The word of God is not a secret code that needs unlocked.

  • 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.
Nov 28, 2023
1,893
326
83
So you believe in double inspiration? I hope not. If so, you don’t need to bother arguing for the translators’ skill or abilities, nor in the textual sources for the KJV, nor be using any format other than the 1611. No Blaney, no Cambridge, no Oxford.
I believe the Pure Cambridge KJV edition is the perfect and inerrant Word of God for today. I believe there was a refinement process through different KJV editions. I believe in several possibilities or theories behind the different KJV editions, which I believe aligns with a prophetic angle or look involving Psalms 12:6-7. Why would I believe such crazy nonsense from your perspective? The many evidences. When you compare the KJV vs. Modern Bibles we see a corruption in doctrine that is extreme in over 50 plus places in Scripture. We see heretics attached to the Modern Bible Movement, with their heretical beliefs aligning with these Modern Bibles. Catholics, spiritualists, liberals, Unitarians, and more. Yet, the KJV stood its grown in being pure from this corruption. Then we have three great revivals in English-speaking countries, which were the result of the KJV (the most top influential English Bible at these times). Many people today in English speaking countries, whether you are a believer or unbeliever still all still speak idioms from the King James Bible. Its words are bound to their tongue, and they don't even know it. Before the popularity of the Westcott and Hort Movement we have today: Efforts repeatedly by previous Modernists have sought to dethrone the KJV and say it would fall away and be forgotten, only to have their own Modernistic Bibles fall into extinction. At the founding of our country, the one and only Bible to first be endorsed by Congress is the Aitken's Bible, which was a King James Bible. While Aitken's Bible was not a success, others quickly followed in making the KJV this nation's national book that presidents would rally its citizens with.


...
 
Nov 28, 2023
1,893
326
83
So you believe in double inspiration? I hope not. If so, you don’t need to bother arguing for the translators’ skill or abilities, nor in the textual sources for the KJV, nor be using any format other than the 1611. No Blaney, no Cambridge, no Oxford.
As for inspiration:

What is inspiration according to the Bible?
Well, according to the book of Job, it appears to be more like illumination of God's words (His knowledge) to man.

Job 32:8
"But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding."

I believe the KJV translators went through a rigorous revision process in creating the KJV. They reviewed the text multiple times, making corrections repeatedly through various companies (groups), with the work ultimately going through a final committee. Sometimes, the translators were operating by their own carnal (man-made) thinking, yet at other times, I believe God illuminated their understanding, guiding them to correctly render the words of God from the manuscript witnesses. Despite this intense translation process, which included corrections, I believe God directed the translators at key moments. God provided His illumination at certain points in time during this process, enabling them to preserve the words that reflected the Hebrew and Greek, culminating in the handwritten master copy (which is not currently available to the public).

Note: I do believe that some Hebrew and Greek words have deeper or expanded meanings, and I greatly value the original languages. I also aspire to learn both Modern and Koine Greek, whether by making multiple visits to Greece to communicate fluently with the locals or even living there. Unlike some of my fellow Ruckmanite brethren, who are guided by love through God's Word, I do not believe that the English supersedes the Hebrew and Greek to the point where the original languages become obsolete. I hold that the original languages are just as important. Like many KJV advocates, I believe Beza's 5th edition (1598) Greek edition best reflects the work of the KJV translators. There are only 20 translatable differences between Beza's 5th edition and the KJV.

Whether you choose to call this illumination (or inspiration) a form of double inspiration is up to you. I simply believe that God continued to preserve His words by translating them into English through men, giving them His understanding of what the original Hebrew and Greek words truly conveyed.

I hope this helps you to understand where I am coming from.

May the Lord bless you, even if we disagree on this most important Biblical topic.




....
 
Nov 28, 2023
1,893
326
83
Yet, the KJV stood its grown in being pure from this corruption. Then we have three great revivals in English-speaking countries, which were the result of the KJV (the most top influential English Bible at these times). Many people today in English speaking countries, whether you are a believer or unbeliever still all still speak idioms from the King James Bible. Its words are bound to their tongue, and they don't even know it. Before the popularity of the Westcott and Hort Movement we have today: Efforts repeatedly by previous Modernists have sought to dethrone the KJV and say it would fall away and be forgotten, only to have their own Modernistic Bibles fall into extinction. At the founding of our country, the one and only Bible to first be endorsed by Congress is the Aitken's Bible, which was a King James Bible. While Aitken's Bible was not a success, others quickly followed in making the KJV this nation's national book that presidents would rally its citizens with.


