What possible benefit to the conversation does your "No comment" add? Why even bother? It only makes you look haughty.
KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- 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.
What possible benefit to the conversation does your "No comment" add? Why even bother? It only makes you look haughty.
I don't know, it seems you have rather a lot to say when you are in full condemnation mode.
Origen planted those quotes in the Septuagint. It’s no different then Wescott and Hort did when they invented the underlying texts of the modern corrupt bibles.
The ecclesiastical text is the Egyptian one that led to the Vulgate.
No comment.
It would’ve been difficult to respond because you lumped all your comments into one quote.
It informs the poster that I didn’t ignore their post.
Typically I don’t comment about personal attacks and off topic things.
No comment.I don't know, it seems you have rather a lot to say when you are in full condemnation mode.
So the verse should go - For God so loved the world (except Esau). Just kidding lol. I'll see if I can find some verse tonight to support my side. The Bible has to be rightly divided between the literal and figurative.
"During the second and third centuries a number of versions of the Old Testament were available each having variations in texts. This created confusion about what was the true text of Scriptures. While the Church had chosen the Septuagint as its own, it differed from the Hebrew version of the second century that was the standard prepared by Jewish Rabbis under Akiba the founder of Rabbinic Judaism. In the interim many textual changes had occurred through corruption during transcriptions, additions and deletions, and mistakes through translations since the Hebrew text used when the Septuagint was prepared.
During the second century Greek translations of the Scriptures were made by Aquila of Sinope, Symmachus the Ebionite, and Theodotion. Each had its own characteristics and variations from the Septuagint and each claimed to be superior. Origen attempted to reveal the true text of the earlier Hebrew Scriptures by establishing the exact relations of the Septuagint to the then current Greek and Hebrew versions. This he did by presenting side by side each version of the Scriptures in six columns in what became called the Hexapla."
https://orthodoxwiki.org/Hexapla
So he made something like biblehub.com of those days
During the second century Greek translations of the Scriptures were made by Aquila of Sinope, Symmachus the Ebionite, and Theodotion. Each had its own characteristics and variations from the Septuagint and each claimed to be superior. Origen attempted to reveal the true text of the earlier Hebrew Scriptures by establishing the exact relations of the Septuagint to the then current Greek and Hebrew versions. This he did by presenting side by side each version of the Scriptures in six columns in what became called the Hexapla."
https://orthodoxwiki.org/Hexapla
So he made something like biblehub.com of those days
Last edited:
Where you get these nonsensical lies? Ruckman and Kiplinger, perhaps?
One more time! The Septuagint was translated from Hebrew in the 3rd century BC! You get that means BEFORE CHRIST, right?
It was a translated totally by Jews, and interestingly, it was supposed to be a perfect translation from the Hebrew, with a dogmatism only recently equaled by KJVO people. (It varied in many places! That is how they know which Bible Jesus and his disciples were quoting!)
Jesus and the disciples mostly quoted the LXX (Septuagint).
"This is the Bible Jesus UsedThe Septuagint was the first translation of the Hebrew Bible; and was made in the third century B.C. by Jewish scribes, who were direct descendents of those trained in Ezra's Great Synagogue of Jerusalem. They were complete experts in the text, being very well versed in Hebrew and Greek.
This translation became very popular among Jews in the first two centuries before Christ because many Jews in those days did not understand Hebrew. Their ancestors had left Israel centuries before, and generation after generation gradually lost the ability to read the Scriptures in Hebrew.
Many of the Jews in Jesus' day used the Septuagint as their Bible. Quite naturally, the early Christians also used the Septuagint in their meetings and for personal reading; and many of the New Testament apostles quoted it when they wrote the Gospels and Epistles in Greek. What is most fascinating is that the order of the books in the Septuagint is the same order in our Bibles today, and not like the Hebrew scrolls. So this means that:
Jesus Primarily Used a Translation
Jesus and the Apostles: studied, memorized, used, quoted, and read most often from the Bible of their day, the Septuagint. Since Matthew wrote primarily to convince the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed their promised Messiah, it follows as a matter of course that his Gospel is saturated with the Hebrew Scriptures. Yet, when Jesus quotes the Old Testament in Matthew, He uses the Hebrew text only 10% of the time, but the Greek LXX translation—90% of the time!
Amazingly, Jesus and Paul used the LXX as their primary Bible. It was just like the Bible each of us holds in our hands, not the original Hebrew Old Testament, but a translation of the Hebrew into Greek. But it was based on exactly the same original and inspired words, and reads just like the Bible we hold in our hands today."
This is the Bible Jesus Used
The Septuagint was the first translation of the Hebrew Bible; and was made in the third century B.C. by Jewish scribes, who were direct descendents of those trained in Ezra's Great Synagogue of Jerusalem. They were complete experts in the text, being very well versed in Hebrew and Greek.
This translation became very popular among Jews in the first two centuries before Christ because many Jews in those days did not understand Hebrew. Their ancestors had left Israel centuries before, and generation after generation gradually lost the ability to read the Scriptures in Hebrew.
