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.

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
2,687
391
83
This is rich. Hebrew and Greek are far more difficult to grasp than 1600s English. So nice try. But no cigar....
You need a REAL pastor-teacher for that.

Without a real pastor teacher we will all be like dumb sheep.
That's what Jesus called us. Because, sheep are, by nature, 'dumb.'
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
2,687
391
83
Sorry, but I don't think you are translating but rather you are paraphrasing often with additional opinion. This is categorized as illumination not a transalation.
Ohhhhhhhh! Even if what I said conveys the needed meaning?

I see...
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,095
958
113
My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they
may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know
the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures
of wisdom and knowledge. Colossians 2:2-3


Treasures hidden in the Word.. Not some secret code. But truths that need to be dug out and bring out buried treasures.

Treasures holding secret keys enabling one to break codes. Codes which need insight that would otherwise mystify and remain unexplained until someone with God's anointing to teach, breaks through distortions and unveil the truth needed to make a believer breath above water.

Now, here's part of the key to Matthew 4:3 that no regular translation can tell us...

In the Greek there is a syntactical system that was invented for the Greek's favorite sport and pastime. That of public debating.

When we see the word translated "if" in English? There are four class conditions that are deciphered by the syntax.
The word translated "if" can have more than one meaning. And, the Greek syntax will be holding to a specific meaning that the Greek readers would instantly understand. But, translations usually will fail to convey.

The common problem I have seen with teachers working with Matthew 4:3, is one that comes from assumptions from what appears obvious in English.. That claim being, that when Satan tempted Jesus to turn the stones into bread, because Satan was casting doubt upon the authenticity of who Jesus is. That Satan was calling his bluff, so to speak.

So far, is that understandable as I presented it?

grace and peace ..................
I just dont think the translators of Kjv and other modern translators does not even know what they are doing. The conditional word if have different usage and good thing is that you are just repeating what is already known in the past. For the obvious, i believe that is based on the context so simple not a complex.
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
2,687
391
83
I just dont think the translators of Kjv and other modern translators does not even know what they are doing. The conditional word if have different usage and good thing is that you are just repeating what is already known in the past. For the obvious, i believe that is based on the context so simple not a complex.

Looks like you do not want to learn what I could have shown you.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,995
332
83
It can make you wise unto yourself... if you have enough to play with, and feel free to speculate as to what something means.
The King James with its archaic English and anachronisms is a speculation feast for subjective thinkers who want authority over
others.


If an angel appeared to you today?
He would speak just like you do.
You might not know he is not a man. (Hebrews 13:2)
He would not be sounding like he just came from some Shakespearean festival.
First, it is written:

"But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;" (1 Corinthians 1:27).​
Second, Jesus spoke in Hebrew when He read the Scriptures but when Jesus cried out, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" on the cross, He spoke in a language that the Jews did not understand. So my talking to angels unawares in my own language is not proof that God did not preserve His words in 1600s English.

You said:
Here is one of your cited verses...

Titus 2:11-12

11 "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,​
12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;​

One can easily assume too much from over simplified English translations.

The Greek word we read translated "teaches" means to allow someone to learn a their lesson a hard way. To let someone get burned and hurt, thus causing that person to learn to say "No!" to unrighteousness. It does not mean simply teaching moral mandates as to tell others to be good little boys and girls.

You won't see that, what I just showed you. Not from typical translations, including the King James.
You need to find a real teacher for that.
Wow. We appear to agree a little here (at least on the interpretation of the underlying Greek).

I did look this up with the help of ChatGPT. There does appear to be some merit to this.

The verb paideuō in this context appears to convey more than simple instruction alone. It suggests a kind of training that involves not only imparting knowledge but also shaping character, often through corrective discipline. The word paideuō was historically used to describe the kind of guidance a parent would give to a child, which could include instruction, discipline, and correction as necessary to foster growth and maturity.

