The Error of KJV-Onlyism

[fredoheaven]

The General Baptists of England published the "Orthodox Creed."


1897:

“IN A CERTAIN SENSE, THE AUTHORIZED VERSION IS MORE INSPIRED THAN THE ORIGINAL...” (Minutes of the Annual Meeting, General Association of the Congregational Churches of Massachusetts, 1897.)​

This is also a claim of Benjamin Jowett, Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford.

The Life and Letter of Benjamin Jowwet p.406

https://books.google.com.ph/books?i...=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

[fredoheaven]

I've met people who can quote chapters of the KJV verbatim. And some were spiritually dead.

Jesus had this to say: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life."

See, I even quoted the KJV. However, it is not entirely correct. It should read "You" search the scriptures.

Why do you think KJB is incorrect in the particular verse? Thanks

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

non sequitur. Are you saying the Bible wasn't the 'final word of authority' when John wrote 'amen' in Revelation, or when Martin Luther hammered the 95 thesis on the church door in Whittenburg?

While Martin Luther did take a step in the right direction towards being saved by God's grace through faith, he also failed to fully accept the truths plainly in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, Romans 8:13, Galatians 6:8-9, James 2:24, and 1 Timothy 5:8. It was also good that he came out from some of Rome's false man-made traditions (Although he should have abandoned them all). But to answer your question,... No. The Scriptures being the final Word of authority did not begin with Luther. The Bible being our final word of authority began sometime either between when Revelation was complete or sometime after when the miraculous sign gifts had ceased (Note: I do hold to the small possibility that I could be wrong and the sign gifts. They could be operating by believers in some remote tribe of Christians somewhere). But this generally how I see how Bible history plays out involving how God communicates to us.

That's what a lot of KJV onlyist do. Even though the Bible teaches something, KJV onlyists will say no it doesn't mean that, because that contradicts the KJV. So you can show them the original Greek, and they try to say oh that's the same as Esther, or that verse from Latin about the Godhead is genuine. Or they don't care that the same Greek word is used in two passages.

And why would we do that? Did we just throw a dart and it landed on the KJV by chance? No, of course not. You make it sound like we have no good reasons to believe in the KJV. We have many reasons. I have come up with 101 Reasons for the King James Bible. Again, God’s Word does not return void, right? So look to Bible history and see which Bible in recent history was being used by the church. It would be the King James Bible. It is the most printed book in the world and has even been translated into other languages. The KJB created the English speaking Protestant world today. It was once this nation’s national book. But the Bible (the KJB) was removed from public schools as a book to teach from in the 1960s. Coincidentally, the Modern Bibles started to rise in popularity, causing doubt in what God’s true words were. Many English speakers today still speak words made possible by the King James Bible and they don’t even know it. Meaning, English speakers today will speak idioms or phrases as found in the King James Bible.

Or they build doctrine on the 1611 turn of phrase. A verse about being diligent to show 'yourself approved' does not specify academic study or reading in Greek.

Which Greek manuscripts? There are many. Do you also know how to order a pizza in the different forms of Greek?
Knowing a dead language would be best if you at least knew the Modern version of it, but most of you don’t know such things.
So you are taking it by faith and hope that your scholarly Greek dictionary is correct. You just assume they got it right when they could have gotten it wrong.

There are no originals anymore and copies of the original languages we do have in the Greek conflict with each other. But we know Scripture says that God's Word does not return void. Where are your original language manuscripts that we can trace whereby we can see it had a huge impact on Bible believers over the hundreds of years?

That's a silly argument if you are going to jump from there to KJV onlyism. It just so happens that you and your church use the KJV, and that is a VERY important group of folks. We could say the Spanish speaking folks or Chinese speaking folks are important, but isn't the center of Christianity the local KJV onlyist church? That kind of reasoning doesn't hold water with me.

I just don‘t think you realize the impact the KJV has had on history. It is a book unlike any other in history. It is the most influential book in the world and has caused the greatest revivals in human history. That’s the fruit. People of other countries who are not native English speakers declare that the KJV is the perfect Word of God? Why would people of other countries say that? It’s because there is something special about the King James Bible that people cannot escape. It is the most loved and attacked book in history.

