KJVOnlyist lets learn together where this doctrine began :)

[LT]

Ok, I'm not done yet lol. Let's see get to the big issues. What is the message Jesus is trying to convey in this passage LT? Is this passage about you or Jesus?

Mat_5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

I have played these games with other KJVers, and found it fruitless and harmful. I told you clearly that this is a distraction. I pray that you listen to wisdom, and mature in Christ.

 

[KJV1611]

I have played these games with other KJVers, and found it fruitless and harmful. I told you clearly that this is a distraction. I pray that you listen to wisdom, and mature in Christ.

Cool I don't mind. I thought you wanted to debate some profound ideas from the scripture.

 

[LT]

Cool I don't mind. I thought you wanted to debate some profound ideas from the scripture.

definitely. If you have something from Scripture that you want clarified, or a doctrinal or theological debate, I'd be glad to join in.
But not if it is exclusive to translation errors and scribal variants.
And not if it is an obvious troll topic.

 

[KJV1611]

Sorry I couldn't pass this up, this is really cool. If you read the KJV you know that the Right Hand is Jesus Christ and you also know that Jesus was a rock of offence (that means he offends people). You also know that he was cut off at the cross and cast away by the Jews. Why? Because it was profitable for the body of Christ that Jesus die on the cross so that the whole body of Christ would not go to hell. I love it!!!

KJV
Mat_5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.


Do you think the NASB perverted that beautiful passage from the KJV. According to it, you can cut off your own right and save yourself from hell.

NASB
30 If your right hand makes you [a]stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, [c]than for your whole body to go into [d]hell.

 

[LT]

Sorry I couldn't pass this up, this is really cool. If you read the KJV you know that the Right Hand is Jesus Christ and you also know that Jesus was a rock of offence (that means he offends people). You also know that he was cut off at the cross and cast away by the Jews. Why? Because it was profitable for the body of Christ that Jesus die on the cross so that the whole body of Christ would not go to hell. I love it!!!

KJV
Mat_5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.


Do you think the NASB perverted that beautiful passage from the KJV. According to it, you can cut off your own right and save yourself from hell.

NASB
30 If your right hand makes you [a]stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, [c]than for your whole body to go into [d]hell.

Jesus was also called the stone that makes them stumble (stumbling block). It all works out the same in NASB. The image is preserved.
the word translated 'offense' in KJV is translated 'stumble' in modern English. 'Offense' was used in a similar way in 1611, but words lose meaning over time.

 

[Reformedjason]

Are there any manuscripts that have 1 john 5:7 like the Kjv before Erasmus ? Nope it was taken from the Latin vulgate.

 

[KJV1611]

Jesus was also called the stone that makes them stumble (stumbling block). It all works out the same in NASB. The image is preserved.
the word translated 'offense' in KJV is translated 'stumble' in modern English. 'Offense' was used in a similar way in 1611, but words lose meaning over time.

Hey that's cool, most people can't even see the symbolism I mentioned. The NASB is doing a decent job until it says "lose one of the parts of your body". The focus is on YOU and not the body. I personally would have never caught the true meaning of that passage in NASB. But I don't want to argue translations. I have a serious question.

I was reading the bible the other day and saw something I had never noticed before. Check this out.

Act 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

I don't know about you, but I've always been taught the church didn't come into existence until Pentecost. What do you think about what Acts says here? This is not a trick question, I'm not trying to corner you or any thing like that. I seriously just noticed this a few days ago. I would like to get your or anyone else's input on it. If the church was around during the wilderness journey then a lot of things I have been taught are wrong.

 

[LT]

Hey that's cool, most people can't even see the symbolism I mentioned. The NASB is doing a decent job until it says "lose one of the parts of your body". The focus is on YOU and not the body. I personally would have never caught the true meaning of that passage in NASB. But I don't want to argue translations. I have a serious question.

I was reading the bible the other day and saw something I had never noticed before. Check this out.

Act 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

I don't know about you, but I've always been taught the church didn't come into existence until Pentecost. What do you think about what Acts says here? This is not a trick question, I'm not trying to corner you or any thing like that. I seriously just noticed this a few days ago. I would like to get your or anyone else's input on it. If the church was around during the wilderness journey then a lot of things I have been taught are wrong.

Many Dispensationalists claim that the Church was created on Pentecost. I do not hold to that position, nor do I believe there is any Biblical support for that position.

I must note that 'church' is not capitalized, so it refers to a local congregation or assembly rather than the Body of Christ. However, because all men are saved through the shed blood of Christ, the OT Saints are also a part of the Body of Christ, as His Bride and Church. I like your interpretation of this text

 

[danschance]

Without admitting it you just said the inerrant word of God does not exist today. Well kind of it does, but it spread over 25 different books that have both truth and error in each of them. I'm curious, how do you know which part of each flawed bible is accurate. I can tell you how most do it... when the bible says something they disagree, well of course that cant be right it doesn't fit what I believe. Let me find another translation and see if it agrees with me. Trust me the way these new translations keep changing you will be able justify any belief or any sin you want.

We have an accurate bible that God has given to us. God is powerful and can makes sure the bible we have today is accurate. So please don't put words into my mouth just to prove you silly point. Odd how you never answer my questions but twist what I say so you can move on to another argument.

 

[danschance]

Sorry I couldn't pass this up, this is really cool. If you read the KJV you know that the Right Hand is Jesus Christ and you also know that Jesus was a rock of offence (that means he offends people). You also know that he was cut off at the cross and cast away by the Jews. Why? Because it was profitable for the body of Christ that Jesus die on the cross so that the whole body of Christ would not go to hell. I love it!!!

KJV
Mat_5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.


Do you think the NASB perverted that beautiful passage from the KJV. According to it, you can cut off your own right and save yourself from hell.