In Titus 1–3, the theme of corrective teaching and training as part of Christian life and growth is evident in several places, providing a context for understanding paideuō ("teaching" or "discipline") in Titus 2:12. Here are some key passages that build this context:
  1. Titus 1:9, 13 – Paul instructs Titus to ensure that elders hold “fast the faithful word” so they can “convict those who contradict.” He also urges Titus to “rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith.” The idea here is that faithful teaching includes both encouragement and correction, which aligns with a broader understanding of paideuō as training that often involves discipline.
  2. Titus 2:7-8, 15 – Paul emphasizes the need for Titus to be an example of good works and sound doctrine, marked by “integrity” and “sound speech.” He adds that Titus should “exhort and rebuke with all authority.” This reinforces the idea that instruction is not just informative but also corrective, involving moral training that may require reproving or rebuking.
  3. Titus 3:10-11 – Paul advises Titus to “reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition,” which reflects a disciplinary approach where correction and rejection (if the person remains divisive) are part of maintaining the health of the community. This implies that teaching and guidance sometimes include a disciplinary component when individuals resist correction.
Throughout these chapters, Paul’s counsel to Titus often includes rebuke, correction, and moral discipline. This broader context suggests that “teaching” in Titus 2:12 (using paideuō) involves more than just instruction; it involves training believers to reject ungodliness and live rightly, which often includes corrective elements.

In fact, if we understand God's grace as personified in Jesus Christ, it aligns well with the idea that His grace would involve not only instruction but also discipline and chastening. Hebrews 12:6 supports this, saying, “For whom the Lord loves He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives.” This passage reflects the idea that Jesus, in His love and grace, does not merely instruct us passively but actively trains us in righteousness, including discipline where necessary, to help us grow in holiness and obedience.

Ephesians 5:25-27 basically says that Christ gave Himself for us so that we might sanctify ourselves by the washing of the water of the Word (Scripture) so that we may present to ourselves to Him as a church that is holy, and without spot. The corrective Scripture and the moving of Jesus in our lives to correct us can help us to obey.

But again, as I pointed out before, just because less information like this is not conveyed does not mean the KJV is inferior or not perfect. God may also simply want to convey more basic truths to us first before we are ready to grasp the deeper truth. If such is not the case, then there would be no such thing as the milk of the Word vs. the meat of the Word.

In any event, while learning Greek is good, you have to be careful with teachers of Greek in these last days. There are some Greek definitions on certain Greek words that are false which have been pushed upon us since the Westcott and Hort movement. Monogenēs (μονογενής)s, and the Greek word "spoudazō" (σπουδάζω) are two examples off the top of my head. I say this because such Critical Text Scholarly interpretations on these words were only invented by this Westcott and Hort movement and it is not recognized by the Greek world of linguists of people who actually live in Greece and speak the language natively, which can be traced back to Koine Greek (Which can at times show changes with certain words).

In fact, it makes sense that there would be a hostile take over of Scripture because that is what Satan seeks to destroy.

You said:
Not by teaching ourselves by reading Scripture as if it were written in prose.

In Christ.....
It is written:

"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him." (1 John 2:27).


....
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,995
332
83
You need a REAL pastor-teacher for that.
Sorry, I am not looking to be brain washed by another. God has been teaching me His Word by the Spirit just fine.

You also don't appear to understand the spiritual state of the times we are living in. Sure, I imagine that your Greek teacher may teach things that are correct, but if he is for the Critical Text (Which I believe he is), then is also most likely pushing the false Westcott and Hort movement interpretations on certain Greek words that are false. I say this because I can actually research to see how these Greek words were used from in the past all the way up until now. AI searches now make it a lot more easier to check these kinds of things (not saying they are perfect always).

Without a real pastor teacher we will all be like dumb sheep.
Try saying that to those in 1 John 2:27.

You said:
That's what Jesus called us. Because, sheep are, by nature, 'dumb.'
So we are so dumb that we cannot learn Greek, and 1600s English on our own?
That sounds like a Democratic party lie to me or a lie from Satan himself.
Evil is all about blaming others wrongfully.
But this is the psyop agenda that is happening in these last days.


....
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
2,687
391
83
First, it is written:

"But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;" (1 Corinthians 1:27).​
....
If you were under a teacher with the integrity and competency as Paul was, that verse would work.
For you would have an accurate understanding to think with.

I have seen some Christians, who assume they are wise, act foolishly to the world.
And, then hide in that verse to be their justification.
As the world was justified in what they claimed to see.

If the world is going to see you as foolish?
At least tell them truth, truth that the Lord can show them they had been shown when they face their condemnation.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,995
332
83
If you were under a teacher with the integrity and competency as Paul was, that verse would work.
For you would have an accurate understanding to think with.

