The Lord Jesus and His Holy Scriptures are One (The Scripture Personified) Pt. 1 & 2

  • 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.

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
Ok fine I want you to know in the initial posting of your thread you did not make it known you were the person in the video. why? That is deceptive.

Since the video I posted initially was my teaching, I just chose not to mention that information. I was not trying to be deceptive. That is why when you asked and sought for that information, I simply answered by letting you know that it was me who did the video. No big deal, but at least you now know that the 177Jeremiah channel is mine.



secondly the term "inspired and inerrant word of God "has been known for original called " autographs". We do not have it. What we do have are copies of the original and none of them were written by King james or in the original copied down in kings english. So we have three dead languages( unchanged), Hebrew, Greek , and latin. Kings english was not one of them.

CS1, I understand that we do not have the original autographs, but we have an inspired and preserved translation of the originals. And they are found in the King James Holy Bible.


Now is the Greek translation of the Old Testament Jesus quoted Septuagint more authoritative of less than the KJV? before you answer please remember Jesus never used a KJV but HE did read from the Septuagint.

CS1, I understand that Jesus did not have a KJB in his day, since the word of God was still going through its own process of seed, growth and perfection (completion). However though, I do not believe that Jesus read from the Septuagint. But rather, I believe that Jesus had a copy of the Hebrew Scriptures in His day, and that that was what he quoted from.


For a good work that affirms this truth, you can click on the link below to a really good article on Christ’s use of Targums:

http://www.biblefortoday.org/Articles/targums.htm


When you say the KJV is to be worshiped I asked you where does it say we are to do so of the KJV?


You did not provide any scripture to support your claim. Jesus is the word of God the KJV has recorded the word of God but the KJV is not to be worshipped .
Where exactly did I say that the KJB is to be worshipped?

This is what I stated, Sir:


“true worship of God is connected with a great reverence and love also for His holy word.”



And then I gave you Psalm 119, and exhorted you to read and study it. Because we certainly do see a great love, respect, reverence, high regard and admiration for the holy Scriptures (God’s word, words, commandments, precepts, statutes, laws, testimonies, judgments, and ways).

I also said this:

“It also can be said though, that when we worship the Lord, we are in a sense also worshipping the word of the Lord since Jesus Christ is One with His word, the Holy Scripture."



And then I gave you this Scripture:



Psalm 119:47-49 KJV

47 And I will delight myself in thy commandments, which I have loved. 48 My hands also will I lift up unto thy commandments, which I have loved; and I will meditate in thy statutes. 49 Remember the word unto thy servant, upon which thou hast caused me to hope.



Also CS1, you said that Jesus is the word of God. Actually, Jesus is the Word of God (upper case W), and the King James Holy Bible is the word of God (lower case w). This distinction between the lower case w (word of God, written word) and upper case W (Word of God, Jesus the Manifest Word) is very clear in Scripture.


The term "Worship the word of God " is not even said in the KJV period.

Who said that that phrase was?



Not even " Worship Gods word" found in the KJV. NOT even in the KJV does it say " Worship the Word of the Lord".

It may not explicitly, but like I already mentioned, since Jesus (the Word of God) and the Bible (the word of God) are One and the Same, when we truly worship Jesus (the Word of God), we also in a way are worshipping the Scripture (the word of God) at the same time. After all, we cannot separate the Lord Jesus Christ from the Holy Scripture. They are One in Unity.


What is expressed and taught explicitly is that God’s word is to be praised and glorified:

Psalms 56:4 In God I will praise his word, in God I have put my trust; I will not fear what flesh can do unto me.

Psalms 56:10 In God will I praise his word: in the LORD will I praise his word.


Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.


Plus, we also know that it is explicitly stated in the Scripture how God views His word, and that He views it so highly that He even magnified it above all His Name:


Psalms 138:1-2 I will praise thee with my whole heart: before the gods will I sing praise unto thee. {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."