...
Meant to say, "ground" and not "grown."



....
 
Nov 28, 2023
1,893
326
83
Miss the point much?

Where in Scripture does it say, “Something that is holy from God does not have errors”?
It is a pretty basic Biblical concept that God being holy, and certain things or objects of God being holy is a word that conveys something that is without defilement or error. If you believe otherwise, you need to make your biblical case. Just know, that if you do say "holy" can have an expanded meaning of something that includes error or defilement, you have to attribute this oddball concept of holiness (which includes defilement and error) to the Lord our God, unless of course you have a workaround verse or something that explains away this problem. However, I am not going to hold my breath on you bringing this kind of study to my attention because I believe it simply does not exist.


...
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,319
8,033
113
Its not for me to decide.
The Bible tells me that God's words are pure and perfect (Psalms 12:6) (Psalms 119:140) (Proverbs 30:5). God’s Word says His words will be preserved forever (Psalms 12:6-7) (Isaiah 40:8) (1 Peter 1:23-25). There is nothing in the Bible that talks about how His Word would continue in error or corruption (Whereby we could not trust it). On the contrary, God’s Word says Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35); It is: “incorruptible...the word of God...” (1 Peter 1:23). So if I believe God's Word, and take it face value, then the issue is a matter of faith in what God says. Do I believe God's Word vs. the scholars and their agenda? That is what this is really about. Faith. Faith in what God said, and not the scribes (that Jesus warned us about). But alas, most will let Scripture's promise of God on the perfect preservation of His Word fall into the background like white noise because they do not like the idea of being under an authority or perfect Word. They like to be able to have some wiggle room when it comes to God's words. They like to have a "Choose Your Adventure Bible." Hence, why the liberal approach to God's Word exists with the current Modern Bible Movement.

Also, it is highly illogical to claim the Bible has errors in it, and then say we trust the Bible. How do you know what is true or false? Not every Christian or scholar agrees on what is true or false on every verse in the Modern Bible Movement.

I think the NKJV sums up the false approach to the Bible by Christians today perfectly.

Taken right out of the NKJV pages. It says this:



This goes against the warning in Revelation 22:19.

Revelation 22:19 says,
“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

I say to those who have this mentality:
Have fun taking your Bible to the butcher's market and slicing and dicing it to your own liking like a piece of meat.
Just know, there will be a judgment on such matters.

Behold, it is written...

View attachment 268798

God’s Word tells us that Christians are to speak the same thing (1 Corinthians 1:10). This can only be if there is one Word of God that we can all agree upon. Therefore, the Modern Bible Movement is not the path of truth. Sure, God can save you with a Modern Translation, but when it comes to following the Lord in what He actually said precisely, that is only going to happen with a King James Bible.

Think. How can you commit the sins in Revelation 22:18-19 by adding or subtracting from His Word if there is no settled text?


....
...
Well.....I have no problem allowing for a little code degradation. The signal is intact and perfectly legible.
Furthermore, there is good reason to believe that the Masoretic was jiggered by Rabbi Akiva in about 100AD.
And it is pretty clear that the proto-Hebrew Vorlage was the basic NT text being used and quoted.
Which today is the LXX and a couple of others, all of which are slightly altered one way or another.
However, there were undoubtedly pristine copies of the LXX in common circulation that Paul used.

 
Nov 28, 2023
1,893
326
83
Well.....I have no problem allowing for a little code degradation. The signal is intact and perfectly legible.
Furthermore, there is good reason to believe that the Masoretic was jiggered by Rabbi Akiva in about 100AD.
And it is pretty clear that the proto-Hebrew Vorlage was the basic NT text being used and quoted.
Which today is the LXX and a couple of others, all of which are slightly altered one way or another.
However, there were undoubtedly pristine copies of the LXX in common circulation that Paul used.

Who gets to decide what is truly God's Word— you, the scholar, or someone else?
When man assumes that role, the real authority shifts from God's Word to human judgment.

