The Error of KJV-Onlyism
- Thread starter presidente
- 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.
My bad, I thought you said Anglican.
Yes, "Anglo" typically refers to people of English-speaking or English-heritage origin. It can also be used more broadly to refer to things associated with England or the English language.
So what’s your problem if God chose England to preserve His words or if God used 1600s English for that same purpose? Did not God choose one language originally with the Greek New Testament Scriptures?
Yes, "Anglo" typically refers to people of English-speaking or English-heritage origin. It can also be used more broadly to refer to things associated with England or the English language.
So what’s your problem if God chose England to preserve His words or if God used 1600s English for that same purpose? Did not God choose one language originally with the Greek New Testament Scriptures?
Do you realize that the many languages was a judgement from God at the Tower of Babel? Scripture prophecies that there will be one pure language in the Millennium. Granted, this will not be English, but the point here is God is focused on getting back to one language. English is also the world language and it would be best in alignment with God’s goals involving the great commission. So it would make a lot sense that God chose to preserve His perfect Word in the world language.
So when Isaiah 34:16 says seek ye out the book of the LORD and read, how exactly can you do that? You realize this is talking about a book during the End Times, right? Nobody today can just casually read Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. In addition, most Textual Critics don’t believe there is an actual book of the LORD. They see God’s words sort of preserved in a sea manuscripts. They believe in shapeshifter critical texts and translations.
-
1
- Show all
Yes, I know you are most likely aware of this story, but you need a refresher on the story to help you understand how God operates. Many on your side of the camp will complain how if there was a perfect Bible, it would also be available in many other languages, too.
As you know, the OT was primarily in Hebrew.
The NT was in Greek.
Zephaniah 3:9 tells us about how God will one day bring in a pure language.
This is a pattern we see. But for some odd reason, you are unable to see it.
As you know, the OT was primarily in Hebrew.
The NT was in Greek.
Zephaniah 3:9 tells us about how God will one day bring in a pure language.
This is a pattern we see. But for some odd reason, you are unable to see it.
I don't recall. Post #, please.
It's not unsupported. Textual critics believe in reconstructing the texts and the texts they currently have are the Word of God (Albeit, not perfect). I mean, if it is unsupported, then why don't you tell us what they believe? Do you have a perfect book known as the Bible that you can hold in your hands?
It's not unsupported. Textual critics believe in reconstructing the texts and the texts they currently have are the Word of God (Albeit, not perfect). I mean, if it is unsupported, then why don't you tell us what they believe? Do you have a perfect book known as the Bible that you can hold in your hands?
Jesus said to the Jews: "But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?" (Matthew 12:3-4).
Obviously, the Jews knew of this story but they were not able to connect the dots of its spiritual meaning.
This is what I meant. You were not able to connect the story of the spiritual meaning behind the Tower of Babel.
Obviously, the Jews knew of this story but they were not able to connect the dots of its spiritual meaning.
This is what I meant. You were not able to connect the story of the spiritual meaning behind the Tower of Babel.
First, it is troubling that you continue to use such words. Yes, the word is related to a donkey, but you would not say this in a job interview, in a church service funeral, or other related setting. Paul says, "Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6).
Second, you missed the point I made. The Jews were obviously aware of the story Jesus said, but He asked if they were aware of the story about a current event that just took place with His disciples. You are unable to do the same with how God operates today.
It wouldn't surprise me if there were folks like you who thought like you did when Jesus asked if they were aware of this OT story.
I say this not to wound you but to help you to see and walk in a better way (That will give you more peace).
May God bless you today.
Second, you missed the point I made. The Jews were obviously aware of the story Jesus said, but He asked if they were aware of the story about a current event that just took place with His disciples. You are unable to do the same with how God operates today.
It wouldn't surprise me if there were folks like you who thought like you did when Jesus asked if they were aware of this OT story.
I say this not to wound you but to help you to see and walk in a better way (That will give you more peace).
May God bless you today.
Matthew 5:22
”But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
So words matter.
Can one say that their speech is full of grace when they continually use hurtful insulting words?
Even in a debate setting, using insulting words in the opposition would be considered an ad hominem.
We are to love even our enemies.
”But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
So words matter.
Can one say that their speech is full of grace when they continually use hurtful insulting words?
Even in a debate setting, using insulting words in the opposition would be considered an ad hominem.
We are to love even our enemies.
