The Error of KJV-Onlyism

Is our Lord limited to language? Is the English language too difficult for him?

- substantiate your claim biblically. Provide precept or principle that proves your argument. Clearly demonstrate that your conclusion is drawn from the Bible.
Does this prove they were not in the original? Your daydreaming is over. First, you need to produce the original.
Second, you don't even realize that almost all English versions are no longer italicized the word 'is' Just goes over the the Bible hub. Interestingly even online translators may come up with using the verb, these are undeniable facts!

Since you didn't respond about why there are italics in bibles, including the KJV, it's obvious that you don't understand why they're there.

BTW, the ORIGINALS are in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek. Now you know something.

If you actually knew anything about English Bible translations we could have a discussion. Since you obviously don't, there is no point.

You are clearly deluded! And your English is poor, so how can you even begin to understand your "perfect" translation???

Poor excuse!

You have no scripture reference while giving your conceited opinion.

"No evidences, I've found so far" should be "I haven't found any evidence so far". How can you claim to understand the King James Bible when you can't even write reasonably correct English???

I've wasted enough time trying to discuss the issue with you. But no more. You're now on "ignore", as I have better things to do with my time.

a) No, our Lord is not limited to language. He can show His power and teach us His truth in any number of ways.
b) Who does "Is the English language too difficult for him" refer to? If you're referring to God, that doesn't even deserve an answer. If you're referring to @fredoheaven, he clearly has trouble with the English language.

I don't have to "prove my claim" as I have explained the issue many times before. The KJV is NOT a perfect translation. (There is no such thing!)

I can't produce the original. Why? Because there is no such thing as "the original"! Do you really not know that???

The rest of your post doesn't deserve a reply. I am done trying to explain things to you! I have better things to do with my time that to discuss things with people who don't know what they're talking about.

Another proof of your nonsense! These two translations are different!!!

You admit that it is possible to have a holy and pure English translation.

No, I do not admit that. Just the opposite. Even though I have written about this before, consider these points...

1) There are no "originals"!!! There are only copies, and they differ from each other.
2) Even if there were perfect originals, direct translation from the ancient languages into English is impossible. There are too many differences in the three languages of the Bible sources in vocabulary, verb tenses, idioms, etc. to make a one-to-one translation possible.

All translations are interpretations! Once you understand that you will have gained some valuable knowledge.

I don't know if you are a KJV-only person, but if you are... which revision of the King James Bible is the perfect one?

So you don’t think it is possible for the Lord to have his words translated pure and holy into the English language.

Ho,ho, prouduced them, can you link me to see if these were originals as you claimed? Another none sense!

Why? Well, there are 101 Reasons for the KJB being the pure Word of God for today, and many of those reasons are based on the Bible.

As for your claim that the KJV has been modified:

If you are talking about intentional changes that affect meaning like the Modern Bibles, this would be a false claim. The printing process involving movable type was messy and it was not a technology that was perfect and led to printing errors. However, the handwritten master copy of the KJV would not have been affected by this, though. If you are hung up on the printed editions: Well, it is possible that God can communicate new information as we see in the story of Jeremiah when the king burned the scroll of Jeremiah.

It's only insanity to you because you have put up filters of protection in researching anything beyond your worldview.

It's not a game. Are you under the false illusion that certain Bibles cannot be corrupted?

Hebrews 11:1 says faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. God wants faith from us, and without faith, it is impossible to please God.

Why did God give perfect understanding to certain select prophets and apostles and He did not give it to anyone else?

I am assuming you mean KJV Bibles that have been translated into foreign languages. Yes, there have been a few of those. Are they error-filled? Well, we do not have all the answers and I don't think you do, either. But we do have enough knowledge to believe God did preserve His words perfectly for today. If not, then how could you trust which doctrines were true or false?

However, you have not really done this "scrutiny test" with us, though. You did not even look at my list of changed doctrines in Modern Bibles.

The Lord can do anything that He puts His mind to (obviously). What I am saying -- now pay attention -- is that there is no proof that the King James translation is the "pure and holy" word of God. I could claim, with just as much validity, that the NIV is the pure and holy word of God.

Now pay attention!!! God can use whatever means He chooses, including a donkey(!) to transmit His message. Most Bibles, with very few exceptions, contain God's pure message to humanity. Their form may be different, depending on which people are reading it, but they contain the same message. Get it? The message.

I hate to break it to you and others, but the King James Bible is just one of many translations, and it has been revised several times (as have most Bibles). So which version of the King James Bible is the pure word of God? And why aren't the other revisions the pure word of God?