But it does say in context to the word of God :


  • Hear the word of God
  • speak the word of God
  • receive the word of God
  • Preach the word of God
  • the word of God is to grow in you
  • Teach the word of God
  • Hearing of the word of God
  • Handling of the word of God

And many many more applications of the word of God. but not of the KJV.

Not of the KJB??

Then which translation do you view as the inerrant word of God?


Your video :

One you do not provide your name, your back ground of learning and your so-called scholarly critique.
My full name is provided in another video on my channel, as well as the ministry which I represent.

Concerning my background of learning, I have learned directly from God’s word, the King James Bible. I also have learned from other ministers of the word, I learn from my pastor at the Local Church which I am a member of. I also have learned from other faithful men and King James Bible believing pastors like Reg Kelly, Michael Hoggard and David Peacock. I learn from other ministers and Christian brethren who also believe in the infallibility of the Scriptures. On my channel and profile, you will see a list of recommended channels, which I also learn from.



You assume those who read the KJV and other translation do not trust the KJV and other ones.
CS1, I am not understanding you, sir.


Could you please elaborate a little more?
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
In context to you dismissing theologians it is in the Video. You did not name them other than the location in Egypt .

Some of the Scholars which I was referring to in my video are the following: James White, Bart Denton Ehrman and others, including some of the late Scholars who had passed away such as Kurt Aland and Bruce Metzger. Concerning Professors, Daniel Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary and others like him who do not believe that any Bible in any language today is the 100% pure, perfect, infallible word of God.

Also, in my video, the Christian Universities and colleges which I was referring to are some of the following: Dallas Theological Seminary, Faith Baptist Bible College, Bob Jones University, Moody Bible Institute, and other seminaries which are run by men who do not believe that there is a Perfect and inspired Bible for us today.


"CS1, we understand that Jesus Christ is our very Saviour who hath saved us from our sins and hath given unto us eternal life. It is also good to understand though that the word of God also saved us and hath quickened us."


Jesus is Lord and it is HIS words that have quickness us by the Holy Spirit not the KJV.

God is One with His word, hence, both God and the Scripture quicken us and they both give us life.


Also you did not quote Charles Spurgeon correctly if you think he was KJV only. You were ill=equipped to provide the KJV only doctrine. You assume CS was speaking of the KJV hey he did not even mention the KJV why? LOL.

Well, if he was not speaking of the King James Bible, then what Bible was he referring to, CS1?
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
Charles Spurgeon semon on the


BIBLE"


Charles Spurgeon:


"I come here tonight in God’s stead, my friends, to plead with you as God’s ambassador, to charge many of you with a sin, to lay it to your hearts by the power of the Spirit, so that you may be convinced of sin, of righteousness, and of a judgment to come. The crime I charge you with is the sin of the text. God has written to you the great things of His law, but they have been unto you as a strange thing. It is concerning this blessed book, the Bible, that I mean to speak tonight." ( NO. 15 sermon CS)


HE did not say the KJV or even mentioned it. Shocking.

ref:


Taken from The C. H. Spurgeon Collection, Version 1.0, Ages Software. Only necessary changes have been made, such as correcting spelling errors, some punctuation usage, capitalization of deity pronouns, and minimal updating of a few archaic words. The content is unabridged. Additional Bible-based resources are available at www.spurgeongems.org.


Well CS1, if I may, let me share with you an excerpt from a Sermon which Charles Spurgeon preached to pastors, and in this sermon he does make mention of the King James Bible, although he does not mention it explicitly, nevertheless though, I as well as many other Bible believing Christians are confident and trust by faith that he in fact was referring to the King James Bible, in this sermon of his, and this is actually said to be his very last sermon message which he preached unto pastors (Bold Emphasis Mine):


