-
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.
The original KJV included what is called the Apocrypha. I do not read that part much, but I do read the Word in various versions and in several languages, and I know this. It is not absolutely necessary to read any of them because God is able to teach the truth via whatever version He decides. Once the Holy Spirit has entered into a person who comes to Jesus Christ, it is impossible to not want to know as much about Him as God will allow, thus we do read. It is the Spirit that gives life, the written words alone are death. Isn't it wonderful that our Father cares for us so much as to teach us each? Praise God always, in Jesus Christ's name, amen.
* Most Bible believing churches cite the authority of the scriptures -- IN THEIR ORIGINAL
LANGUAGES.
* The concept of King James Only was to assert that other translations are paraphrases
or insert or remove word meanings from their original intent.
* Personally, I use several versions of the Bible in English, simply because I am lazy and it
is easy for me to pick out wording differences in English, then go to the Original Language
from there.
* The Tyndale and Geneva Bibles had many additional footnotes and margin notes for the
reason that the state was trying to use "preaching only" techniques and much of the
deeper meanings of scripture were put aside for the benefit of the State/Government
agenda. This is also somewhat true with the King James Bible. We agree also that word
meanings change over time, and in the 400 years since the original release of the King
James, words may not mean to us today, what they did to a reader at that time.
* Relative to the Apocrypha, again, most Bible believing churches affirm the validity of
the historical nature of the Apocrypha, but less so the Doctrinal aspects. Indeed, some of
the practices and behaviors revealed in the Apocrypha are so abhorrent that their
inclusion in the sacred and doctrinal books of scripture was and is considered a danger for
the casual, laity-general reader. Some of the apocryphal books may also lean to a
gnostic or worldly wisdom.
LANGUAGES.
* The concept of King James Only was to assert that other translations are paraphrases
or insert or remove word meanings from their original intent.
* Personally, I use several versions of the Bible in English, simply because I am lazy and it
is easy for me to pick out wording differences in English, then go to the Original Language
from there.
* The Tyndale and Geneva Bibles had many additional footnotes and margin notes for the
reason that the state was trying to use "preaching only" techniques and much of the
deeper meanings of scripture were put aside for the benefit of the State/Government
agenda. This is also somewhat true with the King James Bible. We agree also that word
meanings change over time, and in the 400 years since the original release of the King
James, words may not mean to us today, what they did to a reader at that time.
* Relative to the Apocrypha, again, most Bible believing churches affirm the validity of
the historical nature of the Apocrypha, but less so the Doctrinal aspects. Indeed, some of
the practices and behaviors revealed in the Apocrypha are so abhorrent that their
inclusion in the sacred and doctrinal books of scripture was and is considered a danger for
the casual, laity-general reader. Some of the apocryphal books may also lean to a
gnostic or worldly wisdom.
S
Dear Dominion,
Tyndale's English version of the New Testament is NOT the most accurate Bible in English, because Tyndale refers to God, to the Word of God, to the Holy Spirit, as "it". So, it can't be the most accurate English version for that reason. Also, the KJV has the same defect, referring in Romans to the "Spirit itself", and also calling God, to the Spirit an "it".
Go figure.
Scott in Erie
Tyndale's English version of the New Testament is NOT the most accurate Bible in English, because Tyndale refers to God, to the Word of God, to the Holy Spirit, as "it". So, it can't be the most accurate English version for that reason. Also, the KJV has the same defect, referring in Romans to the "Spirit itself", and also calling God, to the Spirit an "it".
Go figure.
Scott in Erie
S
Dear AnandaHya,
I was quoting someone else who said "KJV only people are crazy." I didn't through any stones. I didn't say that they are crazy.
However, heresy is crazy. So that would make a heretic crazy. KJV only belief IS heresy. It was not a heresy I committed. I committed a far worse heresy, I said "and the Son" (FILIOQUE), but God saved me from FILIOQUISM. Thank God for that. Amen.
God have mercy on you.
God have mercy on me and all of us.
In Erie Scott R. Harrington
I was quoting someone else who said "KJV only people are crazy." I didn't through any stones. I didn't say that they are crazy.
However, heresy is crazy. So that would make a heretic crazy. KJV only belief IS heresy. It was not a heresy I committed. I committed a far worse heresy, I said "and the Son" (FILIOQUE), but God saved me from FILIOQUISM. Thank God for that. Amen.
God have mercy on you.
God have mercy on me and all of us.
In Erie Scott R. Harrington