I have seen some Christians, who assume they are wise, act foolishly to the world.
And, then hide in that verse to be their justification.
As the world was justified in what they claimed to see.

If the world is going to see you as foolish?
At least tell them truth, truth that the Lord can show them they had been shown when they face their condemnation.
Like Democrats, they ignore the reality of things you bring up,, which involves facts, and common sense logic.
While you may disagree with the Democratic Left like I do, the thing is that you are doing the same thing.
You are not dealing with the points I brought up even when I deal with your points.
Again, 1 John 2:27. What do you think it is saying?


...
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,995
332
83
If you were under a teacher with the integrity and competency as Paul was, that verse would work.
For you would have an accurate understanding to think with.

I have seen some Christians, who assume they are wise, act foolishly to the world.
And, then hide in that verse to be their justification.
As the world was justified in what they claimed to see.

If the world is going to see you as foolish?
At least tell them truth, truth that the Lord can show them they had been shown when they face their condemnation.
While Scripture upholds the value of teachers, it also affirms that the Holy Spirit is the ultimate guide into truth, particularly when believers are at risk of being led astray. In situations of doctrinal clarity and discernment, this Spirit-led anointing equips believers to recognize and abide in the truth without being dependent on human validation. Scripture and the Spirit are our ultimate guides. But again, I would say we are living in the last days, and finding those who truly are correct on everything they say has not really happened for me yet. Most often, there are no teachers that I found to be perfect in what they preach and teach. Most often, I encounter Christians who want to justify a sin and still be saved type belief or to obey Modern Bibles that teach false doctrines (as they secretly bash the KJV). Again, I see that we are living in a spiritual wasteland. At least, that has been my experience as a Bible believer. In the Westcott and Hort movement, many of them are simply Bible correctors.


....
...
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
2,687
391
83
Sorry, I am not looking to be brain washed by another. You don't appear to understand the spiritual state of the times we are living in. Sure, I imagine that your Greek teacher may teach things that are correct, but if he is for the Critical Text (Which I believe he is), then is also most likely pushing the false Westcott and Hort movement interpretations on certain Greek words that are false. I say this because I can actually research to see how these Greek words were used from in the past all the way up until now. AI searches now make it a lot more easier to check these kinds of things (not saying they are perfect always).



Try saying that to those in 1 John 2:27.



So we are so dumb that we cannot learn Greek, and 1600s English on our own?
That sounds like a Democratic party lie to me.
They are all about blaming others, and say they are helping us when in reality we know they are hurting us.
But this is the psyop agenda that is happening in these last days.


....

Here is one you are not going to find to understand in all your "searches."

Matthew 4:3....
"Now when the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are the Son of God,
command that these stones become bread.”
The word "if" is in the Greek in the first class condition. What that means is not what the typical English translation is indicating.
For Satan was not attempting to impugn Jesus by trying to get him to prove he is the Son of God by turning the stones into bread.

For the Greek is stating that Satan was admitting and knew that Jesus is the Son of God.

Mark 1:23-24


Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an impure spirit cried out, “What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God!”

Even evil spirits that Jesus cast out recognized hum, and Jesus had to command them to be silent. Mark 1:24-25


A more accurate translation with understanding could read...
"Now when the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are the Son of God - and you are -
command that these stones become bread.”


So then, why was Satan tempting the One whom Satan knew could turn stones into bread, to do so?

.....
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,095
958
113
Hebrews 4:15

For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses,
but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin.


If He were functioning in the power of His own Deity? Hebrews 4:15 could not exist!

Here is when He stopped functioning in His power to be God.

Philippians 2:6-8

who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death –
even death on a cross!


Now for a better detailed translation given by a pastor who taught from the Greek text.
He presented Philippians 2:6-8 with an emphasis on including details from the Greek
that typical mainstream translations avoid giving with the everyday reader in mind.


6~~Who {Christ}, though He eternally existed in the essence of God,
He did not think equalities {plural} with God
a gain to be seized {means to violently take}
and held {so that the Father's plan would not be neutralized}.


{Note: There is no 'robbery' here. He did not have to get equality with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, because He already HAD it! Christ as deity in eternity immediately accepted God the Father's plan for him to leave heaven and become human in hypostatic union. He did not consider this a loss because he still was/is 100% deity also.

7~~But He Himself {Christ}
deprived Himself of the proper function of deity
when He had received the 'inner essence'/form of a servant/slave
although He had been born in the outward likeness/image of mankind.