We can see the hand of God upon the KJB.

1. Textus Receptus Translators Martyred.
2. King James united two Christian groups.
3. KJB & translators almost destroyed by a super bomb.
4. KJB was in a language that is the world language of today.
5. KJB is the most printed book in the world.
6. England spread out to the world and the Bible came with it.
7. KJB created the Protestant English speaking world.
8. A unity over one text (i.e, His Word does not return void).
9. Everyone speaks like the King James Bible.
10. 15 Biblical Reasons. KJB is the one and only best candidate for a perfect Word that is preserved today.

The Bible existed before the committee King James put together translated it.

Yes, I believe this would have been with the Latin Italic Bible by the Waldenses. But the Latin Italic Bible they had the lined up with the KJB was destroyed by the Catholic Church.

The current Bible movement you follow is recent in history. It was started by Westcott and Hort in 1881. If you go to Archive.org and look at the half-title page of Westcott and Hort's Revised Version, it says it is the version set forth in 1611 AD. However, this is a lie or a deception because everyone today (even Modern Scholars) knows that the Revised Version is based on a different line of Greek NT texts and it is not based on the underlying Greek NT text of the KJV. The Revised Version is based on the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The King James Bible is based on the Textus Receptus for the NT Greek. However, Hort called the Textus Receptus villainous and vile. Certainly, he was not a friend of the TR or the KJV. Therefore, based on the evidence, Westcott and Hort clearly employed deception. Furthermore, adding to the challenge for Textual Critics, there was a deliberate attempt to mislead by relocating the segment of 1 John 5:8, which reads, “For there are three that testify:” It's shifted to fill the gap in 1 John 5:7, creating the illusion that there's no crucial missing verse. This should immediately raise alarm bells. However, within the Textual Critic community, many might dismiss it with a casual "No cause for concern here, move along," which is worrying. If it were a trivial detail in the Bible that didn't impact doctrine, it might not be as critical, but this directly relates to a fundamental aspect of understanding God's nature.

If you don't like Wescott and Hort's work, that is in no way an argument for the KJV being inspired. That doesn't even make sense as an argument.

Well, you would be right if God did not promise to preserve His words and that His words were pure words. Seeing we believe God’s Word on this matter, we then look to see the most likely candidate of where God’s Word would be in this time period. The KJB fits the bill as God’s perfect Word in many many ways. 2 Timothy 3:15 says the Scriptures are “holy” and the mathematical miracles within the pages of Scripture are proof of their own holiness. Not to mention the doctrine is always right and superior when compared to the corrupt Bible line of Bibles by Westcott and Hort.

You don't think there was any RCC influence on the KJV, which relied on Roman Catholic Erasmus' Textual Criticism by which he developed the Textus Receptus?

Yes, I believe there is no Vatican influence upon the KJV. Even if you believe there was influence by Erasmus in his TR editions, it would not be present in the KJV (Which is the next Bible in line in the preservation of God’s Word). The Revised Version has 6-8 or so. Yet, this number INCREASES as Modern Bibles progress. Again, why? Because of Catholic corruption. The KJB was not corrupted on this level even if you did find like 1-2 you believe are Catholic changes. Do you even have a previous edition of the Bible that predates the TR / KJV to prove your case that there was a change being made?

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

This is also a claim of Benjamin Jowett, Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford.

The Life and Letter of Benjamin Jowwet p.406

https://books.google.com.ph/books?i...=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

That’s cool. Thank you very much. Anymore stuff that I did not provide from Will Kinney’s article or what I had shown would be appreciated.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

I was born again over 50 years ago.

Years of age as a believer had nothing really to do with it. What matters if you believe the Bible says about itself involving this topic or not. What matters if you have listened to the teachings of the Holy Spirit by God’s Word or not by asking and really desiring to know the truth (Despite whether you like that truth or not). But for your information, I was born again 31 years ago, and I have only increased in knowledge on the Bible issue by God’s grace.

The KJV made no sense to me.

