L
LPT
Guest
How many metaphors and platforms you got going on in that head of yours. Almost everything you say is either one or other.
TRIGGERED
- Thread starter wanderer6059
- Start date
-
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.
How many metaphors and platforms you got going on in that head of yours. Almost everything you say is either one or other.
What the majority says is irrelevant. You quoted HeRoseFromTheDead and responded with a complete misrepresentation of his words. That is a straw man argument, and it is a fallacy.
Interesting juxtaposition of comments.
Regarding "modernizers", it is stubborn to insist that the definitions of words in 1611 should be maintained against the tide of natural linguistic change over time. There is no dark conspiracy to redefine words. Their meanings simply change.
"Suffer" no longer means "allow" or "permit". Live with it.
Those aren't one word. They are three distinct words that happen to sound alike.
"Bottles" (KJV) and "wineskins" (NIV) or "suffer" (KJV) or "let" (NIV) are better examples.
1. Obviously those are the most important things and Christians should focus on them primarily.
2. You do not have have to get involved if controversy bothers you, and you can ignore the whole matter rather than get "triggered".
3. It is not the KJV that has divided Christians but the modern Bible versions and the deception behind them.
4. The KJV was the Bible of the English-speaking world for over 300 years. That could have continued without any conflict.
5. It is important to know that the Bible which Christians call "the Word of God" is reliable, and represents the original manuscripts.
Right. But the KJVO proponents who refuse to update their knowledge and spread enmity towards something new.
Update their knowledge? The ever changing word of God...to fit man's needs...because man is too lazy to study...and us English speakers keep lowering our standards of language into slang...forgive me for spreading enmity towards something new...
"Allow", "permit", and "let" are slang?
How about "markets", "wineskins" or "citizenship"?
Perhaps "judge" or "mediator"? Or "buffalos", "plague" or "tax collector"? Or perhaps "veil"?
All of these are "the slang of modernizers" according to your "reasoning". Once again your argument is utterly without merit.
Your argument does not make any sense, because the KJV is not an original Bible.
Like English translations before 1611 had to be updated, then now 1611 translation needs to be updated. Translators in 17th century did not have all and did not know all.
This is incorrect. The KJB was translated directly out of the Hebrew and Greek (see the Frontispiece of the orginal KJV 1611) and the translators consulted all the existing translations, including all the English ones. Naturally, they were not foolish enough to discard what was already good and acceptable, but they did not rely on any other translation to simply copy it. So it is indeed AN ORIGINAL BIBLE. Take some time to read The Translators to the Reader (the Preface).
Even a cursory comparison of the then existing Geneva Bible with the KJV shows how original the KJB was.
KJB -- ZECHARIAH 10
1 Ask ye of the LORD rain in the time of the latter rain; so the LORD shall make bright clouds, and give them showers of rain, to every one grass in the field.
2 For the idols have spoken vanity, and the diviners have seen a lie, and have told false dreams; they comfort in vain: therefore they went their way as a flock, they were troubled, because there was no shepherd.
3 Mine anger was kindled against the shepherds, and I punished the goats: for the LORD of hosts hath visited his flock the house of Judah, and hath made them as his goodly horse in the battle.
4 Out of him came forth the corner, out of him the nail, out of him the battle bow, out of him every oppressor together.
5 And they shall be as mighty men, which tread down their enemies in the mire of the streets in the battle: and they shall fight, because the LORD is with them, and the riders on horses shall be confounded.
6 And I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph, and I will bring them again to place them; for I have mercy upon them: and they shall be as though I had not cast them off: for I am the LORD their God, and will hear them.
GENEVA BIBLE – ZECHARIAH 10
1 Ask you of the Lord rain in the time of the latter rain: so shall the Lord make white clouds, and give you showers of rain, and to everyone grass in the field.
2 Surely the idols have spoken vanity, and the soothsayers have seen a lie, and the dreamers have told a vain thing: they comfort in vain: therefore they went away as sheep: they were troubled, because there was no shepherd.