{Note: Outwardly Christ's humanity looked the same . . . inside He was different in that He was not born with an Old Sin Nature and He never created one by sinning}.

{Note: Verse 6 - He has the essence of deity - always has always will. Verse 7 - He took on the essence of humanity, except for the imputation of the 'Sin of the Father (Adam)' - The Old Sin Nature - i.e. the reason for the necessity of the virgin birth. Pure deity and pure humanity . . . this makes Him the uniquely born person of the universe - no one like Him - Jesus Christ - 100% deity, 100% humanity - in hypostatic union.}

8~~In fact, although having been discovered
in outward appearance as a man,
He humbled Himself
by becoming obedient to the point of {spiritual} death . . .
that is, the death of the cross.


Now...

Direct contact with our sins caused him a spiritual death. That is why he cried out,
".......... My God, My God! Why have you forsaken me?"

Our sins for the time he needed to endure bearing all of them, caused Him to be cut off from fellowship with God!
He was forsaken as we should have been.
Now I'll try to spin this to a Bible version issue, do you think the word robbery is all wrong in the Kjb? Thanks
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
2,687
391
83
Try saying that to those in 1 John 2:27....
Which says....

"But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need
that any man should teach you".
1 John 2:27

You can not see the irony of what you are missing.


For who taught them that they need no man to teach them?

John! Who is man.

The anointing we have (if we are humble, and correctly abiding in 1 John 1:9) ... will teach us all we need to know from what we have been shown by those whom God gave us to teach us.

Yes! Without a real pastor teacher we will all be like dumb sheep.


For the anointing can not teach us unless we are first taught correctly what we need to think with.
The anointing will teach us what to believe, and not to believe, as we are being taught by teachers.
Not meaning that we are to teach ourselves.
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
2,687
391
83
Now I'll try to spin this to a Bible version issue, do you think the word robbery is all wrong in the Kjb? Thanks
This is how they concluded to use the word robbery...

Who {Christ}, though He eternally existed in the essence of God, He did not think equalities
with God, a gain to be seized {means to violently take} and held.


In other words?

To agree to become as a man? And, having two natures in union?
He had to let go of the preciousness and power of his own Deity!
He did not consider to violently snatch it back in the process. (no robbery)

And, besides... how could he consider it robbery? If it was rightfully his own to begin with? That's the point.

Jesus willingly made himself poor, so that we could be made rich.

grace and peace ........
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,325
13,713
113
Bible believer's survey says,
"Bible believer"? Instead of using high-sounding words with insulting insinuations, you should just say "KJV-onlyists". At least that would be honest. Your premise, however, would remain fallacious.
Actually, I have resolved this a long time ago.
If you are interested, here is..

The Three Ahaziah Kings Theory in 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles:

In the Bible, there appears to be a complex narrative involving three distinct kings named Ahaziah. This theory—The Three Ahaziah Kings Theory—suggests that the accounts in 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles describe three separate individuals named Ahaziah who ruled at different times and under different circumstances. By examining each reference, we see clear differences in their backgrounds, relationships, and the events surrounding their reigns and deaths. Here’s the breakdown of each Ahaziah.

1. Ahaziah in 2 Kings 1
The first Ahaziah appears in 2 Kings 1 as the son of Ahab and the king of Israel:
  • Description: This Ahaziah inherits the throne of Israel from his father, Ahab.
  • Actions: While ruling, he suffers a serious injury after falling through a lattice. Instead of seeking guidance from the God of Israel, he sends messengers to inquire of Baalzebub, the god of Ekron, about his recovery.
  • Death Event: Due to his injury and his idolatrous actions, he receives a prophecy from Elijah that he will not recover. He dies as predicted, ending his reign.
This Ahaziah is significant as the king of Israel who dies due to disobedience and idolatry, well before the other two Ahaziahs begin their reigns.


2. Ahaziah in 2 Kings 8:26-29
The second Ahaziah mentioned in 2 Kings 8 is distinct from the first and is a king of Judah with a unique familial relationship to Ahab’s house:
  • Description: This Ahaziah begins his reign at 22 years old. He is connected to the house of Ahab as a son-in-law through marriage, rather than by direct descent.
  • Actions: Aligning with the house of Ahab, he participates in a battle alongside Joram, king of Israel, against Hazael, king of Syria.
  • Death Event: After witnessing Joram’s death, Ahaziah attempts to flee but is pursued and killed by Jehu. He is buried in Jerusalem. Notably, there is no response from his mother, Athaliah, mentioned following his death.
This Ahaziah’s distinct age, role as a son-in-law to Ahab’s house, and context of his death set him apart from the Ahaziah in 2 Chronicles 22.