When Jesus spoke the parables to others, do you think it made sense to everyone?
Do you think the disciples understood what Jesus was talking about when He spoke of His resurrection before He went to the cross?
Did not Jesus say certain words on the cross that others publicly did not understand?
Remember, the Scriptures say, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.” (Proverbs 25:2).

Most of the preachers used it and spent much time explaining what the language meant. I was not a contemporary of Shakespeare. I decided to use anything but the KJV.

Your experience was different than mine. I was saved by hearing words from the King James Bible, and I learned right away about the corruptions found in Modern English Bibles. Early on in my faith, the Textual Critics almost destroyed my faith in God’s Word. But I trusted God’s Word did not have errors in it as they falsely professed.

I don't have to wonder what it means to be moved in the bowels. Sound like a laxative. What would unbelievers think?

God is into what we would consider strange. If you are familiar with the Bible, you would know many of the stories in the Bible are equally unusual. Isaiah is naked for several years. An axe floating on the water. A donkey talked to his master, Balaam. Ezekiel had to bake his bread using human dung as fuel for the fire. Samson caught 300 foxes, tied them together in pairs by their tails, and fastened a torch between their tails. He then released them into the standing corn of the Philistines, burning up their fields. What are unbelievers to think of such things? Often today, the Bible is mocked for its odd and unusual facts. So that’s not a good excuse.

God’s thoughts are not our thoughts (Isaiah 55:8). Meaning, He doesn’t think like us.

My faith is just fine.

Faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17).
Meaning, everything in your Bible is the faith that God wants you to believe.
Most everything in your New Testament is everything of the faith that God wants you to obey.
Not all Bibles say the same thing and nor do they all teach the same thing.
Modern Bibles teach false doctrines and I have demonstrated that several times in this thread.
See my posts beginning at post #1,777.

It is the faith of the Son of God, and He has no problem. And that is about the only argument I have with modern translations. They say "faith in...." However, the literal translations, such as the Berean, get it right. I often look at the literal translation as well as how it is expressed in the main version.

No, Galatians 2:20 is more accurate because it is referring to ALL of the faith given to us by Jesus (of which He spoke by commandment by the Father). Some in both sides of the camp (KJV believers and Non-KJV believers) have falsely taken Galatians 2:20 to suggest that this is referring to how Jesus had faith. However, Jesus did not have faith. That’s illogical. Hebrews 11:1 says Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Jesus seen the Father accoridng to the Bible. So Jesus could not have faith in God the Father because He already seen Him. Galatians 2:20 is basically saying where faith comes from or He is the author of our faith (Seeing He is one with the Father in the Triune Godhead). For example, it would sort of be like saying: People in the 1800s lived in the comfort of light at night by the light bulb of Thomas Edison. It may not mean he made all the light bulbs personally himself back then where he worked tirelessly himself to make them all. It merely means he invented the light bulb. Jesus who is God (who is one with the Father) invented the faith (the words of God) in the Bible for us to believe in. Jesus seen God the Father. Jesus gave us many things for us to believe in by faith. So that is how we can have “the faith of the Son of God” (i.e., faith that comes from the Son of God because He spoke God’s words for us to believe or have faith in).

This KJV only nonsense implies that every Christian is a native English speaker. Plainly that is untrue.

First, English is the world language. So this aligns with God’s goals in reaching as many as possible.
Second, the great commission is a part of God’s goals (of which we see in Matthew 28, and Mark 16). However, part of the great commission is cast into doubt with footnotes in Mark 16 in Modern Bibles.
Three, not all Christians during the time of the writing of the NT Greek Scriptures was a Greek speaker. Neither was every nation Hebrew speakers in the time when the OT Scriptures were written primarily in Hebrew.
Four, if you were to look at Bible history, you would be able to see the Bible (the KJB) having a great impact on a great many people.
Five, others in other countries (whereby English is not their native tongue) have said that the King James Bible is the perfect Word of God. So it’s not just English people saying this. There is something special about the King James Bible.

