KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES

[iamsoandso]

You'll have to explain yourself some more here in regards to Matt 19:8 and what I posted about the end of the world/age soandso?

How does the above have any bearing on "all Israel" - not the thread topic by the way.

lol, well then I will when I see you in the very midst of a good juicy debate with someone about that very divorce...

 

[Locutus]

lol, well then I will when I see you in the very midst of a good juicy debate with someone about that very divorce...

I think I'll consult my legal counsel...

 

[Locutus]

As for Israel, God did divorce them, but that does not mean he has to re-marry all of them if that is where you are going with your posts soandso.

 

[iamsoandso]

As for Israel, God did divorce them, but that does not mean he has to re-marry all of them if that is where you are going with your posts soandso.

According to law it is required that both parties divulge any tangible evidence to be presented to the represented parties before that takes place. As if it were of the same nature I would find if Israel ever received a formal letter of divorcement from the Lord in the scripture...

 

[Locutus]

According to law it is required that both parties divulge any tangible evidence to be presented to the represented parties before that takes place. As if it were of the same nature I would find if Israel ever received a formal letter of divorcement from the Lord in the scripture...

Jer 3:7 “And I saw that for all the adulteries of faithless Israel, I had sent her away and given her a writ of divorce, yet her treacherous sister Judah did not fear; but she went and was a harlot also.

 

[preston39]

I have no problem calling a "bible" that espouses those things as a re-write, because it is changing basic doctrine to fit politically correct thought.

What I have a problem with is anyone insinuating that anything other than the KJV translation is a "re-write". They are translations... just as the KJV is.

h...,

Where did you get that from? Not me...if that is your insinuation......please refer to fact.

You will not be allowed to spin with me...here.

 

[SovereignGrace]

You're not understanding what I'm talking about and I realize it's my fault because I'm not communicating it well. All I'm saying is that there is the literal Spirit of Christ indwelling all believers but their is also an image of Christ in our minds. That's our view of Christ and who he is and that varies depending on what we've been taught and what we have read about him. That's all I'm saying and I'm sorry that I have caused you so much grief over this.

Edit: I would much rather be your friend rather than your enemy.

But that doesn’t mean they’re two Christs.

Not being snarky here, but your problem is you’re flying solo and not under the authority of a pastor of a local church. Listening to someone on the internet is not the same as Hebrews 10:25. Please, find a local church and submit yourself to it. There is no perfect local assembly, so you’ll have to spit out some bones as you eat meat. But getting into a local church will help you better study.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Daniel 4:8 King James Version (KJV)

8 But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name was Belteshazzar, according to the name of my God, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods: and before him I told the dream, saying,


Daniel 4:8 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

8 But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name was Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods: and before him I told the dream, saying,

*


Daniel 4:9 King James Version (KJV)


9 O Belteshazzar, master of the magicians, because I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee, and no secret troubleth thee, tell me the visions of my dream that I have seen, and the interpretation thereof.


Daniel 4:9 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

9 O Belteshazzar, master of the magicians, because I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in thee, and no secret troubleth thee, tell me the visions of my dream that I have seen, and the interpretation thereof.

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)KJV reproduced by permission of Cambridge University Press, the Crown’s patentee in the UK.

*

Daniel 4:18 King James Version (KJV)

18 This dream I king Nebuchadnezzar have seen. Now thou, O Belteshazzar, declare the interpretation thereof, forasmuch as all the wise men of my kingdom are not able to make known unto me the interpretation: but thou art able; for the spirit of the holy gods is in thee.


Daniel 4:18 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

18 This dream I king Nebuchadnezzar have seen. Now thou, O Belteshazzar, declare the interpretation thereof, forasmuch as all the wise men of my kingdom are not able to make known unto me the interpretation: but thou art able; for the spirit of the holy gods is in thee.

*


Daniel 5:11 King James Version (KJV)


11 There is a man in thy kingdom,in whom is the spirit of the holy gods; and in the days of thy father light and understanding and wisdom, likethe wisdom of the gods, was found in him; whom the king Nebuchadnezzar thy father, the king, I say, thy father, made master of the magicians, astrologers, Chaldeans, and soothsayers;


Daniel 5:11 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

11 There is a man in thy kingdom,in whom is the spirit of the holy gods; and in the days of thy father light and understanding and wisdom, like the wisdom of the gods, was found in him; whom the king Nebuchadnezzar thy father, the king, I say, thy father, made master of the magicians, astrologers, Chaldeans, andsoothsayers;

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)KJV reproduced by permission of Cambridge University Press, the Crown’s patentee in the UK.

 

[KJV1611]

For me personally, the KJV is irrelevant. So I do not care what the KJV is saying for 400 years. I do not base my faith on tradition.

Three centuries of American tradition is not my standard. My town I live in is older than whole United States, so... we are getting again to "what is the standard".

I'm not asking you a question about any translation nor any tradition.

The Question - What is more accurate to the facts - Jesus was a son of the gods OR Jesus was The Son of God?

 

[KJV1611]

In it's message? Yes.

What do you guage inerrancy of the message by? What are your standards?

 

[KJV1611]

Here comes a third:

John 3:3-6
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
KJV

The incorruptible seed causes the rebirth which is the work of the Holy Spirit; just as Gabriel answered Mary: Luke 1:35
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
KJV

My question was - How is it that the same Holy Spirit lead to 2 different views?
Also why are you equating the seed for the earthly body of Christ with the word of God?

