Is YOUR church doctrinal statement ONE with SATAN?

  • 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.
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
I generally have eggs for breakfast and they are always brown. The other day my wife brought home a dozen eggs that were white! I said to her that these can't be real eggs since they're not like the ones I have always eaten. No matter how hard she tried to convince me I knew, absolutely, that real eggs are brown. Different colored eggs can't be as real as the brown eggs I have always eaten.

What is the matter with KJVOs? Every English Bible is a translation; every one has its purpose; and it's impossible for any translation to be perfect.

God told Eve that she and Adam could eat from any tree in the garden except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Like KJVOs she let her own desire for knowledge of what is good and evil run away with her
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,186
3,703
113
It causes people to look for alternate views when they don't like what one particular bible says. That makes sense, in a way. No translation is perfect -- it's impossible -- so people use multiple translations to get the fullest meaning. Only KJVOs won't consider other versions because they believe that the KJV is infallible. It isn't; it's just a translation of the source documents available at the time. You and other KJVOs are limiting your knowledge of God and His message by sticking with the KJV; it makes you unable to look for alternate views when you don't like what another bible says.
And by doing this, you become your own final authority on what God has said. Whether I like it or not, I believe every word of God. Instead of looking to change it to fit me, I try to change me to fit what it says.
 
B

Bede

Guest
And by doing this, you become your own final authority on what God has said. Whether I like it or not, I believe every word of God. Instead of looking to change it to fit me, I try to change me to fit what it says.
All translations have some bias towards the theology of the translators because they read it through the lens of their theology.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
There's only one God, one Jesus, one Holy Spirit, and one gospel. There are multiple Old Testament scriptures (plural!), multiple New Testament scriptures, and many, many translations into multiple languages.

It causes people to look for alternate views when they don't like what one particular bible says. That makes sense, in a way. No translation is perfect -- it's impossible -- so people use multiple translations to get the fullest meaning. Only KJVOs won't consider other versions because they believe that the KJV is infallible. It isn't; it's just a translation of the source documents available at the time. You and other KJVOs are limiting your knowledge of God and His message by sticking with the KJV; it makes you unable to look for alternate views when you don't like what another bible says.
When we do what you suggest, we are not comforming ourselves to the image of Christ, we are conforming our selves to OUR OWN image of Christ.

(Rom 8:29) For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

I don't think you realize this but the IMAGE of Christ is the bible. You can't be conformed to His image without an accurate image.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
All translations have some bias towards the theology of the translators because they read it through the lens of their theology.
I agree with that and that means that any bible version that's not inspired by God IS NOT the word of God, it's the word of the translators and their bias.
 
B

Bede

Guest
I agree with that and that means that any bible version that's not inspired by God IS NOT the word of God, it's the word of the translators and their bias.
And since we do not have any of the original manuscripte it means that ALL translations have flaws to some extent.

There is also the point that just as translators have a bias to their own theology so do readers in judging a transalation.
 
B

Bede

Guest
I agree with that and that means that any bible version that's not inspired by God IS NOT the word of God, it's the word of the translators and their bias.
Since you call yourself KJV1611 did you know this about the 1611 versions (and yes there was more than one).
"In 1611 two separate editions of the KJV were printed. They came to be known as the "Great He Bible" and the "Great She Bible" because one printed Ruth 3:15 as "he went" and the other printed "she went." These two original King James Bibles, printed in the first year this Bible was issued, had several thousands differences. When asked to endorse the KJV, Hugh Broughton, foremost Hebrew scholar of England at that time said he would rather "be rent to pieces by wild horses than have had any part in the urging of such a wretched version of the Bible on the poor people.". (my emboldening)
(From Bible Translations That Do Not Teach Eternal Torment)
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
And since we do not have any of the original manuscripte it means that ALL translations have flaws to some extent.