Side Note:

I had written a more lengthy and better reply to the last paragraph above, but I lost the work. So it is a shortened version.
In any event, may God’s good ways shine upon you, and your family whether you agree or disagree.

God bless.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

I've met people who can quote chapters of the KJV verbatim. And some were spiritually dead.

I am sure atheists can memorize the Bible. If they don’t believe and obey the words, it is not going to change them obviously. But one will be spiritually dead if they remove words from the book of this prophecy (Revelation 22:18-19). This means that there has to be a certain perfect set of words somewhere that one can add or remove from.

Jesus had this to say: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life."

Whether it was your intention or not, many today quote this verse thinking that we don’t need the Scriptures or they quote them so as to downplay their importance. If such is the case: Well, you would not have faith without the Bible. You would not be saved without the Bible. Jesus was merely pointing out to the Jews how they do recognize the truth that the Scriptures are tied to eternal life, but they failed to recorganize that they talked Him (Who was the one who would save all mankind from their sins and be the source of eternal life to all who would believe).

See, I even quoted the KJV. However, it is not entirely correct. It should read "You" search the scriptures.

This is just silly. It is common knowledge that you don’t have to use the word “you” in a sentence as a part of a command and yet “you” (the reader) is implied. I mean, try telling this one to a police officer if you run a stop sign. Obvioiusly the word “Stop” is talking to ”you” or anyone else who sees it.

 

[Nehemiah6]

This KJV only nonsense implies that every Christian is a native English speaker. Plainly that is untrue.

No it implies no such thing. But this is a common straw man argument. Now for over 400 years Christians have had no issues with the King James Bible. In fact even scholars of English literature say that the KJB has molded the English language (and technically it is written in "Modern English" in spite of the archaic words).

Secondly English has become the language of the world, and people from all over the world are quite proficient in English. But for those who are not, the Trinitarian Bible Society publishes Bibles in all the major languages, but based upon the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts, which also underlie the KJB.

There is nothing nonsensical about upholding the most faithful and reliable English translation bar none. Every modern version since 1881 is a corrupted bible. And I have done my research and due diligence, so I do not speak unwittingly.

Are you aware that the leading person on the translation committee of the NASB TOTALLY REPUDIATED that translation after he was convicted by the Holy Spirit?
Frank Logsdon Repudiates the NASB
https://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/logsdon-repudiates-nasb.html

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

. I decided to use anything but the KJV..

"A native speaker of English who has never read a word of the King James Bible is verging on the barbarian.”

—Richard Dawkins, Atheist (source: theguardian.com)

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

Of course evil people love all the other versions of the Bible. And the Chinese/Korean/Thai/Indian and non English speaking Christians are evil because they don't use the KJV. Do you not see how ridiculous your stance is? I guesseth noteth.

Do thou not see, that this is a ridiculous ludicrous statement,

The Kjv if for ye and thou, so how do you presume all other holy books are not for ye and thou.

For ye where lost and going astray, and thou say pray, to him and ask him Did Jesus say ye or you. Thou or you. Thee hopefully will see that thou is speaking wisdom.


The King James version is for ye and the niv is for thou to. 😊

Thus sayeth the lord 😋

 

[presidente]

While Martin Luther did take a step in the right direction towards being saved by God's grace through faith, he also failed to fully accept the truths plainly in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, Romans 8:13, Galatians 6:8-9, James 2:24, and 1 Timothy 5:8. It was also good that he came out from some of Rome's false man-made traditions (Although he should have abandoned them all). But to answer your question,... No. The Scriptures being the final Word of authority did not begin with Luther. The Bible being our final word of authority began sometime either between when Revelation was complete or sometime after when the miraculous sign gifts had ceased (Note: I do hold to the small possibility that I could be wrong and the sign gifts. They could be operating by believers in some remote tribe of Christians somewhere).

The Bible never uses the term 'sign gifts' and does not say that category of gifts have ceased.

All of your strained KJV arguments that you have that one translation or version has to be some kind of final authority is still a problem for your theory, because, Oh no!, back before 1611 then people had to engage in scholarship to find out which manuscript tradition had it right....and there wasn't one document that was the 'final authority' because the KJV hadn't been translated yet. I don't see this set of 'final authority' arguments, concepts, or doctrines that you hold to in scripture about a certain translation, so I don't worry about it.

