KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH 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.
John146 said:
When one studies the Greek copies, there is still the problem of choosing the right words in language to understand them. Most Greek words have multiple meanings in a language. Which do you choose? It's then up to your own liking. I personally don't want to go there even if I were the top Greek scholar on the planet. Not when it comes to God's precious words. I must rely on His promise to preserve them. I do not trust in the KJV scholarship, but God's promise to preserve His holy, pure words. Why the KJV? I have not found it to be false, anywhere. All so called falsehoods can be answered soundly. Also, by looking at it's fruit. That's huge for me.
Click to expand...

Do you listen to yourself.. The KJV was translated using greek copies. Hebrew copies. And probably other copies, copies, Not to mention a lot of it was transdlated from LATIN interpretations of those same copies.

If the copies are flawed. Then the Bible interpreted from them are flawed.
 
trofimus said:
You are simply afraid of individual thinking and decision making, so it seems to me. When some word can have two meanings, you are afraid to decide for youself what is the best for context and want some guys form 17th century to tell you that.

And you know what? English words can have also many meanings. Now what?!
Click to expand...

Absolutely! Bingo! I tremble at the thought of getting messing with God's word. It's not something to take lightly.
 
eternally-gratefull said:
Do you listen to yourself.. The KJV was translated using greek copies. Hebrew copies. And probably other copies, copies, Not to mention a lot of it was transdlated from LATIN interpretations of those same copies.

If the copies are flawed. Then the Bible interpreted from them are flawed.
Click to expand...

Not if your trust is in God and His promise of preservation.
 
John146 said:
Absolutely! Bingo! I tremble at the thought of getting messing with God's word. It's not something to take lightly.
Click to expand...

So you take messing of others and must believe they did it perfectly.

Good choice. You would be a perfect roman catholic.

And answer me what you do when English word can have several meanings.
 
Last edited:
John146 said:
Not if your trust is in God and His promise of preservation.
Click to expand...

lol. Your all over the place man.. If God can keep his english word preserved. He can keep his greek and hebrew and Chaldean copies preserved.

Why can he do one but not the other?
 
trofimus said:
So you take messing of others and must believe they did it perfectly.

Good choice. You would be a perfect roman catholic.

And answer me what you do when English word can have several meanings.
Click to expand...

I allow Scripture to define itself, you know, comparing Scripture with Scripture. That's why it's so important to have the correct words to begin with. The KJV defines itself. Ever heard of the first mention principle? New versions cannot do this.
 
Lucy-Pevensie said:
You are demonstrating a distinct lack of trust in God. God is not limited to the language of 17th Century England.
Click to expand...

Oh, but I'm putting my 100% trust in God and His promise to preserve His words. Do you trust in God to have preserve His words for us? If so, where are they?
 
John146 said:
I allow Scripture to define itself, you know, comparing Scripture with Scripture. That's why it's so important to have the correct words to begin with. The KJV defines itself. Ever heard of the first mention principle? New versions cannot do this.
Click to expand...

I do not get your point.

First, you are against Greek because you do not know how to choose meaning of words having more of meanings.

Then, you say that its not problem in the KJV, because you can compare various places. (which is nonsense, because you would have to compare also the same context).

So.. what is the problem with Greek again? Why cant you compare various places there?
 
eternally-gratefull said:
lol. Your all over the place man.. If God can keep his english word preserved. He can keep his greek and hebrew and Chaldean copies preserved.

Why can he do one but not the other?
Click to expand...

They have always been preserved, but they were not put together completely into one language, in one book, until the KJV.
 
you are potentially allowing your doctrine to get corrupted by the agendas of modern translation committees.
Click to expand...

Yes.... the same way the people of the 17th century were relying on the agenda of THAT modern translation committee..

This is why we rely on the Holy Spirit to guide us in our reading of scripture. He will not lead us astray, if we rely on His guidance.
 
John146 said:
One major problem I have with some new versions when it comes to salvation is Romans 10:9. Most say the following:

ESV - because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Only one who is already saved can confess with their mouth Jesus is Lord. A lost person cannot confess with their mouth Jesus is Lord. They must first confess the Lord Jesus, that is the testimony concerning Him. One day all will confess Jesus is Lord but most will not be saved.
Click to expand...

Guess what? The KJV says exactly the same thing.... except for all the "thee" and "thou" stuff......

[SUP]9 [/SUP]That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Click to expand...

So just what "major problem" do you have with that scripture?
 
trofimus said:
I do not get your point.

First, you are against Greek because you do not know how to choose meaning of words having more of meanings.

Then, you say that its not problem in the KJV, because you can compare various places. (which is nonsense, because you would have to compare also the same context).

So.. what is the problem with Greek again? Why cant you compare various places there?
Click to expand...

No problem with the Greek, but why would I mess with the Greek when I believe God has preserved His words perfectly in English in the KJV?
 
John146 said:
No problem with the Greek, but why would I mess with the Greek when I believe God has preserved His words perfectly in English in the KJV?
Click to expand...

So you realize that the reason "I do not know which meaning I should choose" is invalid?
 
hornetguy said:
Guess what? The KJV says exactly the same thing.... except for all the "thee" and "thou" stuff......



So just what "major problem" do you have with that scripture?
Click to expand...

I have no problem with Romans 10:9 as stated in the KJV, but there is a huge difference in the new versions.
 
hornetguy said:
I'd sound more like a cross between Kris Kristofferson and Tom Waits. :cool:

Used to sound just like Neil Diamond....... in the shower, at least.
Click to expand...
I make Janis Joplin sound like Celine Deon in comparison. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back