In other words, this belief sets off a self-destruct sequence, a dangerous path that, once triggered, threatens to erode the foundation of faith in the certainty and preservation of God's words.


...
 
Nov 28, 2023
1,893
326
83
The Bible is an integrated message system coming from outside our time domain.
It is written with various types of embedded codes, a signal with a certain bandwidth.
This code is intentionally widely distributed across the bandwidth to prevent hostile jamming.

Should small errors creep in, they will not affect the coherence or the comprehension of the signal.
Errors = noise in the signal.

Have small errors crept in over the millennia? Thats for you to decide.
Please go back to my posts and re-read the verses I posted. Do you believe them?
That is what the Holy Spirit is going to ask you the next time you read those verses.
I know this was the case for Mike Hoggard. He used to be a part of the Modern Bible Movement and God saved him from it.
Granted, I do not agree with many things by Mr. Hoggard, but the point here is that Mike was able to have the certainty of the knowledge of the words of truth as Proverbs says, when he did not believe that before.



....
 
Jun 30, 2015
25,208
13,669
113
It is a pretty basic Biblical concept that God being holy, and certain things or objects of God being holy is a word that conveys something that is without defilement or error. If you believe otherwise, you need to make your biblical case. Just know, that if you do say "holy" can have an expanded meaning of something that includes error or defilement, you have to attribute this oddball concept of holiness (which includes defilement and error) to the Lord our God, unless of course you have a workaround verse or something that explains away this problem. However, I am not going to hold my breath on you bringing this kind of study to my attention because I believe it simply does not exist.


...
Um, no, I don’t need to prove my case, because I didn’t make the original claim; you did. I am not going to accept your attempt to employ the burden-of-proof reversal fallacy.

What you call “a pretty basic biblical concept” (that you haven’t supported with Scripture) is nothing more than a wordy attempt to sidestep my challenge. You don’t have a case because you don’t have any evidence. Just admit you’re wrong, accept the consequences, and move on.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,319
8,033
113
Who gets to decide what is truly God's Word— you, the scholar, or someone else?
When man assumes that role, the real authority shifts from God's Word to human judgment.

In other words, this belief sets off a self-destruct sequence, a dangerous path that, once triggered, threatens to erode the foundation of faith in the certainty and preservation of God's words.


...
Well.....I do not suffer from the problems you do as regards the text.
God DESIGNED a perfect integrated messages system that is extremely robust and dependable.
And certainly true in every way.
 
Nov 17, 2015
4,081
957
113
The Bible originally was intended to be taught to man by someone who had access to a scroll.
Even if you could read the original language? We are all limited in our knowledge to use for correlation.

I believe God requires each one of us only so much to know in our lifetime.
Those who are given much, much will be required of them by God.

The church is to self police itself. Checking each other when someone is in error, and providing more information
to those who lack enough knowledge to get put something together correctly.

This notion that some translation will make you accepted by the Lord into the order of the Morning Star is trying to use
a given translation in itself a good luck charm.

We all need to be taught competently. 2 Timothy 4:3 is a warning that many in the church will never know what God requires
of them. But, some will still fight on, thinking his is the one who is right when he is wrong too many times.

God must sort it out in the end. He is faithful, and for those who desire true faith they will find it.

Enjoy your translation. What we really need is good teachers.
Mark 10:18
King James Bible

And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

You shared your thoughts, but nothing yet is enough. You haven’t built your case by making irrelevant remarks and have nothing to offer. Thanks though.
 
Jul 31, 2013
37,620
13,481
113
That is just silly and dumb. The words that come from God (in the Bible) is a part of His own mind unless you simply desire to lobotomize God or seek to take a magic marker to wipe out His words. Besides, I have catalogued 40 places in Scripture where there is a connection between the Living Word (Jesus) and the Communicated Word (like Scripture). But this is not surprising you are hostile to the authority of Scripture. Your own Modern Bibles teach you to think that way. Ironically, one such example is in John 5:39 in the trojan horse update of the KJV known as the NKJV.


....
yet nowhere in that monologue did you glorify Christ.

instead, you slandered me and glorified a fallible translation of God's words into a pagan language.

that's my point.
 