But this generally how I see how Bible history plays out involving how God communicates to us.

The Bible doesn't teach that progression in your charts there, not that God speaking or communicating in other means ceased.

And why would we do that? Did we just throw a dart and it landed on the KJV by chance? No, of course not. You make it sound like we have no good reasons to believe in the KJV. We have many reasons. I have come up with 101 Reasons for the King James Bible.

Again, I reject your whole line of reasoning that after 1611 it became required that one translation of the Bible into a foreign language be THE Bible, and the final authority.... and then having to argue for which one. The premise is flawed.

Which Greek manuscripts? There are many. Do you also know how to order a pizza in the different forms of Greek?

I've never had a Greek pizza. Italian pizza, or New York or Chicago sounds interesting to me. Korean pizza is edible, but i prefer not to have Chinese cabbage on my pizza. I would imagine the Greeks would do an good job of it, but I'd prefer one of those other varieties.

Knowing a dead language would be best if you at least knew the Modern version of it, but most of you don’t know such things.

Neo-Hellenic is pretty far from Koine. Some people who learned NT Greek with Erasmian pronunciation then learn Neo-Hellenic and want to push that pronunciation-- which uses a lot of information-- on Greek learners. I prefer a reconstructed approach. It makes more sense at the initial stages of the language. What good is saying 'Hello' or ordering pizza in Neo-Hellenic going to do someone trying to read the New Testament in New Testament Greek?"

So you are taking it by faith and hope that your scholarly Greek dictionary is correct. You just assume they got it right when they could have gotten it wrong.

You are putting a lot of faith in Anglican scholars who lived in the 1600's. Are you even Anglican? Do you even agree with the doctrine of the translators?

I just don‘t think you realize the impact the KJV has had on history. It is a book unlike any other in history. It is the most influential book in the world and has caused the greatest revivals in human history. That’s the fruit. People of other countries who are not native English speakers declare that the KJV is the perfect Word of God? Why would people of other countries say that?

Who says that? I've spent about 13 years of my life in Asia, and I've gone to I don't know how many of hundreds and hundreds of church meetings, Bible studies, etc., and I never once heard anyone say that about the KJV.

I did talk to the son of a KJV-onlyist who was also doing ministry in Thailand. He told about a missionary living off of funding from the US who was teaching people English so they could learn KJV English so they could read the Bible, so they could hear the word of God and be saved. He rebuked the man, saying he was living off of missions funds teaching English. He considered the idea that they had to hear the word of God in KJV English to legimately hear the word of God and be saved to be some damaging foolishness. I agree.

Of course, one of the missionaries from the independent Baptists in Indonesia that I talked to wasn't really KJV-onlyist, either, and I don't know that the churches they planted held to anything like that. I would guess they used the Terjemahan Baru like other churches used.

So there may be some people in independent fundamental Baptist churches, maybe even Restoration Movement churches that had a missionary teach this bizarre idea. I'd imagine it could keep churches from growing quickly if they think people have to learn 17th century English to hear the word and get saved.

It’s because there is something special about the King James Bible that people cannot escape. It is the most loved and attacked book in history.

I have no idea if it is 'the most attacked book.' I would imagine the Bible, in general, probably is. But the KJV per se? Why? And pointing out that it is a translation of the scriptures is not an 'attack.' If I tell someone who believes he can fly out the window of the second story that he can't fly, that's not an 'attack.'

We can see the hand of God upon the KJB.

1. Textus Receptus Translators Martyred.
2. King James united two Christian groups.
3. KJB & translators almost destroyed by a super bomb.
4. KJB was in a language that is the world language of today.
5. KJB is the most printed book in the world.
6. England spread out to the world and the Bible came with it.
7. KJB created the Protestant English speaking world.
8. A unity over one text (i.e, His Word does not return void).
   
   [/quote]
   None of this is an argument that the KJV is an exclusive inspired translation like the originals.
   