“We are resolved, then, to use more fully than ever what God has provided for us in this Book, for we are sure of its inspiration. Let me say that over again. WE ARE SURE OF ITS INSPIRATION. You will notice that attacks are frequently made as against verbal inspiration. The form chosen is a mere pretext. Verbal inspiration is the verbal form of the assault, but the attack is really aimed at inspiration itself. You will not read far in the essay before you will find that the gentleman who started with contesting a theory of inspiration which none of us ever held, winds up by showing his hand, and that hand wages war with inspiration itself. There is the true point. We care little for any theory of inspiration: in fact, we have none. To us the plenary verbal inspiration of Holy Scripture is fact, and not hypothesis. It is a pity to theorize upon a subject which is deeply mysterious, and makes a demand upon faith rather than fancy. Believe in the inspiration of Scripture, and believe it in the most intense sense. You will not believe in a truer and fuller inspiration than really exists. No one is likely to err in that direction, even if error be possible. If you adopt theories which pare off a portion here, and deny authority to a passage there, you will at last have no inspiration left, worthy of the name.

If this book be not infallible, where shall we find infallibility? We have given up the Pope, for he has blundered often and terribly; but we shall not set up instead of him a horde of little popelings fresh from college. Are these correctors of Scripture infallible? Is it certain that our Bibles are not right, but that the critics must be so? The old silver is to be depreciated; but the German silver, which is put in its place, is to be taken at the value of gold. Striplings fresh from reading the last new novel correct the notions of their fathers, who were men of weight and character. Doctrines which produced the godliest generation that ever lived on the face of the earth are scouted as sheer folly. Nothing is so obnoxious to these creatures as that which has the smell of Puritanism upon it. Every little man's nose goes up celestially at the very sound of the word "Puritan"; though if the Puritans were here again, they would not dare to treat them thus cavalierly; for if Puritans did fight, they were soon known as Ironsides, and their leader could hardly be called a fool, even by those who stigmatized him as a "tyrant." Cromwell, and they that were with him, were not all weak-minded persons—surely? Strange that these are lauded to the skies by the very men who deride their true successors, believers in the same faith. But where shall infallibility be found? "The depth saith, it is not in me"; yet those who have no depth at all would have us imagine that it is in them; or else by perpetual change they hope to hit upon it. Are we now to believe that infallibility is with learned men? Now, Farmer Smith, when you have read your Bible, and have enjoyed its precious promises, you will have, to-morrow morning, to go down the street to ask the scholarly man at the parsonage whether this portion of the Scripture belongs to the inspired part of the Word, or whether it is of dubious authority. It will be well for you to know whether it was written by the Isaiah, or whether it was by the second of the "two Obadiahs." All possibility of certainty is transferred from the spiritual man to a class of persons whose scholarship is pretentious, but who do not even pretend to spirituality. We shall gradually be so bedoubted and becriticized, that only a few of the most profound will know what is Bible, and what is not, and they will dictate to all the rest of us. I have no more faith in their mercy than in their accuracy: they will rob us of all that we hold most dear, and glory in the cruel deed. This same reign of terror we shall not endure, for we still believe that God revealeth himself rather to babes than to the wise and prudent, and we are fully assured that our
own old English version of the Scriptures is sufficient for plain men for all purposes of life, salvation, and godliness. We do not despise learning, but we will never say of culture or criticism. "These be thy gods, O Israel!"

Do you see why men would lower the degree of inspiration in Holy Writ, and would fain reduce it to an infinitesimal quantity? It is because the truth of God is to be supplanted. If you ever go into a shop in the evening to buy certain goods which depend so much upon colour and texture as to be best judged of by daylight; if, after you have got into the shop, the tradesman proceeds to lower the gas, or to remove the lamp, and then commences to show you his goods, your suspicion is aroused, and you conclude that he will try to palm off an inferior article. I more than suspect this to be the little game of the inspiration-depreciators. Whenever a man begins to lower your view of inspiration, it is because he has a trick to play, which is not easily performed in the light. He would hold a séance of evil spirits, and therefore he cries, "Let the lights be lowered." We, brethren, are willing to ascribe to the Word of God all the inspiration that can possibly be ascribed to it; and we say boldly that if our preaching is not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in it. We are willing to be tried and tested by it in every way, and we count those to be the noblest of our hearers who search the Scriptures daily to see whether these things be so; but to those who belittle inspiration we will give place by subjection, no, not for an hour.”

