KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES

  • 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.
trofimus said:
But Christ is not just some knowledge in you which you have been taught or which you read. He is a person.

So if you are a real Christian, He is in you as He is in others.
Click to expand...
There are two Christs in all of us who are saved. The Spirit of Christ which is the same in all of us, I think this is where our new nature comes from. And then there is the Christ in our minds, and yes that Christ is in us too.

Just to be clear I'm not saying in any way shape or form that people who read other versions are not saved or don't have the Spirit of Christ indwelling them. All I'm saying is that the Christ that we belief in is based solely one the words we read and the things we have been taught. If those words are corrupt then the Christ in our minds will be corrupt, not the Spirit of Christ that indwells all believers but the Chirst in our minds.
 
KJV1611 said:
There are two Christs in all of us who are saved. The Spirit of Christ which is the same in all of us, I think this is where our new nature comes from. And then there is the Christ in our minds, and yes that Christ is in us too.

Just to be clear I'm not saying in any way shape or form that people who read other versions are not saved or don't have the Spirit of Christ indwelling them. All I'm saying is that the Christ that we belief in is based solely one the words we read and the things we have been taught. If those words are corrupt then the Christ in our minds will be corrupt, not the Spirit of Christ that indwells all believers but the Chirst in our minds.
Click to expand...

In such a case its not a different Christ, but simply imperfect knowledge of His attributes in our brains... and I think we all have some pitfalls regarding it.
 
Last edited:
trofimus said:
In that case its not a different Christ, but simply imperfect knowledge of His attributes in our brains... and I think we all have some pitfalls regarding it.
Click to expand...
Whether you agree or not, the Christ in your head is IN YOU. :)
 
KJV1611 said:
Sure no problem. Everbody has a view of Christ based on what we've been taught and read.
Click to expand...

Agreed. We can only understand what we have been taught and what has been revealed to us by the Holy Spirit.

KJV1611 said:
That is the Christ in them. The Christ in me IS NOT the same Christ that's in someone who came to understand Christ a different way than I did.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. Christ is not limited to our understanding of Him. As Trofimus wrote, Christ is a Person.

Don't get me wrong; I do understand what you're saying. Our experience of Christ, how we interact with Him and even how we welcome His work in our lives could be different based on our understanding of Him. Look at it this way though; your son has a "picture" of you; that is his "reality". Your wife (assuming you're married) has a different "picture" of you. Your neighbour has yet another "picture" of you. There are some overlaps, and hopefully many distinctions. Does that mean there are many different "yous"? No, of course not.

In the same way, there is one Christ Jesus, not many. There are different ideas about Him, some of which are not true, but that doesn't mean the Christ in you is actually different than the Christ in me. It is our perception of Him which may differ.
 
KJV1611 said:
Whether you agree or not, the Christ in your head is IN YOU. :)
Click to expand...

This seems to deny that Christ is an objective separate Person. Our thoughts about Him may be true of Him... or not, but they are not Him.

The indwelling Christ in a believer is not merely the believer's perception, thoughts, education, or experience.
 
Dino246 said:
Agreed. We can only understand what we have been taught and what has been revealed to us by the Holy Spirit.



I completely disagree. Christ is not limited to our understanding of Him. As Trofimus wrote, Christ is a Person. In Galations 3 the bible says that these have come to faith in Christ and have the Spirit within them. Maybe you can explain how believers that already have Christ in them some how need to get that same Christ birthed in them... the only way I can see that being possible is that Paul is talking about the Christ in their minds.

Don't get me wrong; I do understand what you're saying. Our experience of Christ, how we interact with Him and even how we welcome His work in our lives could be different based on our understanding of Him. Look at it this way though; your son has a "picture" of you; that is his "reality". Your wife (assuming you're married) has a different "picture" of you. Your neighbour has yet another "picture" of you. There are some overlaps, and hopefully many distinctions. Does that mean there are many different "yous"? No, of course not.

In the same way, there is one Christ Jesus, not many. There are different ideas about Him, some of which are not true, but that doesn't mean the Christ in you is actually different than the Christ in me. It is our perception of Him which may differ.
Click to expand...
In Galatians what do you think Paul is travailing to give to birth, the literal Spirit of Christ that indwells all believers or the Christ in their minds?

Galatians 4:19 King James Version (KJV)

19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

Edit: I had typed more comments before those but they disappeared lol.
 
Dino246 said:
This seems to deny that Christ is an objective separate Person. Our thoughts about Him may be true of Him... or not, but they are not Him.

The indwelling Christ in a believer is not merely the believer's perception, thoughts, education, or experience.
Click to expand...
I don't deny that Christ is an objective person that never changes... on this I surely agree.
 
For those of you that understand Romans 11:26 here's an example of what's going on in Galatians, the same type of semi deceptive langauge is being used. As with Galatians 4, if you don't read Romans 11:26 for EXACTLY what it say's, you will believe that all of flesh Israel will be saved.

[h=1]Romans 11:26 King James Version (KJV)[/h][FONT=&quot]26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:[/FONT]
 
KJV1611 said:
In Galatians what do you think Paul is travailing to give to birth, the literal Spirit of Christ that indwells all believers or the Christ in their minds?

Galatians 4:19 King James Version (KJV)

19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

Edit: I had typed more comments before those but they disappeared lol.
Click to expand...

Neither; I believe that verse is talking about Christ being formed in them in a figurative sense, not a literal sense; formation as in correct thinking about Him and what He has accomplished, and what is required of them as a result. It's more than "Christ in their minds" though it could be grossly simplified to this statement. It encompasses conformity to Christ... Christlikeness in thought, word and deed. There is truth in the statement, "until Christ be formed in you" but to take it in the strictest literal sense and exclude all other senses is, in my opinion, incorrect.
 