   [*]Everyone speaks like the King James Bible.

   No they don't. The KJV is influential in terms of religious terminology. People on here talk about 'speaking in tongues'-- and use 'tongues' instead of languages, for example. But we can see in this thread how a KJV onlyist called one person 'ye' and gets the other grammar wrong. Calling one person 'ye' is like calling one person "y'all" in the South. It shows you don't know how to speak correctly in the dialect.
   
   Lots of people have difficulty understanding KJV terminology. Then there are those words that changed in meaning like 'Study' in 'Study to show thyself approved...."
   
   

   [*]15 Biblical Reasons. KJB is the one and only best candidate for a perfect Word that is preserved today.

There is no election for there to be candidates. The idea that one translation in English has to be the 'perfect Word' of God isn't something the Bible teaches.

The apostles did not teach KJV-onlyism either.

Well, you would be right if God did not promise to preserve His words and that His words were pure words. Seeing we believe God’s Word on this matter, we then look to see the most likely candidate of where God’s Word would be in this time period. The KJB fits the bill as God’s perfect Word in many many ways. 2 Timothy 3:15 says the Scriptures are “holy” and the mathematical miracles within the pages of Scripture are proof of their own holiness. Not to mention the doctrine is always right and superior when compared to the corrupt Bible line of Bibles by Westcott and Hort.

That doesn't prove the premise. Nor do mathematical miracles.

Some early Christians held to a Hellenistic Jewish belief that the Greek LXX was an inspired translation. At least they had a compelling tradition, the idea that 70 elders working independently all translated the first five books of the Bible the same way into Greek.

Yes, I believe there is no Vatican influence upon the KJV. Even if you believe there was influence by Erasmus in his TR editions, it would not be present in the KJV (Which is the next Bible in line in the preservation of God’s Word).

I was thinking of a Latin verse about the three that bear record in heaven, taken from Erasmus' work on the Textus Receptus.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

@Dino246


That’s an immature and un-Christ-like reaction - IMHO.

Look at these guys from the Church Split YouTube Channel.



They are reviewing a KJV debate and they are almost drunk while doing so. They got the bottle of booze on the table that they were drinking during the review. Your reaction sort of reminds me of their immature and un-Christ-like behavior on this matter. You can see the video here. They make a cheap shot once. They take the KJV Pastor’s words out of context when he refers to how anti-KJV folk do not have the originals. The Church Split then starts to talk about the original languages existing in copies of manuscripts we have today. But the KJV Pastor was referring to the original manuscripts and not the copies. Perhaps they shouldn’t drink. This is why your side cannot be taken seriously. The immature behavior instead of actually dealing with the points is something I see a lot from your side on forums. Why? Because when a person attacks God’s book or they mess with it, it messes with their mind and behavior.


Side Note:

Also, in recent years, KJV debates have degraded since the KJV debate on the John Ankerberg Show. They now focus these debates on choosing the more odd individuals who believe in the King James believing position. James White is not going to debate Will Kinney or David Cloud. They want to make KJV-only believers look silly and so they choose the most odd KJV-only personalities. Granted, the Standing for Truth YouTube Channel (See here) does offer some sensible KJV debates. But James White or Dan Wallace has not joined in on these kinds of debates, though.

 

[jamessb]

I was born again over 50 years ago. The KJV made no sense to me. Most of the preachers used it and spent much time explaining what the language meant. I was not a contemporary of Shakespeare. I decided to use anything but the KJV. I don't have to wonder what it means to be moved in the bowels. Sound like a laxative. What would unbelievers think?

My faith is just fine. It is the faith of the Son of God, and He has no problem. And that is about the only argument I have with modern translations. They say "faith in...." However, the literal translations, such as the Berean, get it right. I often look at the literal translation as well as how it is expressed in the main version.

This KJV only nonsense implies that every Christian is a native English speaker. Plainly that is untrue.

Slight correction: This KJV only nonsense implies that every Christian is a native 17th Century English speaker. Plainly that is untrue." I would guess that very few KJV users fully understand the archaic Englyshe!