- Excerpt from The Greatest Fight in the World (Sermon by Charles Haddon Spurgeon)


CS1, once again, I am confident that Charles Spurgeon was referring to the blessed Old King James Bible when he stated:


"We are fully assured that our own old English Version of the Scriptures is sufficient for plain men for all purposes of life, sallvation and godliness."
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
where do you get the idea the KJV is perfect ? You know you are not getting that from the Bible itself .

right back at you ?

The teaching that the Scriptures are Perfect and inerrant is indeed Scriptural. For consider the following truths from Scripture itself:

The Scriptures are very pure (Psa. 119:140), are given by inspiration (2 Tim. 3:16), are perfect (Deut. 32:4, 2 Sam. 22:31, Psa. 19:7), are quick and powerful (Heb. 4:12) and that they are the truth (Psa. 119:160, John 17:17).



I come to the conclusion that the King James Bible is the perfect word of God, by examination, deduction, and logical reasoning with the truths and evidence which God has revealed. If God’s word is true and perfect and it is indeed, then we must have a copy of His perfect word. We do not have the original autographs, but we do have an inspired translation and a faithful copy of the what the original autographs said. And it is all found in the blessed King James Holy Bible.


A perfect and inspired translation is not impossible when God is in it. God promised to keep His words (Psalm 12:6-7) and I believe that includes even the translation of His words. And Remember ChosenbyHim, that there were inspired translations from the original autographs.

Yes, there were inspired translations in the original autographs and I already showed you all a couple of them. If not in this particular thread, definitely in one of my other threads.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,067
4,349
113
Some of the Scholars which I was referring to in my video are the following: James White, Bart Denton Ehrman and others, including some of the late Scholars who had passed away such as Kurt Aland and Bruce Metzger. Concerning Professors, Daniel Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary and others like him who do not believe that any Bible in any language today is the 100% pure, perfect, infallible word of God.

Also, in my video, the Christian Universities and colleges which I was referring to are some of the following: Dallas Theological Seminary, Faith Baptist Bible College, Bob Jones University, Moody Bible Institute, and other seminaries which are run by men who do not believe that there is a Perfect and inspired Bible for us today.





God is One with His word, hence, both God and the Scripture quicken us and they both give us life.





Well, if he was not speaking of the King James Bible, then what Bible was he referring to, CS1?
the Bible period the word of Good the KJV take away from the context of the Bible who one over emphasizes KJV instead of the author of the contents. Thats why.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
13,067
4,349
113
The teaching that the Scriptures are Perfect and inerrant is indeed Scriptural. For consider the following truths from Scripture itself:

The Scriptures are very pure (Psa. 119:140), are given by inspiration (2 Tim. 3:16), are perfect (Deut. 32:4, 2 Sam. 22:31, Psa. 19:7), are quick and powerful (Heb. 4:12) and that they are the truth (Psa. 119:160, John 17:17).


I come to the conclusion that the King James Bible is the perfect word of God, by examination, deduction, and logical reasoning with the truths and evidence which God has revealed. If God’s word is true and perfect and it is indeed, then we must have a copy of His perfect word. We do not have the original autographs, but we do have an inspired translation and a faithful copy of the what the original autographs said. And it is all found in the blessed King James Holy Bible.





Yes, there were inspired translations in the original autographs and I already showed you all a couple of them. If not in this particular thread, definitely in one of my other threads.
again playing semantics The word of God is kept by God in the KJV, the NKJV, the NASB, the RSV, the NIV pre1984 before liberal theologian perverted it. I love the KING Jame version, and I love the new KJV too. and the NIV and the NLT and the NASB. all I have preached from and seen people saved using HOW did God do that?
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
well you assume that those who are not KJV only are not right with God and assume that one think that the KJV is not the word of God. FYI most Calvinist of a theological liberal position hold to that understanding they say it Contains the word of God.