There is also the point that just as translators have a bias to their own theology so do readers in judging a transalation.
That's like saying God was capable of making men write out on paper exactly what he wanted written, but he isn't capable of doing that anymore. Is that not a ridiculous statement? What I can't figure out is where did you guys come up with the idea that it's even POSSIBLE for God's word to corrupt or go into disarray.

You guys have bought into a lie, that doctrine doesn't come from the bible. That doctrine came straight from men who crept in unawares and lied to people who wanted to be lied to. Now that false doctrine has taken full root in the "church".
People are never going to agree with any bible more than they agree with the bible they wrote.

In my opinion God is sick of it and he's about to fix the problem.
 
B

Bede

Guest
That's like saying God was capable of making men write out on paper exactly what he wanted written, but he isn't capable of doing that anymore. Is that not a ridiculous statement? What I can't figure out is where did you guys come up with the idea that it's even POSSIBLE for God's word to corrupt or go into disarray.

You guys have bought into a lie, that doctrine doesn't come from the bible. That doctrine came straight from men who crept in unawares and lied to people who wanted to be lied to. Now that false doctrine has taken full root in the "church".
People are never going to agree with any bible more than they agree with the bible they wrote.

In my opinion God is sick of it and he's about to fix the problem.
God works through fallible men both in the original writing and in the translators.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
Since you call yourself KJV1611 did you know this about the 1611 versions (and yes there was more than one).
"In 1611 two separate editions of the KJV were printed. They came to be known as the "Great He Bible" and the "Great She Bible" because one printed Ruth 3:15 as "he went" and the other printed "she went." These two original King James Bibles, printed in the first year this Bible was issued, had several thousands differences. When asked to endorse the KJV, Hugh Broughton, foremost Hebrew scholar of England at that time said he would rather "be rent to pieces by wild horses than have had any part in the urging of such a wretched version of the Bible on the poor people.". (my emboldening)
(From Bible Translations That Do Not Teach Eternal Torment)
I'm not swayed by your copy and paste "errors" that you in no way FOUND ON YOUR OWN, nor have even LOOKED into. If you had looked into it you wouldn't be posting that garbage. You are just regurgitating the same baseless crap that everyone of your predecessors have regurgitated.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
God works through fallible men both in the original writing and in the translators.
I agree, and his pure inerrant word came out of both groups, the original writers and the translators. That's my argument, God can work through fallible men to TRANSLATE his word into ALL LANGUAGES. You're the one saying he didn't do it.
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
And by doing this, you become your own final authority on what God has said. Whether I like it or not, I believe every word of God. Instead of looking to change it to fit me, I try to change me to fit what it says.
No, you become your own final authority on what God has said. You should say, "Whether I like it or not, I believe every word of the King James Bible"; that is quite different than the actual Word of God. If that's your favorite translation (which is all it is), fine, stay with it. Others choose the translation they like the best. Myself, I want a translation that is the closest to the ancient texts, translated into the language that I think, read, and write with every single day. That is my native tongue, and I assume yours also.

Why you have to translate the obscure language of the King James into the language that you think, read, and write in every day is beyond me. And you must do that! The KJV English is a dead language; using it makes one prone to all kinds of errors.

If you think that the KJV is the pure Word of God, I have news for you: it's not. Even the 1611 translators didn't think their translation was perfect, so why should you?
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
I agree, and his pure inerrant word came out of both groups, the original writers and the translators. That's my argument, God can work through fallible men to TRANSLATE his word into ALL LANGUAGES. You're the one saying he didn't do it.
I never said that!

You said, "I agree, and his pure inerrant word came out of both groups, the original writers and the translators." That is so wrong. a) We don't have the original manuscripts so we don't know what the original writers actually wrote and b) Translators do just that: they translate. They cannot reproduce the earliest writings because of the significant differences in the source languages and the destination languages.

No I'll let you in on a secret: the Bible "books" were written in different times and in different places, and there are no "certified" originals; they're all handmade copies. The Bible that Jesus used was the Septuagint, which is itself a translation into Koine Greek. It differed considerably from the ancient Hebrew and Aramaic because there is no one-to-one correspondence between Koine Greek and those languages. So, according to you, the Bible that Jesus used was flawed; it wasn't the original.