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

The Bible never uses the term 'sign gifts' and does not say that category of gifts have ceased.

The Scriptures do not mention the word “Bible” as you just said, but we use it nonetheless. Some folks get hung up on the use of the word “Trinity” (that is not a word found in the Bible) when it simply means three in one. However, the word “Godhead” does appear in the Bible (KJB) and it is another word for Trinity. Yet, this word is removed in Modern Bibles. All direct references to the Trinity in Modern Bibles are removed when you compare the KJV vs. The Modern Bibles. Anyway, getting back to my main point here: Christians use terms sometimes that describe a concept or truth in the Bible many times. Words like Calvinism, or Arminianism describe concepts that one sees in the Bible. By no means does the Bible condemn the use of extra-biblical words to describe things in the Bible that they see.

As for the sign gifts ceasing: Again, I have addressed this in my write-up here. I believe there are good points both biblically and historically why the miraculous sign gifts have most likely ceased today.

Consider the problems in the current Pentecostal and Charismatic Movement:

Note: Keep in mind that Justin Peters (in the video above) is against KJV-only and he agrees with Calvinism (Which is false).
Justin Peters even did a video on co-hosting an author on an anti-KJV-only book. So of course I disagree with him on certain things. The point here is that I do agree with him on the origins of the Pentecostal and Charismatic Movement.

In any event, if the Bible is not your final Word of authority, then what is it?
What did God tell you in a vision? The still small voice of God that speaks to you?
Another holy book that you believe is superior to the Bible?
Church traditions?
Scholars?
Belief in man-made translation theories?
An original language dictionary created by recent Rationalists of our day?

How do you get saved?
Was it not because of the Bible?
How do you know anything about doctrine?
Is it not because of the Bible?
Do you get doctrine and righteous living outside of the Bible as your guide?
If so, what is this source, and does it stand on par with the Bible?
Is this outside source you believe from God duplicatable?
Meaning, if a person said God spoke to them, this is not duplicatable.
20 people can say God spoke to them and they can all disagree with each on that one topic or thing.
So this is no real standard. They are just getting a feeling or impression and that is no real standard at all.
If they are actually hearing voices they believe are from God, this would not put me at ease.
Obviously the fruit will generally tell me they are not really listening to God but a false spirit.
At least, that has been what I have discovered by heavy research anyways.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Personally, no offense, but I would say a person is not even a true born again Christian if they reject the Bible or they down play it.
The Bible is how we get our faith. It is a major lifeline in how God talks to us today. The Bible is how we are guided by God today in what to believe and to obey His will. To reject the Bible is to reject God because God is revealed to us in the pages of Holy Scripture. A born again believer will not want to add or take away from God's word because they have reverence for His words. They wouldn't want to endanger their soul according to Revelation 22:18-19. Granted, I do believe a Christian can be saved by a Modern Bible, but I do not believe they can attack the true Word of God (the KJB), and or create their own translation and or heavily endorse changes in the Bible and yet also be saved. To alter God's Word or to attack His Word are very serious offenses to God.

 

[Dino246]

View attachment 261054
That’s an immature and un-Christ-like reaction - IMHO.

Thanks for your opinion. I'll file it where it belongs.

 

[presidente]

thou is being funny, but ye need joy. 😂

Thou doest speak in jest, but thou needest joy.

 

[presidente]

As for the sign gifts ceasing: Again, I have addressed this in my write-up here. I believe there are good points both biblically and historically why the miraculous sign gifts have most likely ceased today.

You posted a link to that when I was under deadlines at work, and I meant to respond.

Point 1--- that's obviously the wrong interpretation. If you were a Calvinist, I would point out that John Calvin called your interpretation stupid. That is the idea that the perfect comes before the resurrection or heaven. I think attributing it to dying and going to heaven makes no sense. But I noticed Calvin's commentary on the passage quoted a verse that came to mind when I read the passage-- that it does not yet appear what we shall be for we shall be like Him when we see Him as He is.