Jul 31, 2013
37,620
13,481
113
Besides, I have catalogued 40 places in Scripture where there is a connection between the Living Word (Jesus) and the Communicated Word (like Scripture).
only 40?

i bet i can find more than that just in Genesis, and it's going to be independent of what pagan translation i have to read because of Babel and my lack of training in Hebrew.

:)

every
time
He
speaks
 
Jul 31, 2013
37,620
13,481
113
I have catalogued 40 places in Scripture where there is a connection between the Living Word (Jesus) and the Communicated Word (like Scripture).
in ten minutes i catalogued 40 in Genesis 1-4 alone, reading nkjv.

my advice to you in order to grow in knowledge of God is to think and speak more of Christ and less of kjv.
 
Jun 30, 2015
25,208
13,669
113
Actually, I see "them" as in reference to both the words, and the people being preserved.
You can "see" whatever you like, but I encourage you to do the hard research to discover what the Hebrew says. The typical KJV-only interpretation is incorrect.

However, Modern Bibles cannot be trusted because they teach many false doctrines.
No, they don't. There isn't a single major doctrine that is negatively affected in any of the main modern translations. You're paying too much attention to the KJV-only propaganda and not doing enough of your own research.
 
Jul 3, 2015
59,499
28,843
113
The Bible tells me that God's words are pure and perfect (Psalms 12:6) (Psalms 119:140) (Proverbs 30:5). God’s Word says His words will be preserved forever (Psalms 12:6-7) (Isaiah 40:8) (1 Peter 1:23-25). There is nothing in the Bible that talks about how His Word would continue in error or corruption (Whereby we could not trust it). On the contrary, God’s Word says Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35); It is: “incorruptible...the word of God...” (1 Peter 1:23). So if I believe God's Word, and take it face value, then the issue is a matter of faith in what God says. Do I believe God's Word vs. the scholars and their agenda? That is what this is really about. Faith. Faith in what God said, and not the scribes (that Jesus warned us about).
All those verses you give were written long before the KJ was penned.
 
Jun 30, 2015
25,208
13,669
113
God’s Word says His words will be preserved forever (Psalms 12:6-7) (Isaiah 40:8) (1 Peter 1:23-25).
Again, your interpretation of Psalm 12:7 is fundamentally wrong. The other verses don't support the idea of preservation, but of endurance; they are not the same thing.

There is nothing in the Bible that talks about how His Word would continue in error or corruption (Whereby we could not trust it). On the contrary, God’s Word says Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35); It is: “incorruptible...the word of God...” (1 Peter 1:23). So if I believe God's Word, and take it face value, then the issue is a matter of faith in what God says.
Okay... let's address those verses specifically. You believe God's word which says the word of God "cannot be broken" and is "incorruptible", yet you believe that modern translations are "corrupt". You, sir, are holding to mutually contradictory positions.

Do I believe God's Word vs. the scholars and their agenda? That is what this is really about. Faith. Faith in what God said, and not the scribes (that Jesus warned us about).
You believe the "scribes" behind the TR. You must, because you hold that the TR is the "correct" set of readings.

But alas, most will let Scripture's promise of God on the perfect preservation of His Word fall into the background like white noise because they do not like the idea of being under an authority or perfect Word. They like to be able to have some wiggle room when it comes to God's words. They like to have a "Choose Your Adventure Bible." Hence, why the liberal approach to God's Word exists with the current Modern Bible Movement.
Here you go off criticizing some unnamed, non-specific "them". Provide quotes and sources so we all know exactly who is saying these things. Otherwise, I will conclude that you're just making strawman arguments.

Also, it is highly illogical to claim the Bible has errors in it, and then say we trust the Bible. How do you know what is true or false? Not every Christian or scholar agrees on what is true or false on every verse in the Modern Bible Movement.
It's only illogical if you hold (against all evidence to the contrary) that a particular translation is perfect. Because so many KJV-onlyists hold to that, they are constitutionally incapable of considering the possibility of errors in its text. It does, in fact, contain many errors, and that fact stands whether you acknowledge it or not.

How do you know what is true or false?
You do some research. It's odd... KJV advocates admonish "opponents" to "study to shew yourself approved" but resist doing their own homework. ;)

I think the NKJV sums up the false approach to the Bible by Christians today perfectly.