CS1, a Christian that uses a new version out of ignorance may not be living in sin, or even entirely backslidden. But once he learns the Bible version issue, and he hears both sides of this issue, and chooses to go against the truth that God has kept His word pure and faithfully preserved in a complete and finished Bible, then there is something is not right with that Christian, and I believe that problem is lack of faith, and unbelief.


But you were deceptive in not letting one know you were the one speaking in the video.

Well, once again, I was not trying to be deceptive.

I apologize if failing to mention this information initially caused you to think that of me. I really didn’t think anything of it, until you asked for that information. And then I simply provided you the answer to your question.

I am glad that you actually took the time to watch my video, seeing how a lot of people on here choose not to watch the videos which I have shared already.


You proved no resources , no ref to the information you used.
I provided the proof from the Holy Scriptures, from the very source itself. And besides, CS1, the purpose of that video was to simply show people what the Scripture says about itself. To show how the Scripture is personified, proving the unity and oneness which it possesses with our Lord Jesus Christ. I seek to provide evidence from the scriptures, just as my brother in Christ, G. Jon Rov on the Above God’s Name channel, also seeks to do.


You touted this video and it is a bunch of positional opinions preaching to the choir of things you assume we do not know.

In my video, I was simply dealing with the Bible Version Issue from a different and unique perspective. Instead of going to outside sources ( and I have surely done that before), I simply chose to deal with what the Scriptures say and teach regarding the subject matter and truth that Jesus Christ is One with the Holy Scripture and that the Scripture is personified and magnified. In that video series I provided Scriptural proof that the Scriptures and Jesus Christ possess the very same attributes and power. That cannot be denied. One of my brothers in Christ, who has me on his recommended list of channels, had added those three videos of mine to his playlist "KJV Defended as God's word" since he understood that I was dealing with the Bible version issue from this unique approach.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
In other words, this fact and truth that the King James Holy Bible is indeed the very word of God comes by logic, examination, sound reasoning and deduction.
sounds great!
I've seen evidence that the King James is a good translation.
but I haven't seen anything that indicates it is God's word, word for word.

indeed, careful examination led me to the opposite conclusion:
Luke 4:17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, 18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,

where in the King James of the book of Isaiah is that written?

some will answer Isaiah 61, but it is not word for word
Isaiah 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me;

Also Dan, my question to you would be, if you do not believe that the King James Bible is word of God (word for word), then which Translation do you believe is the word of God (word for word)?
I don't think there is one.

I don't think "God's word" refers to a set of markings on a page.

it is the spirit that guides us into all truth.
I believe the spirit can can do that on his own, or use any reasonable translation as a tool.

but excessive focusing on a set of markings runs into this verse, imo
2 Corinthians 3:6 who also made us sufficient as servants of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

when Jesus quotes Moses and says that humans live by every word that comes from the mouth of God, I don't think that means that a human cannot be spiritually alive unless they have all the words that would become the Bible.

that's because people were spiritually alive before the entire Bible had been written, or at least delivered to humans.

also, Peter says that the letters of Paul are scripture.
Paul wrote a letter to the laodiceans.
that letter is not in the King James version.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,491
13,799
113
The teaching that the Scriptures are Perfect and inerrant is indeed Scriptural. For consider the following truths from Scripture itself:

The Scriptures are very pure (Psa. 119:140), are given by inspiration (2 Tim. 3:16), are perfect (Deut. 32:4, 2 Sam. 22:31, Psa. 19:7), are quick and powerful (Heb. 4:12) and that they are the truth (Psa. 119:160, John 17:17).

I come to the conclusion that the King James Bible is the perfect word of God, by examination, deduction, and logical reasoning with the truths and evidence which God has revealed. If God’s word is true and perfect and it is indeed, then we must have a copy of His perfect word. We do not have the original autographs, but we do have an inspired translation and a faithful copy of the what the original autographs said. And it is all found in the blessed King James Holy Bible.

You claim logical reasoning, but you have employed logical fallacies. According to the evidence you have given, I can make the same claim about the NASB.