Many of the Jews in Jesus' day used the Septuagint as their Bible. Quite naturally, the early Christians also used the Septuagint in their meetings and for personal reading; and many of the New Testament apostles quoted it when they wrote the Gospels and Epistles in Greek. What is most fascinating is that the order of the books in the Septuagint is the same order in our Bibles today, and not like the Hebrew scrolls. So this means that:
Jesus Primarily Used a Translation
Jesus and the Apostles: studied, memorized, used, quoted, and read most often from the Bible of their day, the Septuagint. Since Matthew wrote primarily to convince the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed their promised Messiah, it follows as a matter of course that his Gospel is saturated with the Hebrew Scriptures. Yet, when Jesus quotes the Old Testament in Matthew, He uses the Hebrew text only 10% of the time, but the Greek LXX translation—90% of the time!
Amazingly, Jesus and Paul used the LXX as their primary Bible. It was just like the Bible each of us holds in our hands, not the original Hebrew Old Testament, but a translation of the Hebrew into Greek. But it was based on exactly the same original and inspired words, and reads just like the Bible we hold in our hands today.
This is the Bible Jesus Used
The Septuagint was the first translation of the Hebrew Bible; and was made in the third century B.C. by Jewish scribes, who were direct descendents of those trained in Ezra's Great Synagogue of Jerusalem. They were complete experts in the text, being very well versed in Hebrew and Greek.
This translation became very popular among Jews in the first two centuries before Christ because many Jews in those days did not understand Hebrew. Their ancestors had left Israel centuries before, and generation after generation gradually lost the ability to read the Scriptures in Hebrew.
Many of the Jews in Jesus' day used the Septuagint as their Bible. Quite naturally, the early Christians also used the Septuagint in their meetings and for personal reading; and many of the New Testament apostles quoted it when they wrote the Gospels and Epistles in Greek. What is most fascinating is that the order of the books in the Septuagint is the same order in our Bibles today, and not like the Hebrew scrolls. So this means that:
Jesus Primarily Used a Translation
Jesus and the Apostles: studied, memorized, used, quoted, and read most often from the Bible of their day, the Septuagint. Since Matthew wrote primarily to convince the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed their promised Messiah, it follows as a matter of course that his Gospel is saturated with the Hebrew Scriptures. Yet, when Jesus quotes the Old Testament in Matthew, He uses the Hebrew text only 10% of the time, but the Greek LXX translation—90% of the time!
Amazingly, Jesus and Paul used the LXX as their primary Bible. It was just like the Bible each of us holds in our hands, not the original Hebrew Old Testament, but a translation of the Hebrew into Greek. But it was based on exactly the same original and inspired words, and reads just like the Bible we hold in our hands today."
https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/tips/what-bible-did-jesus-use-11638841.html
So, the fact alone that the KJV uses the Masoretic text shows that it has errors. In fact, there are many differences between the Masoretic text and the LXX. I don't know if Jesus and his disciples used the LXX because they knew it better, or because the people knew Greek better, generally, but the fact is, the LXX was used.
So, Origen, who lived 200 years after Christ (c.184 AD) did not mess with the quotes that Jesus and the disciples used in the NT. The LXX exited 500 years before the time of Origen, there were MANY copies of that Bible, even if Origen had changed one or 10 copies, he could not have changed them all.
Try and search out and verify your sources before you mouth off about things you are clueless about, ok?
Ephesians 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
The quote in red is false. Which, if the finish of the sentence out of that modern Bible is provided it may show an example of how the false modern Bible not only contradicts the Authorized Bible, but it’s own text as well.
Notice how the corrupt text breaks the sentence apart, to present a new sentence with a different meaning.
The red sentence ends with, “in His sight” to replace the authorized “before him in love.”
The new sentence removes the truth that to be holy and blameless before God we must be “in love.”
The removal of “in love” allows a reader to think obedience to the law is how we stand before God.
The red version then begins a new sentence where there isn’t one in the Authorized.
The red corruption reads ...In love He predestined us to be adopted through Jesus Christ for Himself, according to His favor and will...
Which promotes a lie, that God’s love causes favoritism.
Note that the red version sticks “In love” in verse four.
This rather stupid thing is probably done to mislead readers if perhaps they read casually and think the “In love” is still attached to the verse four they have tampered with.
It is quite obvious that the red version writers are heathens trying to create a false doctrine favoring law instead of grace.
The Authorized reads “the good pleasure of” instead of the corrupt red version that reads “favor.”
“
Last edited:
World does not mean ‘all whoever lived’. The sooner ppl realize that, the sooner their theology improves. God never changes, His love is everlasting, so then if He loves everyone, and He changes not(immutable), by using your logic, He loves Satan, his minions, and those He will personally cast into hell. That’s a cruel God.
I would rather say "Thats a just God". There is no hate towards His creation in God. God is love and there is no darkness in Him.
As you can read above, these corrupt bibles promote false doctrine. In this case they want people to believe that Jesus was born to save only certain people that God is pleased with and favors.
What bald face lies these modern bibles invent.
Then the poster presented...
Can you see that the corrupt notion of, favoritism by God, is wicked and blasphemous?
God is pleased with his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
God is not pleased with any other man because all men are sinners according to the law.
But God’s grace is offered to all men and grants all men opportunity to please God one way, by faith in Jesus, leading to repentance and baptism and receiving of the promise of the Holy Ghost.
The corruption in modern bibles is intentional and will corrupt the readers of them with carnal and blasphemous doctrine and, vain philosophy as well.