Has anyone found secret messages in the bible?

  • 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.
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#1,561
Jun 30, 2015
25,606
13,861
113
#1,561
Bible_Highlighter said:
But many in your camp have made that claim and you don’t appear to not have any problem with it.
Click to expand...
Do you challenge every KJV-only proponent on every point they make? No. I'll address what I choose to address, same as you.

Bible_Highlighter said:
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.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you have overlooked Noah and Abraham (and many others). What Bible did they have? I assure you, it wasn't a KJV!

Bible_Highlighter said:
My point is that the manuscripts you mention are corruptions and therefore they are not even worthy of consideration of age.
Click to expand...
I haven't mentioned any specific manuscripts, so your point is empty.

Bible_Highlighter said:
Besides, age is not the determination of truth
Click to expand...
So stop pointing to it as any kind of validation for the KJV.

Bible_Highlighter said:
as Original Onyists believe.
Click to expand...
And stop broadbrushing everyone who disagrees with you as an "Originals Onlyist". If you don't accept the term "KJV-only" for yourself, what makes you think your invented term is appropriate for anyone else?

Bible_Highlighter said:
Their argument for Originals Onlyism is circular reasoning
Click to expand...
Quote any "Originals Onlyist" making an argument that is circular. You'll have to start by finding someone who claims that title for themselves first.
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#1,562
Jun 30, 2015
25,606
13,861
113
#1,562
Bible_Highlighter said:
If one believes in Textual Criticism, then they are going to buy into claims by Textual Critics and their assumptions. I don’t. I believe the Bible over the wisdom of men.
Click to expand...
Yet you hold to a translation that is the direct product of textual criticism and can't see your hypocrisy!
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#1,563
Jun 30, 2015
25,606
13,861
113
#1,563
Bible_Highlighter said:
Nothing is impossible for God. What some people see is all things done on a carnal or outward level, looking only for imperfections or error. But they are not taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture on how God is operating to preserve His words. They are not looking at the good fruit that the KJB produced and its great and positive influence throughout history. They do not recognize the dark origins of the Modern Bible movement. They are not looking for answers on this topic with the Bible, either. They are just trying to discern things with what they believe is Science.
Click to expand...
More silly broadbrushing and claims without evidence.

Get some integrity.
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#1,564
Jun 30, 2015
25,606
13,861
113
#1,564
Bible_Highlighter said:
You have given no evidence historically, biblically, textually, doctrinally, etcetera that your position on Originals Onlyism is better.
Click to expand...
I haven't claimed that "Originals Onlyism" is better. I have made no claim whatsoever about "Originals Onlyism", and I feel no obligation whatsoever to defend claims I have not made.

Perhaps you should stop asserting things that have no basis and start addressing things that people actually say.
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#1,566
Jun 30, 2015
25,606
13,861
113
#1,566
Bible_Highlighter said:
You have not brought forth any significant evidence to support your Originals Onlyism or Modern Textual Criticism.
Click to expand...
See my post 1564... then read it another ten or fifteen times until it sinks into your head.
 
Bible_Highlighter

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
#1,568
Nov 28, 2023
2,086
339
83
#1,568
Dino246 said:
I haven't claimed that "Originals Onlyism" is better. I have made no claim whatsoever about "Originals Onlyism", and I feel no obligation whatsoever to defend claims I have not made.

Perhaps you should stop asserting things that have no basis and start addressing things that people actually say.
Click to expand...
Uh, that’s not true. You said only the originals were inspired here.
 
Bible_Highlighter

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
#1,571
Nov 28, 2023
2,086
339
83
#1,571
Dino246 said:
Yet you hold to a translation that is the direct product of textual criticism and can't see your hypocrisy!
Click to expand...
Again, you are confusing Textual Criticism with Modern Textual Criticism.

Modern textual criticism is the heretical theory behind the modern Bible versions. It assumes that God has not precisely preserved the Scripture, but that it had to be recovered in modern times by textual critics. It produces uncertainty concerning the details of Scripture. A confident “thus saith the Lord” is replaced with “this reading has more support than that reading.” The congregation’s one Bible standard is replaced with a multiplicity of conflicting Bibles.

Source:
https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/a_testimony_against_modern_textual_criticism.php
 
Bible_Highlighter

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
#1,572
Nov 28, 2023
2,086
339
83
#1,572
NightTwister said:
Because you're conflating numbers clearly in the text with numbers only you can see by forcing things together.
Click to expand...
There is nothing to force. It’s revealed in the text itself. If what you say is true, then there would be no patterns. Again, how would you explain the name of Jesus (excluding anti-mentions) appearing 70 x 7 in the even books of the New Testament and also in the odd books of the New Testament? 70 x 7 is the amount of times Jesus told Peter to forgive. What are the odds of this even happening? If you know anything about statistical probabilities, you would be amazed by such a truth. But you think these numbers are in all books for some crazy reason. Well, if that is the case, you need to prove your case that the same amazing discoveries in the Bible are found exactly in the same equal fashion in other books. This is something I know you cannot do. But your fear of occult numerology is a convenient way of not dealing with this topic.
 
NightTwister

NightTwister

Well-known member
#1,574
Jul 5, 2023
2,122
805
113
65
Colorado, USA
#1,574
Bible_Highlighter said:
There is nothing to force. It’s revealed in the text itself. If what you say is true, then there would be no patterns. Again, how would you explain the name of Jesus (excluding anti-mentions) appearing 70 x 7 in the even books of the New Testament and also in the odd books of the New Testament? 70 x 7 is the amount of times Jesus told Peter to forgive. What are the odds of this even happening? If you know anything about statistical probabilities, you would be amazed by such a truth. But you think these numbers are in all books for some crazy reason. Well, if that is the case, you need to prove your case that the same amazing discoveries in the Bible are found exactly in the same equal fashion in other books. This is something I know you cannot do. But your fear of occult numerology is a convenient way of not dealing with this topic.
Click to expand...
No, I don't have any fear of that. I just don't agree with your gnosticism.
 
Nehemiah6

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
#1,580
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#1,580
Dino246 said:
Yet you hold to a translation that is the direct product of textual criticism and can't see your hypocrisy!
Click to expand...
Dino, if you are saying that the King James Bible is the product of textual criticism" that is incorrect.

As noted in Britannica, higher and lower (textual) criticism began in the 19th century: "Textual criticism, properly speaking, is an ancillary academic discipline designed to lay the foundations for the so-called higher criticism, which deals with questions of authenticity and attribution, of interpretation, and of literary and historical evaluation. This distinction between the lower and the higher branches of criticism was first made explicitly by the German biblical scholar J.G. Eichhorn; the first use of the term “textual criticism” in English dates from the middle of the 19th century. In practice the operations of textual and “higher” criticism cannot be rigidly differentiated: at the very outset of his work a critic, faced with variant forms of a text, inevitably employs stylistic and other criteria belonging to the “higher” branch. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.