Then, on top of that, many centuries later the KJV translators had to use what was available to them to create a Bible version in the (now dead) language of early 17th Century England. Now, KJVOs invariably come up with, "now what this means...", another step removed from the earliest languages. Unqualified people are translating olde Englyshe into the (living) language that everybody uses today, including yourself.

I know you'll never be convinced of reality and that really bothers me.
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
I agree with that and that means that any bible version that's not inspired by God IS NOT the word of God, it's the word of the translators and their bias.
all Bible versions that we have today are translations!
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
When we do what you suggest, we are not comforming ourselves to the image of Christ, we are conforming our selves to OUR OWN image of Christ.

(Rom 8:29) For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

I don't think you realize this but the IMAGE of Christ is the bible. You can't be conformed to His image without an accurate image.
Oy vey! Are you serious when you say, "...the IMAGE of Christ is the bible." It doesn't say that anywhere in the Bible, including your fallible King James version.

We don't "predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son" Romans 8:28-30 [a paragraph, not a single verse taken out of context] "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified."

As long as you're quoting Romans 8, how about 8:1, "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, " The KJV has " There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. " The last clause is an addition to the earliest texts. It is without question a serious doctrinal error that is not attested to by any of the earliest sources. It was added by some zealous translator -- and you buy into it!
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
Interesting fact: The committee that King James assigned to translate the Bible into English thought that the Greek texts were written in Classical Greek. But they were wrong. ... Several Greek words gave the translators of the King James Bible trouble because they didn't know Koine Greek.

Also, it's important to acknowledge that many people who love the old KJV, and who use it in their ministries, are not part of this aberrant movement. It is a mistake to assume that anyone who uses the KJV believes it's the only inspired Bible for the English-speaking world.
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
Jeremiah 31:31-34...
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Hebrews 8:8-12..,
For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

If the King James Version is the "infallible words of God", how come these two sections from the KJV aren't identical. In other words, the KJV contradicts itself regarding what God actually said.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
all Bible versions that we have today are translations!
What does that have to with price of tea in China? Of course they all translations but one is translated with INSPIRATION. There is no way in the world that it can be said that KJV wasn’t inspired by someone. Someone purposely translated the same Greek words differently and added words to the original Greek.

The only question that anyone can have about inspiration is whether God inspired it or the devil inspired it.

I’m sure you’re an avid KJV reader and already witnessed these things yourself.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
Oy vey! Are you serious when you say, "...the IMAGE of Christ is the bible." It doesn't say that anywhere in the Bible, including your fallible King James version.

We don't "predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son" Romans 8:28-30 [a paragraph, not a single verse taken out of context] "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified."

As long as you're quoting Romans 8, how about 8:1, "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, " The KJV has " There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. " The last clause is an addition to the earliest texts. It is without question a serious doctrinal error that is not attested to by any of the earliest sources. It was added by some zealous translator -- and you buy into it!
Humor me, what do you think being conformed to the image of Christ means? Where does your image of Christ come from. In other what are you looking at to make yourself be more Christ like?
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
Since you call yourself KJV1611 did you know this about the 1611 versions (and yes there was more than one).
"In 1611 two separate editions of the KJV were printed. They came to be known as the "Great He Bible" and the "Great She Bible" because one printed Ruth 3:15 as "he went" and the other printed "she went." These two original King James Bibles, printed in the first year this Bible was issued, had several thousands differences. When asked to endorse the KJV, Hugh Broughton, foremost Hebrew scholar of England at that time said he would rather "be rent to pieces by wild horses than have had any part in the urging of such a wretched version of the Bible on the poor people.". (my emboldening)
(From Bible Translations That Do Not Teach Eternal Torment)
Did ya know that there was also a version they called the sinners Bible, because they left out not in the thou shalt not commit adultery, this reading thou shalt commit adultery.