Yes, there were inspired translations in the original autographs and I already showed you all a couple of them. If not in this particular thread, definitely in one of my other threads.
While it's true that the Scripture contains inspired translations, it does not follow that translations of all of Scripture are inspired in the same way.
 

Lafftur

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2017
6,895
3,634
113
And a dumb ass at that lol.

2Pe_2:16 But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet.
No, no.......the donkey that spoke to Balaam was a "smart ass." LOL! :giggle::love:(y)
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
First, I'm not CS1...
My mistake, Dino.

I meant to write your user name. For I was directing those questions toward you.


I know you're not getting that from the Bible itself.


What God could do is not in question; what He has done is. He has not inspired a translation of the Bible, only the originals.

Once again Dino, where do you get this teaching from that God only inspired the Originals???


I cannot find anywhere in Scripture the Alexandrian teaching and philosophy that only the original autographs were inspired and perfect. It simply is not there.

What God inspired, He also preserves, and the inspiration is kept intact through God’s divine preservation.

Now another question to consider is this: When Jesus read from the Scripture of Isaiah In Luke 4:17, did Jesus have the very original writing of Isaiah, or did He have a copy of it??


Also Dino, One more question to consider is this: When Paul wrote unto Timothy how that from a child he had known the holy Scriptures which are able to make him wise unto salvation. Was Paul referring to the originals or was he referring to a copy which was in Timothy’s possession?


The word of God is inspired, but the wording of the translation is not.

Since there are inspired translations in the Holy Scriptures, then a translation certainly can be inspired.


A text without its context becomes a pretext. God promised to preserve (something) from a wicked generation. You can believe what you like, but until you can prove it with actual evidence, it remains only your opinion.

I have considered the context of Psalm 12, and upon examining it, I see a contrast between man’s unfaithful, vain, double tongued words and God’s faithful, pure and preserved words. God keeps and preserves His words, therefore as a result, God also keeps and preserves His saints and the poor and needy.

There are translations within Scripture, yes, and as such, those are inspired. However, that is no evidence a translation of Scripture is inspired. You're comparing apples to pebbles.

Actually, it is evidence, Dino. If our God placed inspired translations even in the original autographs, then why couldn’t God provide us with an inspired and perfect translation today?

What makes you think either that I am not or do not desire "to go on unto perfection"

Dino, If you have not come to the place in your Christian life where you have placed complete faith in what God has said in His word, then I have a hard time believing that you are growing unto perfection.

In other words, if you still have doubts and unbelief in God’s ability to keep and preserve His word through an inspired and faithful translation, then I would exhort you to repent regarding this important issue, and start believing in God’s finished Bible, the blessed King James Holy Bible.


or that I do not "have complete faith and trust in the word of God"?

Because you do not believe that there is a perfect, infallible and inspired Bible available for us today.


You're a cultist because you hold to cultic thinking about the KJV. You're trying to dodge by claiming the good things you believe. The Jehovah's Witnesses use exactly the same tactic.

If I was a cultist, Dino, then I would say that you were lost and not saved, since you do not agree with me. But that is not the case here. Even though, you clearly do not agree with me on this important subject of the Bible Version Issue, I have never claimed that you were lost one time. I believe that you are saved. I understand that there are a lot of Christians that do not agree with the Position which I and other King James Bible believing Christians hold on this crucial and very important issue.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,491
13,799
113
My mistake, Dino.

I meant to write your user name. For I was directing those questions toward you.





Once again Dino, where do you get this teaching from that God only inspired the Originals???


I cannot find anywhere in Scripture the Alexandrian teaching and philosophy that only the original autographs were inspired and perfect. It simply is not there.

What God inspired, He also preserves, and the inspiration is kept intact through God’s divine preservation.

Now another question to consider is this: When Jesus read from the Scripture of Isaiah In Luke 4:17, did Jesus have the very original writing of Isaiah, or did He have a copy of it??


Also Dino, One more question to consider is this: When Paul wrote unto Timothy how that from a child he had known the holy Scriptures which are able to make him wise unto salvation. Was Paul referring to the originals or was he referring to a copy which was in Timothy’s possession?