NASB
30 If your right hand makes you [a]stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, [c]than for your whole body to go into [d]hell.

I fail to see any significant difference between these two verses.

 

[mpaper345]

[SUP]2 [/SUP]Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
[SUP]4 [/SUP]And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables(2 Timothy 4:2-4).

The time will come when people will want to hear the Bible how they want to hear it.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
[SUP]2 [/SUP]Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
[SUP]3 [/SUP]Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
[SUP]5 [/SUP]For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer(1 Timothy 4:1-5).

It will especially accelerate when people start departing from the truth of the Bible and embrace a nature worship interpretation of the Bible that exalts man and puts Jesus as a good teacher and not the Savior of the world that will eventually be the fundamental Christianity of the world which all religions will except which seems as if the New Age Religion is the biggest pushers of that interpretation.

So the danger of people saying KJVonlyist might lead some people to embrace that false interpretation,not that I am putting down any other version but eventually it will change from version to version until it is the interpretation of the New Age interpretation by slowly changing it,or they will do away with the versions for it would seem like the New Age Religion already has their own version supporting their interpretation.

 

[LT]

[SUP]2 [/SUP]Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
[SUP]4 [/SUP]And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables(2 Timothy 4:2-4).

The time will come when people will want to hear the Bible how they want to hear it.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
[SUP]2 [/SUP]Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
[SUP]3 [/SUP]Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
[SUP]5 [/SUP]For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer(1 Timothy 4:1-5).

It will especially accelerate when people start departing from the truth of the Bible and embrace a nature worship interpretation of the Bible that exalts man and puts Jesus as a good teacher and not the Savior of the world that will eventually be the fundamental Christianity of the world which all religions will except which seems as if the New Age Religion is the biggest pushers of that interpretation.

So the danger of people saying KJVonlyist might lead some people to embrace that false interpretation,not that I am putting down any other version but eventually it will change from version to version until it is the interpretation of the New Age interpretation by slowly changing it,or they will do away with the versions for it would seem like the New Age Religion already has their own version supporting their interpretation.

while there may be a fraction of truth in that assertion, you are also committing what is called a "slippery slope fallacy".

 

[The_highwayman]

[SUP]2 [/SUP]Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
[SUP]4 [/SUP]And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables(2 Timothy 4:2-4).

The time will come when people will want to hear the Bible how they want to hear it.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
[SUP]2 [/SUP]Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
[SUP]3 [/SUP]Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
[SUP]5 [/SUP]For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer(1 Timothy 4:1-5).

It will especially accelerate when people start departing from the truth of the Bible and embrace a nature worship interpretation of the Bible that exalts man and puts Jesus as a good teacher and not the Savior of the world that will eventually be the fundamental Christianity of the world which all religions will except which seems as if the New Age Religion is the biggest pushers of that interpretation.

So the danger of people saying KJVonlyist might lead some people to embrace that false interpretation,not that I am putting down any other version but eventually it will change from version to version until it is the interpretation of the New Age interpretation by slowly changing it,or they will do away with the versions for it would seem like the New Age Religion already has their own version supporting their interpretation.

I am not against the KJV/KJB I have one, what i do not care for and think that is wrong, that that Version is Inerrant and the belief the translators of the KJV/KJB were inspired by the Holy Ghost and that made the KJB/KJV inerrant.

 

[danschance]

One thing the KJV perverted was by adding a Latin name into the old testament that has caused confusion ever since.

Isaiah 14:12
KJV - How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!
NASB - How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn!
ESV - How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn!
NIV - How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!

Lucifer is an old Latin term for Venus. The hebrew says Morning star but the KJV translators wanted to make it seem more like it was about satan. This is a perversion of what God had intended.

 

[LT]

One thing the KJV perverted was by adding a Latin name into the old testament that has caused confusion ever since.



Lucifer is an old Latin term for Venus. The hebrew says Morning star but the KJV translators wanted to make it seem more like it was about satan. This is a perversion of what God had intended.

Geneva Bible did it too (one of 6000+ examples that show that the KJV is actually a paraphrase of Geneva 1599, not a translation).
KJV 1611 is basically Geneva 1599 without the footnotes.

 

[LT]

^ignore that post. I shouldn't have gone there. It is not a productive topic. sorry.

 

[KJV1611]

Many Dispensationalists claim that the Church was created on Pentecost. I do not hold to that position, nor do I believe there is any Biblical support for that position.

I must note that 'church' is not capitalized, so it refers to a local congregation or assembly rather than the Body of Christ. However, because all men are saved through the shed blood of Christ, the OT Saints are also a part of the Body of Christ, as His Bride and Church. I like your interpretation of this text

I'm with you 100% on that one - OT saints are part of the Body of Christ. I'm not sure what you mean by church is not capitalized. All the children of Israel were the "congregation" which would mean they were the church. All that came out of Egypt were covered by the blood. Or am I not seeing this right.

 

[KJV1611]

We have an accurate bible that God has given to us. God is powerful and can makes sure the bible we have today is accurate. So please don't put words into my mouth just to prove you silly point. Odd how you never answer my questions but twist what I say so you can move on to another argument.

OK, didn't mean to ignore you. Which bible in existence today is the inerrant word of God.

 

[KJV1611]

I fail to see any significant difference between these two verses.

OK, let's go through it together danschance. Reading from the NASB what is your interpretation of this verse? This is not a trick question or anything I just want to see where the text of the NASB leads to you.

 

[KJV1611]

One thing the KJV perverted was by adding a Latin name into the old testament that has caused confusion ever since.



Lucifer is an old Latin term for Venus. The hebrew says Morning star but the KJV translators wanted to make it seem more like it was about satan. This is a perversion of what God had intended.

Who is the morning star danschance or anyone else reading this? Is is Satan or Jesus?