Dino246 said:
Neither; I believe that verse is talking about Christ being formed in them in a figurative sense, not a literal sense; formation as in correct thinking about Him and what He has accomplished, and what is required of them as a result. It's more than "Christ in their minds" though it could be grossly simplified to this statement. It encompasses conformity to Christ... Christlikeness in thought, word and deed. There is truth in the statement, "until Christ be formed in you" but to take it in the strictest literal sense and exclude all other senses is, in my opinion, incorrect.
Click to expand...
I agree with you.... I'm not as good at communicating my thoughts as you are but that's what I've been saying all along. This verse has nothing to do with salvation and the Spirit of Christ coming into the beleiver. Paul is trying to birth Christ's likeness in them and that's done by the incorruptible word of God and that's what being BORN AGAIN is - forming us into the image of Christ.
 
KJV1611 said:
I agree with you.... I'm not as good at communicating my thoughts as you are but that's what I've been saying all along. This verse has nothing to do with salvation and the Spirit of Christ coming into the beleiver. Paul is trying to birth Christ's likeness in them and that's done by the incorruptible word of God and that's what being BORN AGAIN is - forming us into the image of Christ.
Click to expand...

no one is a perfect communicator but God, it is in those times when we all can work on patience understanding and reading between the lines, I to am not great communicator of thoughts I know the feeling for sure.
 
KJV1611 said:
Sure no problem. Everbody has a view of Christ based on what we've been taught and read. That is the Christ in them. The Christ in me IS NOT the same Christ that's in someone who came to understand Christ a different way than I did.
Click to expand...
Are you calling me the Antichrist?

[video=youtube;WxB1gB6K-2A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxB1gB6K-2A[/video]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Laish
Lucy-Pevensie said:
Introduction to the Translators' Preface

At a conference with church authorities in 1604, the newly appointed King James I ordered a new, uniform translation of the Bible into English. The translators were allowed to use previous translations at their liking, such as Tyndale's, Matthew's and the Geneva Bible. The Preface contains much information on the considerations the translators had to make to accomplish their task. They also defend the idea of translating the holy text into 'vulgar' English.
There were 47 translators, who worked in 6 teams in Westminster, Cambridge and Oxford. It took 4 years to produce the first, preliminary translation, and nine more months for review and revision. The first edition was published in 1611. In most later editions the preface was not included.





"we do not deny — nay, we affirm and avow — that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the king's speech, which he uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the king's speech,"


Preface to the King James Version 1611, Part 9 of 10
Click to expand...

KJV1611 said:
With all due respect, I don't think you understand what inspiration means. Men aren't "special" because God spoke through them or influenced their actions. There's nothing special about any of the bible writers nor of the KJV translators. All of them were just normal men whom God used to get his will done... everything they did in their lives most certainly wasn't inspired.

And yes the KJV translators were talking about PAST bibles. They were not talking about every book past, present and future that slaps Holy Bible on the cover.

"we affirm and avow — that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God."
Click to expand...

The words you highlighted in red do NOT restrict themselves to the past! On the contrary they apply to all translations present past and future; even unseen.

If you claim that a book is inspired then it must be inspired from cover to cover. God doesn't inspire parts of a book and then appoint you to determine for everyone which parts are inspired and which are not.

If scripture reveals that certain words person spoke were inspired then only those words are inspired.
 
KJV1611 said:
For those of you that understand Romans 11:26 here's an example of what's going on in Galatians, the same type of semi deceptive langauge is being used. As with Galatians 4, if you don't read Romans 11:26 for EXACTLY what it say's, you will believe that all of flesh Israel will be saved.

Romans 11:26 King James Version (KJV)

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Click to expand...

here is that NHEB

not to shabby I think


New Heart English Bible
and so all Israel will be saved. Even as it is written, "There will come out of Zion the Deliverer, and he will turn away ungodliness from Jacob.
 
LPT said:
here is that NHEB

not to shabby I think


New Heart English Bible
and so all Israel will be saved. Even as it is written, "There will come out of Zion the Deliverer, and he will turn away ungodliness from Jacob.
Click to expand...

The only problem I see is that they missed the number 9 pattern by using Zion instead of Sion. I think Mount Zion/Sion represents heavenly Jerusalem the MOTHER (fruit bearing) of us all.... Sion is found exactly 9 times in the KJV. :)

Other than that I think they nailed it.
 
MarcR said:
The words you highlighted in red do NOT restrict themselves to the past! On the contrary they apply to all translations present past and future; even unseen.

If you claim that a book is inspired then it must be inspired from cover to cover. God doesn't inspire parts of a book and then appoint you to determine for everyone which parts are inspired and which are not.

If scripture reveals that certain words person spoke were inspired then only those words are inspired.
Click to expand...
I wonder why they didn't say "shall contain the word of God, nay, shall be the word of God". It all seems past tense to me. :)
 
SparkleEyes said:
King James version is fine if you are interested in only reading a bible that has not been updated based on the: Dead Sea Scrolls and many many other documents we have found since the 1600s!!
Click to expand...


S...,

Are you trying to suggest that G-d kept some guidance from us until ...later? What significant NEW guidance are you referring to?
 
KJV1611 said:
The only problem I see is that they missed the number 9 pattern by using Zion instead of Sion. I think Mount Zion/Sion represents heavenly Jerusalem the MOTHER (fruit bearing) of us all.... Sion is found exactly 9 times in the KJV. :)

Other than that I think they nailed it.
Click to expand...

huh your right, I'm still reading it haven't fully accepted it yet lol, thus good point, here is somethings a found about it.

Sion is mount Hermon: Deuteronomy 4:48, having three summits.
Zion is the city of David: 2Samuel 5:7; So then Sion is not Zion. and visvarsa
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back