You don’t even know what I’m talking about and you’re the expert on inspiration lol.right
thanks
got it...sorry. not sorry. set yourself up there
Things to Consider Before Attempting to Correct the King James Bible
- Thread starter Andrew1
- 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.
7
7seasrekeyed
Guest
you can't even laugh at yourself can you!
that error was seriously funny and instead of laughing at it, you come back with another attempt to 'prove' how smart you are
you need to ease up. not every hill is big enough to die on
"Science" always has been an accumulation of knowledge, but sometimes it is false knowledge. Unfortunately even Christians sometimes prefer to listen to education above the Word of God! Stick with the Bible, let science and education catch up later.
Because then that would be considered a private interpretation . Not the original autograph. His interpretation is the interpretation that we can know Him after as the perfect all other are private interpretations or personal commentaries.
7
7seasrekeyed
Guest
well thank you! finally!
while I agree with the spirit of your response here, my actual question has to do with what you said
this: Again, because a word used in 1611 is not used as much or at all today, does not make that word incorrect or void. And true science will always agree with the KJV.
from your post 564
what do you mean by that exactly? why will 'true science' always agree with the KJ? you do understand the Bible is not a science book, right?
If science ever disagrees with the Scriptures, it is the science that is false. Of course, the bible is not a science book containing all science, but it does contain science within it.
Sorry it’s just frustrating to hear people bad mouth the KJV when there’s so much about it that you guys don’t understand.you can't even laugh at yourself can you!
that error was seriously funny and instead of laughing at it, you come back with another attempt to 'prove' how smart you are
you need to ease up. not every hill is big enough to die on
7
7seasrekeyed
Guest
7
7seasrekeyed
Guest
yah know I don't think folks are badmouthing the KJ...as I have said, I was brought up on it and still enjoy it
the fly in the ointment seems to be the belief y'all think an English version was inspired...everything else is just monkey grease
I totally got your point but I thought the sp error was really funny
that's all
I don't think you can paint with such a broad brush when it comes to what others understand
No that’s not right, it’s exactly the opposite. Any Bible that’s not inspired would be called a private interpretation.
If God didn’t do the translation then it’s not the word of God. This should be evident to everyone.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
I am still waiting for someone to show me where Judah ruled with Christ..I'm thinking not the flat earth dome version of it haha
which he has not indicated he believes as far as I know, but......
then again....
Funny I see his Spirit from cover to cover when I read the KJV. He signed it, you're just looking for the wrong kind of signature.
L
Locoponydirtman
Guest
Y'all still blathering on about who's Bible is best?
Mine is best!
I have seen some fairly alarming claims in this thread.
Calling the work of the Holy Spirit evil is a serious offence. I would be very careful not to cross that line.
Mine is best!
I have seen some fairly alarming claims in this thread.
Calling the work of the Holy Spirit evil is a serious offence. I would be very careful not to cross that line.
The pure undiluted text I would say is not available to us. However, the American Standard Version is very reliable in my view. And the NET Bible version was compiled by New Testament scholars. Including Dr. Daniel Wallace. Who is highly credentialed and fluent in the Koine Greek that the New Testament was originally written in.So Ydo what is the pure text, a version that is Gods heart....not changed or diluted...for such a gal as i an older women seeking Gods heart in Spirit and Truth...what is the best English version pl. ? love in Christ Sherril...
Truth!
God is the spirit behind and within the entire Bible. It's good we can bring that to his attention.
I would say His translation or interpretation alone is inspired in its original autographs. The mysteries as to the spiritual understanding are made know according to the signified language using parables. Hiding the spiritual unseen. Many of the differences in translations has to do on how we divide or how we hear God. .
It's been a few years since I was in one of these KJV only debates, but I think that the main contention on the KJV side is that the (manuscripts that the) "modern" translations (are based on) are corrupted by Alexandrian influence. The last person that I discussed it with shared this video with me:
It is rather fascinating, and I think that it explains the KJV-only position much better than any forum debater does (let's face it, you're better off listening to arguments from experts; if you're arguing with just another online debater, you're probably not dealing with the opposition's best arguments, which isn't fair to either side). I still didn't see anything substantial and unrefutable in the video that supported the KJV side, but it was interesting to watch.
It is rather fascinating, and I think that it explains the KJV-only position much better than any forum debater does (let's face it, you're better off listening to arguments from experts; if you're arguing with just another online debater, you're probably not dealing with the opposition's best arguments, which isn't fair to either side). I still didn't see anything substantial and unrefutable in the video that supported the KJV side, but it was interesting to watch.