Do you really think that Paul's understanding was so childish when he wrote I Corinthians that yours is like an adult's in comparison to his, just because you have the Bible? If you read through a book he wrote, then come back years later and read it again and gain some insight you didn't get before, something Paul clearly had when he wrote the passage, you have disproved your theory. Clearly, Paul knew more about his own doctrine and the gospel and understood it more deeply than a lot of Bible owners since. That fact disproves your interpretation.

There is also the contextual issue. I Corinthians 1:7 says,
So that ye come behind in no spiritual gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ....

While waiting for Jesus to come back, Paul did not wish or anticipate his readers coming behind in any spiritual gift. Some themes mentioned later in the book are in the first chapter,-- utterance and knowledge, spiritual gifts, pride, wisdom, unity v. division. He's getting ready to write an epistle that addresses various topics including speaking in tongues and prophecy, and he speaks of 'utterance' and then writes that in verse 7.


Why should spiritual gifts

Point 2. I don't think you know how grammar works. I don't think you know how Greek grammar works, or words being inflected for gender. One word being in the neuter does not mean that all related concepts and ideas have to be expressed in the neuter. But if we want to play that silly game, telos in 'then cometh the end' in I Corinthians 15:24 is also a neuter singular noun, and so is 'swma' translated 'body.'

Conceptually, the situation that comes at or after the resurrection makes more sense as an explanation for what Paul is talking about. It will affect him personally. He speaks of himself in the first person, "When I was a child...." This will also likely change his knowledge, along with our own. And it is an actual theme in the epistle, unlike scripture.

The perfect law of liberty was perfect when James wrote his epistle. Paul wasn't sitting around waiting for that to become perfect.

 

[jamessb]

Personally, no offense, but I would say a person is not even a true born again Christian if they reject the Bible or they down play it.
The Bible is how we get our faith. It is a major lifeline in how God talks to us today. The Bible is how we are guided by God today in what to believe and to obey His will. To reject the Bible is to reject God because God is revealed to us in the pages of Holy Scripture. A born again believer will not want to add or take away from God's word because they have reverence for His words. They wouldn't want to endanger their soul according to Revelation 22:18-19. Granted, I do believe a Christian can be saved by a Modern Bible, but I do not believe they can attack the true Word of God (the KJB), and or create their own translation and or heavily endorse changes in the Bible and yet also be saved. To alter God's Word or to attack His Word are very serious offenses to God.

I read this unintentionally. That said, it is 100% wrong!

1) We get our faith from God, not from a book.
2) The way God talks to us today is through the Bible, through prayer and through the Holy Spirit.
3) The Holy Spirit is how we are guided by God today in what to believe and how to obey His will.
4) I don't know any believer who rejects the Bible! That is madness. People prefer one translation over another because God's message is revealed most clearly in the translation s/he prefers.
5) No born-again believer will ever want to add or take away from God's word. That includes you!
6) "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll" Revelation 22:18-19 Anyone who thinks this refers to an English translation of the entire Bible instead of the "book" of Revelation doesn't understand what John clearly wrote.
7a) Nobody is saved by the Bible! God is the one who saves! OBVIOUS!!!
7b) The KJB is not the "true Word of God". It is a translation only, and not error-free!
8) To alter God's Word or to attack His Word are very serious offenses to God. This is not limited to the King James Bible! When you attack modern translations, you are attacking His Word!!!

Again, I read your post by accident. Maybe the Holy Spirit directed me to read it because it is so egregious.

You are still on "ignore". Your post is precisely the reason!

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

Thou doest speak in jest, but thou needest joy.

Thou needeth to remembereth The Joy of thy lord, is thy strength.

Thou doest speak in jest, but thou needest joy.

Thou should seek the Joy of the lord, 😊

Thou needest warmth in thy hearth, and a glow on thou cheeks 😊

 

[presidente]

Thou needeth to remembereth The Joy of thy lord, is thy strength.

Yeah, thou also needest to remember that the joy of the Lord is thy strength.

Thou should seek the Joy of the lord, 😊

Thou also shouldst seek the joy of the Lord.

Thou needest warmth in thy hearth, and a glow on thou cheeks 😊

Thou also needest warmth in thine heart.