3. Ahaziah in 2 Chronicles 22:1-10
The third Ahaziah appears in 2 Chronicles 22, also as a king of Judah but under different circumstances:
  • Description: This Ahaziah is 42 years old when he begins to reign and is noted as the youngest son of Jehoram. Unlike the Ahaziah in 2 Kings 8, he has a direct maternal connection to Ahab’s lineage through his mother, Athaliah, the daughter (or granddaughter) of Omri.
  • Actions: Under the influence of Athaliah and her counselors, he follows in the idolatrous ways of Ahab’s family. Like the 22-year-old Ahaziah, he also joins forces with Joram against Hazael, showing a similar battle alliance but with different motivations and influences.
  • Death Event: He is killed by Jehu, but his death prompts a unique response: his mother, Athaliah, seizes control of the throne by executing potential heirs to the kingdom.
This Ahaziah’s older age, biological connection to Jehoram, and Athaliah’s takeover following his death differentiate him from the 22-year-old Ahaziah in 2 Kings.


Why the Three Ahaziah Kings Theory Works:
  1. Distinct Ages: Each Ahaziah’s age at the start of his reign is different:
    • The first Ahaziah’s age is unspecified but he dies early in 2 Kings 1.
    • The second Ahaziah is 22 years old when he begins to rule in 2 Kings 8.
    • The third Ahaziah is 42 years old in 2 Chronicles 22, starting his rule later than the others.
  2. Unique Family Relationships:
    • Ahaziah of Israel in 2 Kings 1 is the son of Ahab.
    • Ahaziah of Judah in 2 Kings 8 is described as a son-in-law to the house of Ahab, with connections by marriage.
    • Ahaziah of Judah in 2 Chronicles 22 is noted as the youngest son of Jehoram, with a maternal link to Ahab’s lineage through Athaliah.
  3. Separate Death Events and Responses:
    • Each Ahaziah meets a different fate, with distinct circumstances around each death:
      • The first Ahaziah dies from injuries and a divine judgment due to idolatry.
      • The second Ahaziah dies at Jehu’s hand after attempting to flee, with no response from his mother.
      • The third Ahaziah’s death triggers Athaliah’s violent response, seizing the throne of Judah.
  4. Shared Battles, Distinct Motivations:
    • Both the 22-year-old Ahaziah in 2 Kings 8 and the 42-year-old Ahaziah in 2 Chronicles 22 join Joram of Israel in a battle against Hazael, king of Syria. Despite this shared action, the two Ahaziahs have distinct motivations: the younger Ahaziah acts in alignment with his marital connection to Ahab’s family, while the older Ahaziah is heavily influenced by his mother, Athaliah, and her counselors.
  5. Biblical Pattern of Shared Names with Separate Identities:
    • The Bible includes multiple individuals with the same name but unique roles, which further supports this theory. For example:
      • James: In the New Testament, we find James, son of Zebedee (an apostle), James, son of Alphaeus (another apostle), and James, the brother of Jesus (a leader in the early church).
      • Herod: Various Herods appear in the Gospels and Acts, including Herod the Great (who ordered the massacre of infants), Herod Antipas (who executed John the Baptist), and Herod Agrippa I and II (who played roles during early Christianity).
      • Simon: Multiple Simons are mentioned, such as Simon Peter (one of Jesus’ closest disciples), Simon the Zealot (another disciple), Simon of Cyrene (who carried Jesus’ cross), and Simon the Pharisee (who hosted Jesus).
  6. These examples illustrate a pattern in Scripture where individuals with shared names hold distinct roles and stories. This precedent supports the plausibility of three separate Ahaziahs in 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles.


Conclusion

The Three Ahaziah Kings Theory provides a coherent solution to the supposed contradictions in 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles. By identifying these as three separate individuals, the differences in ages, family relations, shared battles with distinct motivations, and events surrounding their reigns and deaths are harmonized without assuming any error in the text. This theory not only respects the integrity of Scripture but also aligns with other instances of shared names in the Bible, presenting a plausible and logical explanation for the Ahaziah narratives across these books.



