The Error of KJV-Onlyism

WHAT are you talking about??? Messiah is a Hebrew word that means anointed or Christ in the New Testament. It refers to the expected king and deliverer of the Hebrews, the Savior, and the Messianic hope of the Old Testament.

Basically, you say Aaron was not anointed.
[Exodus 28:41 NKJV] 41 "So you shall put them on Aaron your brother and on his sons with him. You shall anoint them, consecrate them, and sanctify them, that they may minister to Me as priests.

It refers to kings and priests who were anointed with embalming fluid.

You clearly have a personal agenda that avoids dealing with reality. You are intent on proving that one or two words translated differently between NIV versions means something. It doesn't!

Consider these two obvious points...
a) Which source documents were used?
b) What are the Greek words and what do they mean in context?

When you have even a basic understanding of the art/science of translating ancient languages into modern English and are willing to drop your obvious bias, perhaps there will be something to discuss.

Where are you getting your (incorrect) information?

Oil is a picture of the Spirit. The true anointing is with the Spirit. Any OT anointing pointed to Christ who God Himself anointed at His baptism, and gave Him the Spirit without measure.

The bible, and there is also the fact where Jesus was embalmed in anointing "oil" after he died.

Okay, I do understand you but it seems an online translators like Microsoft Bing and Pons do far better than the NIV of yours in this particular passage.

Okay, to be more precise, where exactly in the Bible are you getting your information from?

I repeat, you clearly have a personal agenda that avoids dealing with reality. You are intent on proving that one or two words translated differently between NIV versions means something. It doesn't!

Why are you trying to prove that the difference of a few words between the NIV versions means anything? => All Bible translations have been modified over time <= It is obvious that you are attacking the latest version of the NIV for a particular reason. => What is that reason <=

Aaron was never regarded as a messiah, being only anointed with oil. So you are really confused and should stop posting nonsense.

Anointed is the definition of a messiah in Judaism. The verb and noun are same root.

There is no confusion other than your cynicism.

It may or may not been anointing "oil", but it was embalming "oil". It was flammable.

But NOT applicable to Aaron or any other person you named. Strictly applicable to Jesus of Nazareth, who is rejected by Judaism.

Check post#5254867 above. It is not strictly applicable to Jesus, but the irony is that Saul was one, but Jesus supposedly isn't.

[1 Samuel 15:1, 17 NKJV] 1 Samuel also said to Saul, "The LORD sent me to anoint you king over His people, over Israel. Now therefore, heed the voice of the words of the LORD. ... 17 So Samuel said, "When you [were] little in your own eyes, [were] you not head of the tribes of Israel? And did not the LORD anoint you king over Israel?

Well, you have put me on ignore for no real good reason. I have attempted to show you false doctrines in Modern Bibles, but you did not appear to be willing to see such a list or verses that were changed for the worse in Modern Bibles. So who is the one who is avoiding reality?

It does actually. Just because you say it does not mean anything without you giving us a good reason as to why you are right.
The point of the different NIV editions making changes for the worse is a pattern we see in other Modern Bibles. Also, the Rationalistic translation philosophy and corrupt manuscripts show that the problems in Modern Bibles today are simply a result of a partly bad tree, to begin with. Corrupt doctrines are simply a result of the tree (or origin of the Modern Bible Movement) as being partially corrupt.

Because God is not the author of confusion.

Your failing to take under consideration that any differences between the KJV editions is a result of printing errors, etcetera. Back in the day before they perfected the printing technology, there was going to be errors in larger printed books. It was just a reality of the times. Printing errors was common when they used movable type set for printing. It was not until the Pure Cambridge Edition (circa 1900) that they were to use a more perfect printing process.

Today, Modern Bibles do not have such an excuse. They make intentional changes to the text as they see fit.

Again, these types of false claims have been refuted. Nowhere does the Bible teach that if you believe that His Word is preserved and perfect it equals idolatry. The Bible itself teaches that the words of the Lord are pure words, and they shall last forever (Psalms 12:6-7) (1 Peter 1:23). Jesus said Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away (Matthew 24:35). As I said before in this thread, Moses carried the two stone tablets that had the very words of God on them. These were perfect words because they were written directly by God Himself. Do you think Moses was into idolatry because he believed these words were perfect? Surely not. Also, we can reverence God's Words according to the Bible. Psalms 119:140 says, "Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it." Do you love God's words because they are very pure? I don't think so. You hold to the unbiblical view that God's word has errors in them.

And you say this without a shred of evidence. You say we (KJV believers) have come up with twisted facts to justify our opinion, but you have not really discounted such facts. Your just keep giving us your opinion rather than solid good reasons. As I said before, you would not even look at my list of reasons that shows changed doctrines in Modern Bibles.

And you have turned the Bible we have today into a work of man and not as the preserved words of God. So you have to become the authority ultimately in deciding what God said and did not say. Most King James Bible believers hold to the view that the Bible (KJV) are the expressed thoughts or mind of God. They believe that God who is a spirit being is to be worshiped. But they also know that Scripture says that His words are very pure and therefore we love those words (Psalms 119:140). We do not think the Bible is God, but we do believe that the Bible reflects His mind and His desires for our lives. God wants us to live by every word of God. But you don't appear to believe that because you think that God's words have been corrupted. You are in the camp of Bible correctors. We are simply just Bible believers. That is the major difference between us here.

Does anyone care to discuss the subject OP: The Error of KJV-Onlyism? I don't see how anointing has anything to do with this.

1 John 2:27
"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."

What may surprise folks is that the Fundamentalist's foundation to fight liberalism in England and Germany was based on rocky ground, to begin with back in 1878 (See this article here). The Fundamental's goal to fight Liberalism declared a false belief that only the originals are inspired. Fundamentals believe double inspiration is heresy. Today, many Fundamentals are against simple common men who just simply believe the King James Bible is the perfect Word of God. The Fundamentalist today attacks the pure Word of God and those who believe in it. These Fundamentalists do not currently have the Anointing of the Holy Spirit to spiritually see that “Double Inspiration” took place when God told Jeremiah to write out another roll (Scroll) to replace the one that was destroyed (with him being told to add many like words to that copy). Job 38:2 says that the inspiration of the Almighty gives man understanding. This is how Scripture is given by inspiration of God. This is how we can declare that the words are inspired.