WE all basically say from the time of John the Baptist's birth, he will be filled with the Holy Ghost. This is unlike the KJB that correctly says he will be filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb. Being filled with the Spirit in the mother’s womb suggests John the Baptist is a living human being inside the mother. Today, some Christians believe in abortion because they don’t think the baby is alive inside the womb (Which is basically the murder of innocent babies). No doubt, Modern bibles like these could potentially lead a person to justify the murder of the innocent.

#19. Fornication is either removed entirely or watered down.

Fornication means sex before marriage. This word “fornication” is removed entirely in popular Modern Translations (such as the NIV, ESV, and NET). The NAS95 mentions fornication four times, while the KJB mentions it 32 times. The point here is that this is an attack on the sin of sex before marriage (See 1 Corinthians 7:2). NAS95 changes it to immoralities. Other versions say “sexual immorality” instead of “fornication” which muddies the waters of meaning here. Sexual Immorality could include other immoral sex acts (bestiality, incest) that do not specifically refer to fornication. Newer Christians today think sex before marriage is okay.

#20. The Command on not to have fellowship with prosperity preachers is removed.

The command to remove yourself from those who think that “gain is godliness” is missing in 1 Timothy 6. We should not hang out or fellowship with prosperity teachers or money-grabbing believers. Their influence can rub off on you to think the same way. Their bad influence can lead you to chase after riches instead of righteousness. The love of money is the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:10). 1 Timothy 6:5 says we are to withdraw ourselves from those who think “gain” is “godliness.”


Anyways, these are just a few of the red flags in Modern Translations. But there is a lot more.
Modern Translations has so many red flags that it would make one think they were in a Russian airport.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
Still haven't heard any arguments that lift the KJV above everything else, to be honest not even an attempt at one. You hold up a translation as an idol. That's wrong plain and simple.
Most do not know that all Modern Bibles are influenced by the Vatican.

Here it is straight out of the Nestle and Aland Critical Text 27th Edition (New Testament Greek text). Note: The Nestle and Aland Critical Text is in it’s 28th edition now and it is the basis for most of the Modern English Bibles printed today. But the 27th edition below says this…



Source:
The KJB Only versus the Latin Vulgate Only Argument by: Another King James Bible Believer

I am going to repeat the text and highlight the key points.

The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between the Vatican and United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. This marks a significant step with regard to inter confessionals relationships.

So…

#1. The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies.
#2. Following an agreement between the Vatican and United Bible Societies
#3. It has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. (Note: What is the word “it” referring to in this sentence? This could be referring to the text and it is the basis (foundation) for new translations and revisions (Modern Bibles)).
#4. The text is the basis for new bible translations made under their supervision (the Vatican) which marks a significant step in regards to inter confessional relationships. Why does it mark a significant step? Because Carlo Martini (A Catholic cardinal) is an editor on the Nestle and Aland Critical Text.

In fact, let's check out the Nestle and Aland Critical Text page at Wikipedia called:

“Novum Testamentum Graece”


Novum Testamentum Graece - Wikipedia

Scroll down the page, and you will see pictures of Nestle, and Aland.
Note: Nestle worked on the Critical Text years before Aland.
Kurt Aland is the one who worked on the Critical Text involving the Vatican. How so?

Notice the highlighted words in the pic below

Carlo Maria Martini.



If you were to zoom in and look at the picture below Kurt Aland:



Again, who is Carlo Maria Martini?

As I said before, he is a Catholic cardinal.



Source:
Carlo Maria Martini - Wikipedia

Important Note: JUST CLICK ON THE LINK FOR CARLO MARIA MARTINI MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE).

But wait. There’s more. Let’s look at Kurt Aland again. I circled his picture below for you to see him. You can see his name next to his picture.



Now in this photo, you can see Kurt Aland with the pope:



Why?

Because of this:




“The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between the Vatican and United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. This marks a significant step with regard to inter confessionals relationships.”

Source:
Nestle and Aland Critical Text - 27the Edition.

Not too long ago in history, we learn that the Catholic Church did not want you to read the KJB.



