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!
"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.
"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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.