Taken right out of the NKJV pages. It says this:



This goes against the warning in Revelation 22:19.

Revelation 22:19 says,
“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
Each time you criticize another translation, you should apply your criticism to the KJV first. It is well known that the KJV is replete with words that aren't in the original languages (just look for the italics). If we apply Revelation 22:21 to the KJV as you do so with the NKJV, the KJV should be discarded immediately as an utter corruption.

Further, you really need to find a copy of the 1611 KJV. It has marginal notes with alternate readings; these are usually left out of modern printings. Its Preface to the Reader provides reasoning similar to the above-quoted NKJV preface.

I say to those who have this mentality:
Have fun taking your Bible to the butcher's market and slicing and dicing it to your own liking like a piece of meat.
Just know, there will be a judgment on such matters.
Go ahead and exercise some consistency and integrity. I'll wait.

God’s Word tells us that Christians are to speak the same thing (1 Corinthians 1:10).
Wow... I've seen some misapplications of Scripture, but you win the prize for today! Look at the context! Is Paul talking about using the same translation? No!

This can only be if there is one Word of God that we can all agree upon.
We disagree on that.

Therefore, the Modern Bible Movement is not the path of truth.
That does not follow.

Sure, God can save you with a Modern Translation, but when it comes to following the Lord in what He actually said precisely, that is only going to happen with a King James Bible.
That is complete, unadulterated bullhockey.

Besides being fundamentally wrong, it's arrogant, closed-minded, and, given that the KJV contains errors, foolish.
 
Jun 30, 2015
25,208
13,669
113
I believe the Pure Cambridge KJV edition is the perfect and inerrant Word of God for today. I believe there was a refinement process through different KJV editions. I believe in several possibilities or theories behind the different KJV editions, which I believe aligns with a prophetic angle or look involving Psalms 12:6-7.
Since Psalm 12:6-7 does not actually say anything about refining the word of God, your view is incoherent.

That aside, you previously stated, quoting Scripture, that the word of God is perfect and pure. If the previous versions were not "perfect and pure", then by your own logic, they were not the word of God. At All. Not pure, not perfect, not holy.

How can what is holy come from what is not holy?

Think on that.
 
Jun 30, 2015
25,208
13,669
113
As for inspiration:

What is inspiration according to the Bible?
Well, according to the book of Job, it appears to be more like illumination of God's words (His knowledge) to man.

Job 32:8
"But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding."

I believe the KJV translators went through a rigorous revision process in creating the KJV. They reviewed the text multiple times, making corrections repeatedly through various companies (groups), with the work ultimately going through a final committee. Sometimes, the translators were operating by their own carnal (man-made) thinking, yet at other times, I believe God illuminated their understanding, guiding them to correctly render the words of God from the manuscript witnesses. Despite this intense translation process, which included corrections, I believe God directed the translators at key moments. God provided His illumination at certain points in time during this process, enabling them to preserve the words that reflected the Hebrew and Greek, culminating in the handwritten master copy (which is not currently available to the public).

Note: I do believe that some Hebrew and Greek words have deeper or expanded meanings, and I greatly value the original languages. I also aspire to learn both Modern and Koine Greek, whether by making multiple visits to Greece to communicate fluently with the locals or even living there. Unlike some of my fellow Ruckmanite brethren, who are guided by love through God's Word, I do not believe that the English supersedes the Hebrew and Greek to the point where the original languages become obsolete. I hold that the original languages are just as important. Like many KJV advocates, I believe Beza's 5th edition (1598) Greek edition best reflects the work of the KJV translators. There are only 20 translatable differences between Beza's 5th edition and the KJV.

Whether you choose to call this illumination (or inspiration) a form of double inspiration is up to you. I simply believe that God continued to preserve His words by translating them into English through men, giving them His understanding of what the original Hebrew and Greek words truly conveyed.

I hope this helps you to understand where I am coming from.

May the Lord bless you, even if we disagree on this most important Biblical topic.
It appears that you don't hold to double inspiration as Ruckman held; that's a good thing. You do, however, hold to inspired guidance, which leaves you in the impossible position of explaining the inconsistencies in the "Spirit-guided" KJV.