Yes, I am aware that this is from an older dictionary by the Catholic Church (Which can be found in one of their Catholic Bibles). But it is still pretty recent in history.

I am also aware there is 2020 KJV created for Catholics.

But why bring this up?

Well, as I said before, there are 14 changes that can be found in the NIV that favors the Catholic Church. You can check out these changes in this PDF here on page 21 or 22. Do you want to trust a Bible that is influenced by the Catholic Church? I sure don’t.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
That is non-sensical. Original writings are not translations of those writings. Words have meaning.
What were the original words Joseph spoke in Egyptian? We have them in Hebrew not Egyptian.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
Calling the King James Bible "inspired" simply makes people refuse to take Christians seriously
Who cares? Are we to please God or man? Was the translation of the Egyptian words that Joseph spoke translated into Hebrew and that Hebrew translation inspired? Jesus himself spoke in Hebrew and yet, the words were translated into Greek, and the Greek translation is the inspired words of God.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,070
335
83
Ten Main Categories That Defend The King James Bible:

#1. Manuscript Witnesses (Majority of manuscripts or witnesses favor the KJB). Compare 5,800 manuscripts for the TR with only 45 or so for the Alexandrian texts. In the mouth of two or three witnesses let every word be established. There are four gospels, etcetera. In Textual Criticism they say the old is better after having tasted the new. Also, just because something is older does not mean it is better. A pagan religious document that would predate the Incarnation of Christ is not better just because it is older to the NT Scriptures. In fact, Paul said that even in his time, the Scriptures were being corrupted. Is it not odd that this very verse that talks about this corruption is altered in Modern bibles?

#2. Doctrinal (The KJB is doctrinally superior. Meaning, doctrines that are vitally important are found in the KJV, but yet, they are missing in the Modern Bibles. Also, Modern bibles teach false doctrines, as well).

#3. Influence or Fruit (The KJB is the most printed book in the world and it had the greatest influence positively in history leading to many great revivals whereas the Modern Bibles are tied to this recent Laodician church age). (a) There are 200 plus idioms or phrases in the English speaking world that are found in the KJB. (b) Here in America, the KJB has had an amazing impact or influence. In America: The first printed English Bible (including the OT and NT) was the King James Bible that was endorsed by Congress (i.e., the Aitken’s Bible). The KJB became the dominant translation here in America since the 18th century and the early 1960s. Lincoln was gifted a King James Bible by the black community and he spoke highly of it and the famous Gettysburg address was peppered with language of the KJB. Other US presidents in history spoke highly of the King James Bible, and it had significant impact here in America; Especially around the timing of the 300th anniversary of the KJB. Two US presidents spoke in high regards of the KJB a few days apart from the KJB anniversary.

#4. Biblical; The Word of God speaking about the Word (Meaning, the Bible supports that there is a book, and it is perfect, and would be preserved forever - which aligns with the KJB belief; Whereas Textual Criticism cannot be demonstrated by Scripture).

#5. Historical: Comparing the Origins of Each (One can see the hand of God upon the origins of the KJB, and it had the best translators, whereas with the Modern Translation movement, its origins are tied to deceptions, Catholicism, Unitarianism, liberalism, and other problems; In short, the KJB has noble and good origins and the Modern Bibles have dark origins).

#6. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 1) There is no singular standard and everyone does what is right in their own eyes. They have phantom bibles that exist only in their own minds or the minds of their chosen respected scholars. Dan Wallace does not agree with James White. They cannot actually point to a singular book and say it is the Word of God or the Bible (a.k.a. the Book of the Lord as mentioned in Isaiah 34:16). They become the authority or the scholar becomes the authority when they find what they believe is an error in God’s Word. There is no true reverence for the words of God when the Bible warns not to add or take away from his words and Jesus tell us His words would not pass away.

#7. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 2) The Men Attached to Modern Scholarship. Check out this PDF by WayofLife.

#8. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 3) Deceptions in Textual Criticism (See my post here).

