No he wasn't considered righteous by his works. Why do you insisit on works salvation... God doesn't consider you righteous because of your works.
Why the king james?
- Thread starter Blain
- 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.
I'm not aware of that but I like it... I guarantee you something beautiful is hidden there. I can assure you it's not a mistake. I will check it out later, I have to go to a baby shower. But I shall return Lord willing.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Why do you insist on making such false claims?
Considered a righteous person does not mean one is made righteous.
and why do you refuse to answer my question. Would a person who has no works, (a hearer of the word only) be considered righteous? even if he professed to have faith?
P
PeacefulWarrior
Guest
Nice.. but I have given you about six places in OT, that contradicts what apostles wrote about them. And I can give you many more.
I have chosen the NT quotes, that say "it is written" or with similar opening phrase, so that you cant explain it by some theological dispute. If IT IS WRITTEN, then you have to have it WRITTEN in your OT.
Mark 7:6-7
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Is 29:13
..this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:
Ups! And now tell me, that KJV is a perfect translation with perfect doctrines and only in KJV can be people led to the right christianity
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Is 29:13
..this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:
Ups! And now tell me, that KJV is a perfect translation with perfect doctrines and only in KJV can be people led to the right christianity
Last edited:
Well, what you wanted is to interrogate God the Holy Spirit. It’s none of your business to dictate what word the Holy Spirit would impress to the writer like Apostle Paul…too bad. What you really trying is to compare the OT and NT in a word for word basis without acknowledging that it can be said in another way by the Holy Spirit.
This game is over since you are just making to put an error on KJV because the NT cites the OT in a different way using the Masoretic Text for the OT and KJV on the NT (TR) and that your standard in correcting or judgment is using the corrupt LXX. I have already meet this before of this kind of seeming contradictions you are offering … yea I can give more than that and I have some listings on these on my notes. A mere child’s play, I guess. But thanks to you inputs anyway, however, a word of advice, you need to put faith in God to believe in His words, for God is true and His words endureth forever but man is a liar. True enough, the scripture is not made to be broken or pass away.
Last edited:
The Lord hasn't shown me anything yet but one thing that stands out is the purpose of the three things mentioned. The three things were to do away with David's iniquity.... Nothing David could do would do away with his iniquity only Christ could do that so obviously this is the gospel hidden in the story. I think 7 years and 3 years represent the same thing, nothing to do with time but something to do with Christ. I know what 7 years represents but I'm not sure about the three years... I will have to wait until the Lord shows me for sure.
Can you give me an example of someone in the bible that was considered righteous but not made righteous?
I agree a person with no works (a hearer of the word only) is not considered righteous.
It is written humanity will not live by bread only... tell where the error in that statement is.
Mark 7:6-7
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Is 29:13
..this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:
Ups! And now tell me, that KJV is a perfect translation with perfect doctrines and only in KJV can be people led to the right christianity
Trofimus I don't think you understand what makes something an error in the bible. There is absolutely no difference in what is being said in those two verses. Mark - Teaching commandments of men as doctrines. Isaiah - Precepts of men as fear toward God. Can't you see God is trying to show you what "Fear of God" is? You get all hung up in trying to find mistakes in the bible and you totally miss the thing God is trying to show you.
Game is over for KJV, because it used wrong version of Old testament to translate from. Obviously. So now you have to talk a lot to get it in line.
Last edited:
If you teach that every word is absolutely important and inspired in Holy Scriptures, how can you be on the other hand so benevolent and accept that changing many words in the Scripture citation is OK?
There is no error in original Bible. There are many errors in manuscripts and translations made from them. Because copying or translation is not inspired.
Are you used to quote in such a free way?
Matthew 4:4: It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God
Deuteronomy 8:3: ...man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live
-- time is different
But I am still waiting for explanation why is it OK to drop the "Lord" word from Isaiah in KJV and still believe it is a perfect Bible version:
Romans 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith,
Lord, who hath believed our report?
Isaiah 53:1 Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
The exact words don't matter but the words. You can say Jesus is God's only begotten son but you can't say Jesus is God's only son. Those 2 don't say the same thing.
I agree the originals were inspired and only God can translate those originals into other languages, man can't do it with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
I guess I would agree with you if Paul would have said "For Esaias saith Quote who hath believed our report, but he didn't quote Isaiah, he said Esaias saith... It's a given in Isaiah that Isaiah is talking to the Lord.
Last edited:
You might want to proofread your posts before you click "Post".
If you are to be taken seriously at all, you need to come up with a rational refutation of the Preface to the 1611 edition, from which I quote:
"Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God."
"There be many words in the Scriptures, which be never found there but once, (having neither brother nor neighbour, as the Hebrewes speake) so that we cannot be holpen by conference of places. Againe, there be many rare names of certaine birds, beastes and precious stones, &c. concerning which the Hebrewes themselves are so divided among themselves for judgement, that they may seeme to have defined this or that, rather because they would say something, the because they were sure of that which they said, as S. Jerome somewhere saith of the Septuagint. Now in such a case, doth not a margine do well to admonish the Reader to seeke further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For as it is a fault of incredulitie, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can beno lesse then presumption. Therfore as S. Augustine saith, that varietie of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversitie of signification and sense in the margine, where the text is not so cleare, must needes doe good, yea is necessary, as we are perswaded."
(King James Version Original Preface)
Good luck.
I am not sure what this sentence supposed to mean.
I am not sure what this supposed to mean either... "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son" (John 3:16)
Or are you talking about leaving out words from the specific verse? In that case you agree with me.