Since there are inspired translations in the Holy Scriptures, then a translation certainly can be inspired.





I have considered the context of Psalm 12, and upon examining it, I see a contrast between man’s unfaithful, vain, double tongued words and God’s faithful, pure and preserved words. God keeps and preserves His words, therefore as a result, God also keeps and preserves His saints and the poor and needy.




Actually, it is evidence, Dino. If our God placed inspired translations even in the original autographs, then why couldn’t God provide us with an inspired and perfect translation today?




Dino, If you have not come to the place in your Christian life where you have placed complete faith in what God has said in His word, then I have a hard time believing that you are growing unto perfection.

In other words, if you still have doubts and unbelief in God’s ability to keep and preserve His word through an inspired and faithful translation, then I would exhort you to repent regarding this important issue, and start believing in God’s finished Bible, the blessed King James Holy Bible.





Because you do not believe that there is a perfect, infallible and inspired Bible available for us today.





If I was a cultist, Dino, then I would say that you were lost and not saved, since you do not agree with me. But that is not the case here. Even though, you clearly do not agree with me on this important subject of the Bible Version Issue, I have never claimed that you were lost one time. I believe that you are saved. I understand that there are a lot of Christians that do not agree with the Position which I and other King James Bible believing Christians hold on this crucial and very important issue.
Tl; dr.


Have a nice day; I'm busy.
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
How many languages was Peter speaking in, at Pentecost?
Concerning how many languages which peter and the other apostles spoke in at Pentecost, this is just a guess, But I would say, probably about 18.
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
While it's true that the Scripture contains inspired translations, it does not follow that translations of all of Scripture are inspired in the same way.
And so you basically do not believe that there is any inspired copy of God's word which we have today?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,491
13,799
113
I cannot find anywhere in Scripture the Alexandrian teaching and philosophy that only the original autographs were inspired and perfect. It simply is not there.

"Alexandrian"? Whatever. I can see that having a rational conversation with you is a waste of time. You have been brainwashed.

What God inspired, He also preserves, and the inspiration is kept intact through God’s divine preservation.

Yes, but the wording of the translation was not inspired.

Now another question to consider is this: When Jesus read from the Scripture of Isaiah In Luke 4:17, did Jesus have the very original writing of Isaiah, or did He have a copy of it??

Irrelevant.

When Paul wrote unto Timothy how that from a child he had known the holy Scriptures which are able to make him wise unto salvation. Was Paul referring to the originals or was he referring to a copy which was in Timothy’s possession?

Also irrelevant.

Since there are inspired translations in the Holy Scriptures, then a translation certainly can be inspired.

That doesn't prove that any translation of the whole Bible has been inspired.

I have considered the context of Psalm 12, and upon examining it, I see a contrast between man’s unfaithful, vain, double tongued words and God’s faithful, pure and preserved words. God keeps and preserves His words, therefore as a result, God also keeps and preserves His saints and the poor and needy.

You and every other KJV-onlyist I have encountered ignores three crucial words that make your position untenable: "from this generation".

Actually, it is evidence, Dino. If our God placed inspired translations even in the original autographs, then why couldn’t God provide us with an inspired and perfect translation today?

I didn't say He couldn't; I said He didn't. There's a huge difference.

If you have not come to the place in your Christian life where you have placed complete faith in what God has said in His word, then I have a hard time believing that you are growing unto perfection.

Your opinions about me are irrelevant.

In other words, if you still have doubts and unbelief in God’s ability to keep and preserve His word through an inspired and faithful translation, then I would exhort you to repent regarding this important issue, and start believing in God’s finished Bible, the blessed King James Holy Bible.

I exhort you to repent of your bibliolatry.

Because you do not believe that there is a perfect, infallible and inspired Bible available for us today.
You make statements about what you believe; leave the statements about what I believe to me.