#9. Unique superior qualities of the KJB. (a) Thous, and Thees help you to distinguish between a singular person being spoken to vs. two or more people. Many Modern bibles do not have this distinction or quality. (b) The KJB was not originally created with a copyright and so its creation was not motivated by one, unlike Modern Translations. (c) The KJB has italicized words, which shows the honesty of the translators. (d) KJB is easier to memorize (e) KJB was designed to be spoken and heard by the ear.

#10. Divine Nature of the Text: Biblical Numerics (The King James Bible is the only Bible that has amazing unexplainable numerical patterns within it that can only be the hand of God upon such a book; Note: Rather than go into detail myself about this point, I would recommend checking out several videos on the topic instead to truly see the magnitude and depth of this topic fully). See this video here to start.



This is like some kind of mantra your side says mindlessly. Yet, you do not know what idolatry is if you say this.
Was Moses making God’s words an idol because he carried the perfect words of God (written by the hand of God) on two tablets with the Ten Commandments? No. So just because one has a perfect set of God’s words does not mean it is an idol unless you are going to condemn Moses for having the perfect words of God. This is why your claim is unbiblical and silly. Most KJB translators do not bow down to the KJB as if it was the essence of God itself. That is what we would have to do in order for it to be an idol. Most KJB believers hold to the view that God is a spirit being and He is a Trinity. The believe the Bible are the expressed thoughts of God. But if you believe that having a perfect set of God’s words is idolatry, then why does Scripture say the following?

Psalms 119:140
"Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.”

So are you saying that the Psalmist here is committing idolatry because they love God’s word because it is very pure?
Pure is suggesting that it is perfect.
Meant to say, “KJB believers“ do not bow down to the KJB, and not… KJB translators.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
You hold so tightly to something not found in His word that you're willing to split the body and call other brothers and sisters false and wicked that disagree with you.
Never, ever, ever have I or will I. That is a false statement.
 

NightTwister

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2023
2,098
790
113
65
Colorado, USA
A List of Doctrines Changed in God's Word (Between the KJB and Modern Translations):
#1. Doctrine of The Trinity is Affected; For the Only Verse (1 John 5:7) That Point Blank Tells Us About the Trinity is Removed:
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#2. The Doctrine of Fasting To Cast Out Persistent Demons is Removed:
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#3. The Full Version of the Doctrine of Having "No Condemnation" According to Romans 8:1 is Removed:
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#4. In Genesis 3:16, the ESV (Which is one of the most popular Modern Translations) Doctrinally Changes the Nature of the Truth in the KJV by Saying that Eve's (the wife's) Desire is Contrary To Her Husband's.
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#5. 2 Corinthians 3:12, and Habakkuk 2:2 is Altered by Modern Translations To Eliminate How God Uses Plainness of Speech.
Relativist fallacy.
#6. Philippians 2:7 Changes Doctrine by Removing an Aspect of the Deity of Christ During His Earthly Ministry.
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#9. Modern Bibles falsely teach Jesus had faith.
Non sequitur fallacy.
#10. The False Belief that Jesus is a second-created god is taught in Modern Bibles:
Non sequitur fallacy.
#11. The Truth That God Will Not Reward Us Openly By Our Doing Works in Secret For Him is Erased.
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#12. Important Key Words in the Lord’s Prayer are Removed.
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#13. The Great Commission in Mark is Questioned.
Non sequitur fallacy.
#14. God magnifies His Word above His own name Is Removed in Modern Bibles.
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#15. In Modern Bibles, You are Not Taught About Knowing the Certainty of the Words of Truth.
Non sequitur fallacy.
#16. Doubt is Cast on the Depth of Christ’s Sacrifice Involving the Substitutionary Atonement.
Non sequitur fallacy.
#17. The False Demi-God Jews View.
Non sequitur fallacy.
#18. Leaving Room for Abortion.
Non sequitur fallacy.
#19. Fornication is either removed entirely or watered down.
Circular reasoning fallacy.
#20. The Command on not to have fellowship with prosperity preachers is removed.
Circular reasoning fallacy.

You continue to claim that the KJB is the best, then use it to evaluate the others. That's the very definition of a circular reasoning fallacy. For the rest, you simply fail to support your claims, which are also in part based on circular reasoning.