3 My wrath was kindled against the shepherds, and I did visit the goats: but the Lord of hosts will visit his flock the house of Judah, and will make them as his beautiful horse in the battle.
4 Out of him shall the corner come forth: out of him the nail, out of him ye bow of battle, and out of him every appointer of tribute also.
5 And they shall be as the mighty men, which tread down their enemies in the mire of the streets in the battle, and they shall fight, because the Lord is with them, and the riders on horses shall be confounded.
6 And I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will preserve the house of Joseph, and I will bring them again, for I pity them: and they shall be as though I had not cast them off: for I am the Lord their God, and will hear them.
...in 1611. Therefore its not original, but it has begun to exist in 17th century.
Has SOT given you a term or word for the way God sees and and classifies them?
By modernizers, do you mean like those who eliminate the Biblical relevance of certain terms in lieu of a generalized meaning for different words? While I am probably the first one to accuse someone of being a modernizer , but that is because I use a simple test using a couple of precepts, which basically is a mini-algorithm so in this case I have to say that if Depleted believes that a rabbit is more reflective of a mammal such as herself than as a ruminant, which is the flesh that has a modified digestive tract that allows the processing of a fiber only diet then can't say she is wrong.
So Depleted is absolutely correct, the interpretation that the rabbit has a rudiment digestive system would be incorrect since the rabbit has an esophagus, a single stomach, and bowels and the rudiment has multiple compartments which processes the plant material like a little friggin fiber factory.
So in reality these new translations are just like cecoptropes for the believers who need to redigest the KJV translation.
ruminants
Since the LORD wouldn't let me read anything but Genesis 1 and the book of Proverbs 4:7 for my first four or five years and that was thirty years ago so what would you suggest is the best way to shew everyone you are approved unto God?
All I got is 1 Thess 4:11
So the answer is in the text? If that was true, and I am not saying it isn't, yet if the text instructs that a matter shall be established by two or more witnesses, then the text can only serve as 1 witness to the faith.
Last edited:
Those aren't one word. They are three distinct words that happen to sound alike.
"Bottles" (KJV) and "wineskins" (NIV) or "suffer" (KJV) or "let" (NIV) are better examples.
someone gets it =D lol most people it goes over their head
These are outrageous claims!
It couldn't possibly have continued because early modern English is no longer understood by the majority of the population.
A refusal to publish and preach the gospel in modern English would be morally indefensible. To try to lead people to believe modern English is a deception is itself a deception and a stumbling block. Why should any learned Christian be clinging to and spreading these evil myths?
Jesus spoke to the common people of his time not only to those who did special studies of archaic languages. He is the same today. The Word of God is available in modern English.
A
Ariel82
Guest
Nature of the forum and human nature it seems...shoot first and ask questions later.
Being on this site has challenged me to establish what I believe is sound doctrine and biblically based and what I reject.
I always wonder where you draw the line for fellowship? How big is your circle?
Everyone is different.
My line is agape love.
If people understand and show it, they enter the inner circle of my heart. What I think of as the holy of holies where God is among us.
Everyone else I meet I may greet at the gate and talk with but unless I see the Holy spirit speaking through them...,i find it hard to trust what some merchants sell.
1. Anyone who is familiar with my posts knows that I do not make "outrageous claims". So you can take that back.
2. I will not reproduce the graph accompanying this statement below, but in 2017 the King James Bible was the most widely read Bible in the USA. Check it out for yourself.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/299402/preferred-bible-version-usa/
3. We all would love to see a faithful, reliable, word-for-word translation in English which is based strictly on the Hebrew Masoretic Test and the Greek Textus Receptus. But it is too late, since Bible publishers (other than the Trinitarian Bible Society), textual scholars, many pastors, teachers, and Christian leaders have been hoodwinked into accepting the corrupted. critical texts underlying the modern versions. Thus a large segment of evangelical Christians has followed suit.
Last edited: