This is silly. According to this statement, this would mean that no Christians who trusted the KJV existed in English-speaking countries until Westcott and Hort showed up.
So what authority do you speak of here?
Do you believe you are speaking on God's behalf?
Is God giving you a vision or a dream to say this?
Is it just your thoughts? Remember, God's thoughts are not our thoughts.
....
….
Perhaps Eostre is a false friendThis is an example where pagan culture steals a word from the Bible and makes it their own. You have been conditioned by your pagan culture repeatedly like brainwashing to see it that way. But if you look at older dictionaries, you will then begin to realize things are not what they appear to be (back at a certain point in time in the past). The meaning of words can change with the passage of time.
....
....
No, I don’t think that”s in the wrong thread.![]()
Oops. Wrong thread, ...sorry.
![]()
Oops. Wrong thread, ...sorry.
As doctrine does not exist outside of exegesis and interpretation, your assertion is incoherent.There are over 50 plus doctrinal changes in Modern Bibles that are for the worse, and not for the better.
Perhaps Eostre is a false friend
As doctrine does not exist outside of exegesis and interpretation, your assertion is incoherent.
There may be quite a few differences in wording between the KJV and a particular modern translation, but given that few modern versions are actually modified KJV translations, they aren’t “changes”.
You said:You chirp about exact words being necessary in Scripture but you don’t care to use precise words in your arguments… resulting in arguments that are easily refuted or dismissed. Another KjV-only advocate does the same thing.
is your trust in Christ or in kjv?
As doctrine does not exist outside of exegesis and interpretation, your assertion is incoherent.
There may be quite a few differences in wording between the KJV and a particular modern translation, but given that few modern versions are actually modified KJV translations, they aren’t “changes”.
You chirp about exact words being necessary in Scripture but you don’t care to use precise words in your arguments… resulting in arguments that are easily refuted or dismissed. Another KjV-only advocate does the same thing.
Gnats in your food make it imperfect, unsuitable for eating. Wrong words in the KJV make it imperfect, unsuitable for trusting.
I've heard that to understand difficult verses of the Bible or to have deeper meaning of any verse, requires guidance of the Holy Spirit. Any thoughts about this?
No, they are not. Modern Bibles teach false doctrines in over 50 plus places.
SO provide a list. That a certain denominational theology disagrees with the bible doesn't mean SPIT. I don't know of any "False doctrines from Bible translations, but hundreds from man's / denominational Theology.
Paul didn't worry about that religious "Background noise". He presented Jesus, and Him Crucified, and didn't bother with "Theological arguments" until he was with people who KNEW GOD"S WORD, and had the indwelling Holy Spirit to keep things accurate.
That's not true. Paul talked about a wide variety of important spiritual topics in NT Scripture.
I didn’t “dismiss” anything. I said your statement is incoherent.You did not even see all 50 of them, and you are dismissing them out of hand. How very Democratic Liberal Left of you.
Wrong and misleading. “Removed” is completely the wrong concept here. One can only “remove” something that was present. The words, phrases and verses that appear in the KJV but not in “modern translations” have been examined and determined to be later additions to the text rather than original. The translators left out what didn’t belong.Again, you are selling a false narrative. 1 John 5:7 is removed in Modern Bibles,, and there are other words and verses removed.
As poetic as the KJV may sound, the English language has changed drastically in 400 years.Right, I believe the Holy Spirit will guide an English-speaking Christian to use the KJV because He will point out the corruptions in Modern Bibles that the KJV exposes. See, the KJV is like magnifying glass that exposes the errors of the Modern Bibles. Scripture (the KJV) is inspired by the Holy Spirit. Proof? Just check out this video here:
Note: I do not believe the English supersedes the KJV in the sense that it replaces the original languages, but I do see how God can convey things to us in English that may not be possible in the original languages. Granted, the essence or heart of the meaning is there in the original languages with the KJV.
I believe the Hebrew, and Greek are very important to study for deeper meaning of what is behind the English words of the KJV (Which are still correct words in English).
....
....
You have already proven yourself to be gaslighting us by your inability to reason with what you were shown so far...Again, such ad hominem attacks really does not mean anything. Show me evidence your belief has any kind of backing in the Bible or has superior doctrine to the KJV. Make me a believer in Textual Criticism. How is a shape shifting text superior than a settled text? Insults are not becoming of the saints. That is what the Democrats do (Seeing they have no real policies to offer Americans that will truly benefit them).
....
I didn’t “dismiss” anything. I said your statement is incoherent.
Wrong and misleading. “Removed” is completely the wrong concept here. One can only “remove” something that was present. The words, phrases and verses that appear in the KJV but not in “modern translations” have been examined and determined to be later additions to the text rather than original. The translators left out what didn’t belong.
Based on German Rationalism. There is no special spiritual consideration taken into account. No prayer, no fasting, and no care that there really will ever be a settled text at any point. The committee of Modern scholars is built upon others like Catholics and Unitarians, as well. Is that who you want to translate your Bible? What about all the Catholic ideas in your texts? You probably have no clue about this. Catholic ideas have progressively grown in number since the Revised Version. Do you even care to know if I showed you? That is why I cannot take you seriously.
It is unknown how many exact unique manuscripts in total that Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza, had combined. We also do not know the exact number of manuscripts the KJV translators used, either. The 1666 London fire did not help with that, I am sure. While not always an exact match, the KJV does align the best with the majority of Greek manuscripts in existence (i.e., the 5,800 Byzantine Greek manuscripts). The Alexandrian texts that the Nestle and Aland are based upon make up the minority of manuscript witnesses.
....