 

[KJV1611]

K...,

Just curious...why wouldn't you respond to .."Gods" plural? ( a major, change, distortion, redaction, word replacement, spinning, of G-d's word in direct violation of Rev 22, et al ).

I'm not sure what you're asking here - "why wouldn't you repond to.."Gods" plural?". Can you clarify what your asking?

 

[trofimus]

I'm not asking you a question about any translation nor any tradition.

The Question - What is more accurate to the facts - Jesus was a son of the gods OR Jesus was The Son of God?

"But the angel of the Lord came down into the oven together with Azarias and his fellows, and smote the flame of the fire out of the oven; And made the midst of the furnace as it had been a moist whistling wind, so that the fire touched them not at all, neither hurt nor troubled them...

And Nabuchodonosor heard them singing praises; and he wondered, and rose up in haste, and said to his nobles, Did we not cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? and they said to the king, Yes, O king. And the king said, But I see four men loose, and walking in the midst of the fire, and there has no harm happened to them; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of God....

And king Nabuchodonosor answered and said, Blessed be the God of Sedrach, Misach, and Abdenago, who has sent his angel, and delivered his servants, because they trusted in him; and they have changed the king’s word, and delivered their bodies to be burnt, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God."

Daniel 3, LXX

From the context, it seems to me that it was an angel, not Jesus personally. Even though "angel of the Lord" can be seen as Jesus.

The term the pagan king used (a son of god or a son of gods) does not change the meaning. The words of Babylonian kings are not our creed. He simply expressed that there is some divine looking being. He did not identify him to be the Jewish Messiah or one of the Trinity, he did not have such knowledge.

 

[KJV1611]

How can the message of the KJV be inspired when it mistranslates the Greek?

(Mat 24:3 KJV) And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Correct translation:

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

(Heb 9:26 KJV) For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Correct translation:

Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

I like this one Loco, these are the "errors" that hide the good stuff. I'm guessig the KJV translators used "world" instead of "age" because the bible doesn't deal in ages at least not that I know of... I've never seen a list of ages in the bible.

The end of the world can either mean the end of the lieteral world or the end of the figuative world. The figurative world (whatever that is) ended when it was judged.

[h=1]John 12:31 King James Version (KJV)[/h][FONT=&quot]31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.[/FONT]

 

[KJV1611]

"But the angel of the Lord came down into the oven together with Azarias and his fellows, and smote the flame of the fire out of the oven; And made the midst of the furnace as it had been a moist whistling wind, so that the fire touched them not at all, neither hurt nor troubled them...

And Nabuchodonosor heard them singing praises; and he wondered, and rose up in haste, and said to his nobles, Did we not cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? and they said to the king, Yes, O king. And the king said, But I see four men loose, and walking in the midst of the fire, and there has no harm happened to them; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of God....

And king Nabuchodonosor answered and said, Blessed be the God of Sedrach, Misach, and Abdenago, who has sent his angel, and delivered his servants, because they trusted in him; and they have changed the king’s word, and delivered their bodies to be burnt, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God."

Daniel 3, LXX

From the context, it seems to me that it was an angel, not Jesus personally. Even though "angel of the Lord" can be seen as Jesus.

The term the pagan king used (a son of god or a son of gods) does not change the meaning. The words of Babylonian kings are not our creed. He simply expressed that there is some divine looking being. He did not identify him to be the Jewish Messiah or one of the Trinity, he did not have such knowledge.

With no standard there is no such thing as truth... you believe an it was an angel (angel just means messenger) and I believe it was Christ. In your view there's is nothing to correct the one of us who is wrong.

Do you think this is how God intended to teach us?

 

[KJV1611]

But that doesn’t mean they’re two Christs.

Not being snarky here, but your problem is you’re flying solo and not under the authority of a pastor of a local church. Listening to someone on the internet is not the same as Hebrews 10:25. Please, find a local church and submit yourself to it. There is no perfect local assembly, so you’ll have to spit out some bones as you eat meat. But getting into a local church will help you better study.

I'm not flying solo, I have a pastor about 4 hours away and most of the time I attend church online but I do attend in person every so often. Point taken though and I appreciate the advise.

 

[trofimus]

With no standard there is no such thing as truth... you believe an it was an angel (angel just means messenger) and I believe it was Christ. In your view there's is nothing to correct the one of us who is wrong.

Do you think this is how God intended to teach us?

I am still waiting for you response what is the standard. You believe something, I believe something, now what?

 

[KJV1611]

I am still waiting for you response what is the standard. You believe something, I believe something, now what?

The standard is the inspired inerrant word of God? Now the question is which bible is the inspired inerrant word of God.
I've only seen one so far.

 

[trofimus]

The standard is the inspired inerrant word of God? Now the question is which bible is the inspired inerrant word of God.
I've only seen one so far.

What about general church and her creeds?

What about "the standard is the verifiable truth", no matter where it is written in?

Let us not limit ourselves.

 

[KJV1611]

Trof the KJV translators translated the Greek and Hebrew for spirit differently so that the word count for Holy Ghost would = 90 and the word count for Holy Spirit would = 7.

Do you think this is coincidence or by design?