Has anyone found secret messages in the bible?

By practice, the KJV being an english translation. It is flawed. With the flaw of the english language.

Not to mention it also has other errors..

But when you worship it. You will take it as gospel truth, and miss out on the deeper meaning of the word,
[/QUOTE]

But Revelation 13:18 tells us to count a particular number and it ascribes a particular message or meaning to it. If it was wrong to count a number and gain a particular meaning, then Revelation 13:18 would be wrong in telling us to count this number and realize that it has a meaning as told to us.

Did Moses make preposterous claims about the tablets themselves? Not at all! He pointed people to the LORD and the truth of His word.

The KJV did not "cause" great revivals. That's ridiculous. The Holy Spirit "caused" the revivals. That you believe the KJV caused them supports the accusation that you worship the translation, not the Lord behind the words.

That's a fallacious appeal. That the KJV existed for a couple of centuries before W&H is completely irrelevant. If you truly believed that age was a valid qualification, you would immediately ditch your KJV in favour of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the LXX, or Jerome's Vulgate.

Exactly. It's in the plain text vs. trying to hunt for numbers that aren't.

In order to determine it is flawed, you would have to either possess the originals to compare them to or you would have to point out something that cannot be reconciled in the fact that it violates basic morality and or destroys good doctrine. The thing is that I have already listed how Modern Bibles have corrupt doctrines within them in this thread.

Did you even read the verses I posted in reference to God’s Word?
It seems like the point escaped you, friend.

I have greek reprints. i have the greek language, and I see the flaw of how some greek words have no English equivalent. Or one english word can be used to interpret multiple greek words.

I would not trust any english bible


God did not create an english Bible.

men translated it, with the flaws of the language and with their own flaws.

The only autographs that are inspired was the origional. As you said, we do nto have them anymore, so anything we read is a flawed copy or translation.

But Gods word still gets out

Are you saying that a translation cannot be the inspired word of God?

This is an illogical argument. Nobody is claiming the paper on the Bible is something special. Obviously it is the words on the page that is perfect and preserved. So my point still stands. If Moses carried the perfect words of God in his hands, and he did, then you would have to falsely claim that he worshipped the words of God because he simply carried a perfect words of God.

I am not suggesting it was the Bible alone without the Spirit. Also, the individual people have to be cooperative, as well. But God knows the end from the beginning and He can place whomever He likes into whatever time and place He so chooses. But the point here is that God’s words were instrumental as a part of people coming to the faith. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). It’s why preachers are to preach.

“…and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?” (Romans 10:14).

But the Dead Sea scrolls did not have any influence and they came way later. They were discovered between 1946 to 1956.
The LXX is a product of Origen who viewed Scripture allegorically. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate is a product of the Catholic Church was from a completely different line of manuscripts than the KJV. The equivalent of the Vulgate today is the Douay-Rheims. The KJV Translators actually spoke negatively of this translation in their preface (seeing the full version of it came out a year prior - 1610).

Which is why all the claims you make about the modern versions "removing" things are invalid, because your standard is the KJV, not the original-language texts. Speaking in terms of logical argumentation, as long as you hold to the KJV as your standard and compare other translations to it, you actually have no argument, because with equal validity I can hold up any modern translation, compare the KJV to it, and claim that the KJV is inferior on some point (which I can do). In order for your position to be valid, you must have an objective standard other than the KJV, as Job might have said, "One which can lay its hand on them both".

Basic morality or good doctrine... based on what, exactly? Your answer will be "the word of God" which you hold to be the KJV... making your argument circular and therefore invalid.

No, you haven't. You've pointed out things that you find objectionable, or grossly misinterpret to suit your position, and as such you are just as guilty of "picking and choosing" as you accuse others.

In order to do this, one has to have the truth of the word of God.

Every new version has the KJV as its standard. Tell me why do the new versions remove verses but keep the same verse count as the KJV?

Example: Matthew 18 verse 11. The new versions remove verse 11, but instead of having a verse 11, they skip it and go onto verse 12.

No, because I'm not the one making the claim.

And still you don't see how silly your statement was. Think it through.


Miss the point much?

Which we do in any number of modern translations.

Which Greek manuscripts? Not all of them say the same thing.
Also, you would have to be able to speak, read, and write both Modern Greek, and Kione Greek fluently to truly know the differences, and spot to see which ones are superior. But I can just read the verses in English from the 47 translators who know the original languages far better than you and see the doctrinal problems in Modern Bibles for myself. There are many doctrinal problems that are heretical.

Sure He did. It’s called the King James Bible and it is the book of the Lord as mentioned in Isaiah 34:16.

See this video here on the Book of the Lord and how it ties in with verses from Revelation.


If God did not create a perfect Bible in the world language of our day, then we could not know which words were true or false.

Then we could not know which words were true or false and we could not trust God’s word and we would have to rely on our own infallible opinions that all differ from each other on what God said (Which would be a mess or confusion).

But no Scripture says only the originals were inspired. That is in the Book of Second Opinions.

After the scholars are done butchering His Word you mean.
Again, if the Bible has errors, then who gets to decide what is true or false?
Do folks have a truth detector machine?

All truth? Impossible, since the versions contain different truths. Let me guess, "Only the important truth matters."

Great claims require great evidence. Show the evidence to support your claim.

Consistency. That's the only reason. If one person is looking for verse 3 and another has to look for verse 5 because that's the way the KJV had it, it would cause unnecessary confusion. It does not lend any credence to the accuracy of the KJV. The chapter and verse divisions predate the KJV.

No, new versions do not "remove" anything; that's a reification fallacy. The verse simply is not included.

Consistency with the KJV.

Multiple versions already accomplish this.

But many in your camp have made that claim and you don’t appear to not have any problem with it.
In fact, you appeared to try and come to their defense.
But again, they are falsely accusing without realizing Moses carried the perfect set of God’s words.
This means they would also have to falsely accuse Moses of worshiping God’s words because he no doubt believed he carried the perfect words of God on those two tablets because they were written with the finger of God.

No. You are the one who is not getting it. While one does need the Spirit, they also need God’s Word to be saved, too. You cannot have faith without the Bible.

My point is that the manuscripts you mention are corruptions and therefore they are not even worthy of consideration of age.
Besides, age is not the determination of truth as Original Onyists believe. Their argument for Originals Onlyism is circular reasoning and there is no good evidence for such a position, especially when there are far better evidences supporting the KJV as the Word of God, and there are evidences showing the corruption in the Modern Translation movement.

Um, no. If the KJV were God's direct creation, then it would not contain blatant internal contradictions, which it does. There would be no "conjectural emendations" in Revelation because Erasmus didn't have a complete copy, which there are. The commandment not to commit murder would not be rendered differently in two places in the NT, which it is.

I already addressed your error on this; perhaps you are unable to learn?

Or perhaps you are so deluded that you think Isaiah's words were specifically about the KJV translation?