If I was a cultist, Dino, then I would say that you were lost and not saved, since you do not agree with me. But that is not the case here. Even though, you clearly do not agree with me on this important subject of the Bible Version Issue, I have never claimed that you were lost one time. I believe that you are saved. I understand that there are a lot of Christians that do not agree with the Position which I and other King James Bible believing Christians hold on this crucial and very important issue.
You don't need to be completely radical to be a cultist; you just need to hold secondary matters as "crucial and very important". With you there is far more evidence.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
And so you basically do not believe that there is any inspired copy of God's word which we have today?
I use the King James mostly.

There are errors in the King James just as other paraphrases of corrupted mankind called private interpretations. Changing the word sabbath a non time sensitive word to weeks adding a time element is clearly one.

Luke 18:12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

Replacing. Or making to no effect.. . . I fast twice on the Sabaath , I give tithes of all that I possess.

Three kosher meals were allowed on the same Sabbath that men give tithes of all that they possess.

Nine times the word sabbath "rest" is replaced with week. A word that was not even used in the Greek when it was heard from God.
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
I haven't watched your video, but I thought the thread title was interesting. Made me think of John 1...

John
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Just wanted to point out that the Bible does not tell us all there is to know about Jesus. It is not big enough. The book of John finishes this way:

John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,402
113
Worship the God of the version, not the version......the King Jimmy is a translation/transliteration, NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS!
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
"Alexandrian"? Whatever. I can see that having a rational conversation with you is a waste of time. You have been brainwashed.

Dino246, I am having a rational and logical conversation with you. My belief and faith in the word of God is a god thing. I have been helped out by the Holy Spirit as He hath taught me and lead me into deep truth about His holy word. And that’s what I want for you and others, Dino.


Yes, but the wording of the translation was not inspired.

How can you even say that, Dino? If the very wording of the Translation is not inspired, what’s the use? Inspiration is preserved intact, and that inspiration is carried over into the very words of the Translation.


No, it is not Irrelevant, Dino. That question is very relevant. Because if Jesus had only a copy of the Original, then we know that Jesus viewed that copy of the Scripture as authoritative and just as inspired as the Original autograph of Isaiah.




Once again, No it is not irrelevant, Dino. It is very relevant. What Timothy had in his possession was not the original autographs, but were copies of the originals. And yet Paul stated clearly to Timothy that what he knew from a child were the Holy Scriptures. And then in the very next verse, Paul says all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine. Therefore Dino, If Timothy had in his possession the very holy Scriptures, then we can be confident that we also today can have possession of the very holy Scriptures. Since Timothy also did not have the original autographs, but had copies.


That doesn't prove that any translation of the whole Bible has been inspired.

The Scripture itself says this about itself: All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God…


Therefore since all scripture is given by inspiration of God, wouldn’t that mean that the very translation of the whole Bible is inspired?



You and every other KJV-onlyist I have encountered ignores three crucial words that make your position untenable: "from this generation".


I am not ignoring those three words, Dino. It has a double application. God preserves both His words, and His saints. We are preserved by God because God is faithful and because He hath faithfully kept and preserved His pure words.



I didn't say He couldn't; I said He didn't. There's a huge difference.

And Why do you say that God did not provide us with an inspired and perfect translation?


Your opinions about me are irrelevant.

What I said is spot on. We grow in our faith by the word of God. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.



I exhort you to repent of your bibliolatry.

I simply believe that God has kept His word intact and that we have access to His perfect and preserved word today. If you want to say that I worship the Bible, then that is fine. Because God is one with His word, the Holy Bible. Hence, when I am worshipping the God of the word, I am also in a sense worshipping the word of God Almighty.



You make statements about what you believe; leave the statements about what I believe to me.


if I am not judging you properly and rightly concerning your position, Dino, then why don’t you just come right out and tell me where can I find a perfect copy of God’s written word today?



You don't need to be completely radical to be a cultist; you just need to hold secondary matters as "crucial and very important". With you there is far more evidence.

I am not a cultist. You are falsely labeling me, and for that, you ought to repent, Dino.


This Bible version Issue is a very important issue, since it is doctrinal. And since it deals with the very word of God, which God magnifies above all His Name (Psalm 138:2).