Nothing you wrote says anything about the KJV in scripture. Nothing. I accept Gods word, thanks to Him I love His word. I just don't agree with your cult that the KJV is the only one that qualifies, and NOTHING in scripture supports this divisive and completely blind faith point of view you hold to. There's just no reasoning with cultist.
-
1
- Show all
There are several places where Modern Versions make Jesus appear to sin:
In Matthew 5:22 is just one example. Modern Translations remove the words “without a cause” in relation to being angry with your brother.
The King James correctly includes the words “without a cause,”
“But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.” (Matthew 5:22) (KJV).
Why is this important? Because Jesus got angry in Mark 3:5.
“And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other.” (Mark 3:5) (KJV).
But if we are to believe the Modern Translations, then Jesus had sinned by getting angry with his fellow brethren or Jews based on Matthew 5:22. For Modern Translations appear to condemn Jesus for just being angry in general as a sin, when in reality, Jesus was specifically referring to being angry without a cause.
Titus 3:10 in Modern Bibles says that we are to reject a divisive man or have nothing to do with them anymore (NASB) (NIV) (ESV) (NKJV) (BSB). However, Jesus says, “Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:” (Luke 12:51).
The author of the Living Bible (TLB) says in Zechariah 13:6, “What are these wounds? Oh, these I got when I was in a brawl at my friend's house." This is blasphemous because it is a prophecy about Jesus Christ.
In John 7:8, the Modern Translations remove the word “yet,” making it appear like Jesus is lying. The King James correctly includes the word “yet,”
“Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.”
(John 7:8) (KJV).
I remember a Christian once told me about how Jesus lied, and they pointed out this section of the Scriptures to me. I have heard other Christians say that Jesus sinned, as well. This is just crazy talk. Jesus had to be our spotless Lamb to pay the price for our sins. No doubt, they were most likely reading or favoring a Modern Translation that made them think this way.
The Bible teaches that Jesus is holy, undefined, and separate from sinners (Hebrews 7:26). It plainly tells us that Jesus is without sin (2 Corinthians 5:21, 1 Peter 2:22, 1 John 3:5, Hebrews 4:15).
Now, you cannot possibly be desperate enough to ignore all of these.
This is a pattern of evidence that we see in Modern Bibles that not good.
This also just the tip of the iceberg of major problems within them, as well.
Side Note:
Jesus sinning in Modern Bibles is just one reason out of my 101 Reasons for the King James Bible being the Pure Word of God for today.
In Matthew 5:22 is just one example. Modern Translations remove the words “without a cause” in relation to being angry with your brother.
The King James correctly includes the words “without a cause,”
“But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.” (Matthew 5:22) (KJV).
Why is this important? Because Jesus got angry in Mark 3:5.
“And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other.” (Mark 3:5) (KJV).
But if we are to believe the Modern Translations, then Jesus had sinned by getting angry with his fellow brethren or Jews based on Matthew 5:22. For Modern Translations appear to condemn Jesus for just being angry in general as a sin, when in reality, Jesus was specifically referring to being angry without a cause.
Titus 3:10 in Modern Bibles says that we are to reject a divisive man or have nothing to do with them anymore (NASB) (NIV) (ESV) (NKJV) (BSB). However, Jesus says, “Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:” (Luke 12:51).
The author of the Living Bible (TLB) says in Zechariah 13:6, “What are these wounds? Oh, these I got when I was in a brawl at my friend's house." This is blasphemous because it is a prophecy about Jesus Christ.
In John 7:8, the Modern Translations remove the word “yet,” making it appear like Jesus is lying. The King James correctly includes the word “yet,”
“Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.”
(John 7:8) (KJV).
I remember a Christian once told me about how Jesus lied, and they pointed out this section of the Scriptures to me. I have heard other Christians say that Jesus sinned, as well. This is just crazy talk. Jesus had to be our spotless Lamb to pay the price for our sins. No doubt, they were most likely reading or favoring a Modern Translation that made them think this way.
The Bible teaches that Jesus is holy, undefined, and separate from sinners (Hebrews 7:26). It plainly tells us that Jesus is without sin (2 Corinthians 5:21, 1 Peter 2:22, 1 John 3:5, Hebrews 4:15).
Now, you cannot possibly be desperate enough to ignore all of these.
This is a pattern of evidence that we see in Modern Bibles that not good.
This also just the tip of the iceberg of major problems within them, as well.
Side Note:
Jesus sinning in Modern Bibles is just one reason out of my 101 Reasons for the King James Bible being the Pure Word of God for today.
-
1
- Show all