.....
Streeeeeeetch... *pop*

Not a chance. There are far too many matching details in both accounts that require, by all manner of evidence, that your second and third Ahaziah's are one and the same. There is no "third" Ahaziah. The KJV is in error here. The "explanations" are ridiculous. Were such a matter ever to come before a competent judge, the KJV case would be laughed out of court.

Actually, I found another error in the KJV while studying this...

2 Kings 8:25 In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign.

2 Kings 9:29 And in the eleventh year of Joram the son of Ahab began Ahaziah to reign over Judah.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,325
13,713
113
2. Ahaziah in 2 Kings 8:26-29
The second Ahaziah mentioned in 2 Kings 8 is distinct from the first and is a king of Judah with a unique familial relationship to Ahab’s house:
  • Description: This Ahaziah begins his reign at 22 years old. He is connected to the house of Ahab as a son-in-law through marriage, rather than by direct descent.
You made an error here. Verses 16-18 identify Jehoram, not Ahaziah, as the son-in-law of Ahab. That shoots down your theory quite thoroughly.

16 And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat being then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign.

17 Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem.

18 And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab: for the daughter of Ahab was his wife: and he did evil in the sight of the Lord.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,325
13,713
113
Firstly, a person's salvation walk can be affected if they lose trust in God's Word, especially if they come across the flawed approach of Textual Criticism, which falsely teaches that all Bibles contain errors, contrary to what Scripture says about the communicated Word of God.
Textual Criticism doesn't teach anything. It is a set of practices, not a teacher, preacher, or professor. Personification doesn't work when you're laying blame.

It is more likely that a person who is discouraged from studying outside certain narrow parameters will lose trust. I encourage you and every reader to do their own homework, and not to limit themselves to any particular sources.

For example, if someone believes there is an error in the Bible, as some mistakenly assert regarding the three Ahaziahs in 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles, it can contribute to doubt.
Given your error with regard to Ahaziah, you need to rethink this. As to "contributing to doubt", you and all KJV-only proponents do that by casting aspersions on other translations. Don't be a hypocrite!

Finding anomalies should lead to further study, not to doubt. If your trust is in the perfection of your translation, you have no hope. My trust is in the risen Lord Jesus, and I'm not shaken in the least when I find errors in a printed translation of Scripture. I know God is bigger than the Bible in my hands. I'm not sure that most KJV-onlyists can say that.

There is a valid, sound, and satisfying explanation for the difference between the two verses noting Ahaziah's age, but it is not any of the convoluted fantasies I've heard from KJV-onlyists. In fact, I have NEVER seen it cited by any KJV-only proponent. I suspect most of them don't even know it, because they use Bibles that have had the marginal notes deleted.
 
Nov 28, 2023
1,995
332
83
Which says....

"But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need
that any man should teach you".
1 John 2:27

You can not see the irony of what you are missing.


For who taught them that they need no man to teach them?

John! Who is man.

The anointing we have (if we are humble, and correctly abiding in 1 John 1:9) ... will teach us all we need to know from what we have been shown by those whom God gave us to teach us.

Yes! Without a real pastor teacher we will all be like dumb sheep.

For the anointing can not teach us unless we are first taught correctly what we need to think with.
The anointing will teach us what to believe, and not to believe, as we are being taught by teachers.
Not meaning that we are to teach ourselves.
Seems like you are just in Scripture denial. 1 John 2:27 is talking about how the Holy Spirit can teach believers. See verse 20.
"Bible believer"? Instead of using high-sounding words with insulting insinuations, you should just say "KJV-onlyists". At least that would be honest. Your premise, however, would remain fallacious.

Streeeeeeetch... *pop*

Not a chance. There are far too many matching details in both accounts that require, by all manner of evidence, that your second and third Ahaziah's are one and the same. There is no "third" Ahaziah. The KJV is in error here. The "explanations" are ridiculous. Were such a matter ever to come before a competent judge, the KJV case would be laughed out of court.

Actually, I found another error in the KJV while studying this...

2 Kings 8:25 In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign.

2 Kings 9:29 And in the eleventh year of Joram the son of Ahab began Ahaziah to reign over Judah.
There are differences as I pointed out. No use arguing if you are bent on seeing errors in the Bible.


....