The intent behind any translation is for the reader to understand God.

a) The Lord is not limited to language (obviously).
b) Of course the English is not too difficult for the Lord.

What is your point?

What is a "holy and pure English translation"?

Read post #2850. I am not going to repeat myself.

Do you worship a book or do you worship God?

Never heard that one before, 🤦. I magnify the word of God and I worship the Lord Jesus Christ. Can one truly worship the Lord without magnifying his word? God himself magnifies his word above his own name.

Psalm 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Well, that's not true. There actually is proof that the KJV is the "pure and holy" word of God.

#1. The 1611th mention of LORD (super-caps) is found in Deuteronomy 16:11. What is significant about this is that this verse says that we (the reader) are to rejoice in the place where God places His name. While this is referring to the Jewish temple, it is also noteworthy to point out that there is a symbiotic relationship between the Living Word (JESUS), and the Communicated Word (like Scripture) (See here). Jesus' body is referred to as a temple (John 2:21). So if Jesus is associated with the temple, then the Word of God (words of God, or the Communicated Word) would also be like a temple (See: Proverbs 18:10). In fact, the King James Bible is the first English Bible to distinguish between LORD (Jehovah - sacred name of God) vs. Lord (Adonai - master). All previous Textus Receptus Bibles never made this distinction before (properly reflecting the underlying original words) (See this video here by Brandon Peterson).

#2. If you were to add up the verse numbers down in a straight column for Luke 4:4, Matthew 4:4, and Deuteronomy 8:3 (See this example here), you would see that it adds up to a total of 16:11. This is significant because it is the only three verses that express the truth that man shall not live by bread alone but by every Word of God.

#3. In Acts 16:11, Paul is headed to a certain destination by boat. If you were to take a straight line and draw it passed his destination and keep going in a straight line from that same direction, it would end up in England where the King James Bible was made. In addition to that, the island that Paul stopped at along the way had a mountain on it. This mountain is named "Fengari" (which you can see in this article here). What is significant about this mountain is that it is 1611 meters high.

#4. Psalms 119 is close to the heart of the Bible. (Side Note: Psalms 103:1-2 are the two middle verses of the Bible (i.e. the center or heart of the Bible). Anyway, Psalms 119 talks about the Word of God (i.e., the Communicated Word of God, like Scripture). Psalms 119 has 176 verses. This is the mathematic equation 16 x 11 (i.e., 1611).

#5. Psalm 138:2 states, "For You have magnified Your word above all Your name." This verse is altered in Modern Bibles to destroy this truth (Which conveniently fits the theology of those who reject the idea of the importance and perfection of God's Word as KJV believers). (Side Note: KJV believers have been falsely slandered in that we worship the KJV when they are not able to fully grasp the importance of the teaching in Word in Psalms 138:2, and Psalms 119:140). Anyway, Psalms 138 (the chapter) has 1611 words.

This is from one of my pages in my 101 Reasons for the KJB:



This is something you are failing to do because you put several of us on ignore for no good reason, and you failed to address my significant points for the KJB (like the list of false doctrines taught in Modern Bibles that I provided to you in this thread).

This is true. However, what you are failing to understand is that many KJV believers (not all) will say that a person can be saved using a Modern Translation because the gospel message is still the same in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. The problem arises in using a Modern Bible can potentially lead a person into believing false doctrine or they can get tripped up into the world of Textual Criticism, whereby they could alter God's Word themselves (by making a translation), or endorse those who do make translations (Whereby it ignores the warning in Revelation 22:18-19).

Please show us in the Bible a good set of verses whereby God was not concerned about the details of His actual words (because they can be corrupted) but He was more concerned about the general message.

Sorry, Westcott and Hort's revision of the King James Bible does not count. The Revised Version is a lie. That was their first English translation based on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. It does not faithfully follow the Textus Receptus. So they lied. Yet, Textual Critics today follow them in some way (Trusting their two preferred manuscripts and their translation theories).

Pure Cambridge KJV edition (by A.W. Pollard) (circa. 1900) found at Biblehub.com or you can get at Amazon.
The words of the LORD have been purified seven times (Psalms 12:6), which would have been with the seven MAJOR KJB editions.

There was no revision. At least, not in God's eyes. The seven MAJOR KJB editions are updates to fix printing errors, and update the English, etcetera. There are no major revisions of the KJV.

Are the other six KJV editions the pure Word of God? Yes, they are. I believe God communicated advanced or additional meaning in the subtle differences between the 7 MAJOR KJB editions (Which was due to printing error, etc.).

This is not possible in all Bibles because select respected Modern Bibles teach is a created demi-god, when in reality Jesus is eternal, and uncreated.