The word of God is not a secret code that needs unlocked.

  • 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.

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
For those who are against abortion, for any reason...

The KJV is not your friend.

Job 3:11
Authorized (King James) Version

Why died I not from the womb?
Why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly?

The KJV did not say....

Why died I not in the womb?
Why did I not give up the ghost before I came out of the belly?


That is just one example of many that the KJV accurately translated the meaning of the Hebrew 'min betin.'
Meaning, from (outside) the womb.

God's Word says that Job could not die inside the womb.
Because God imputes the human soul at birth, not before.
The parents create the human body.
But, only God creates human soul life.

Look through the KJV and you will never find when it says, inside the womb to pertain to human soul life.

But, you will find 'inside the womb' in modern translations.
First, the Modern Bibles say the same thing as the KJV in Job 3:11. Just go to Biblehub.com on this verse and you will see it. The ESV says the same thing using different words (among others).

Second, Job was wishing of the possibility that he could have died while in the womb or shortly after birth (Which happens all the time even today). Seeing it was God who ultimately takes life, Job was not wishing his parents killed him or anything silly. He simply desired he died early on by some accidental problem in birth. So you are imagining something problematic that does not exist.

Three, you also have things backwards. It is actually the Modern Bibles that promote abortion:

Certain Modern Translations Leave Room for a Person to Commit Abortion. For example, Luke 1:15 in certain Modern Translations such as the CEV, GNT, ICB, PHILLIPS, MSG, NCV, NLV, and WE all basically say from the time of John the Baptist's birth, he will be filled with the Holy Ghost. This is unlike the KJB that correctly says he will be filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb. Being filled with the Spirit in the mother’s womb suggests John the Baptist is a living human being inside the mother. Today, some Christians believe in abortion because they don’t think the baby is alive inside the womb (Which is basically the murder of innocent babies). No doubt, Modern bibles like these could potentially lead a person to justify the murder of the innocent.

But we both know you will not be able to see what I am talking about here. Why? Well, you have set your bow or attack against God's pure Word. This never ends well when a person goes down this path of darkness.

....
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
Would it be correct for me to assume that you really meant to say:

"This does not mean there was a body before the Incarnation."

John 3:

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

In verse 16, 'begotten' is about Bethlehem and 'gave' is about the cross. In verse 17, the "sense" of 'sent not his Son' is one of being after-the-fact - it does not mean that Jesus was the 'Son of God' outside of the virgin [conception and] birth. The sonship of Jesus is defined by - and rests totally 100% in - Him being born into the human race.
In addition, in Acts 13:33, translations like the NIV, NLT, BSB, and CSB imply that God the Father became Jesus' Father at some point in time, suggesting that Jesus only became God's Son during the incarnation. However, this is incorrect because Scripture clearly shows the Father sent His Son into the world (John 3:17) (John 3:13) (John 16:28), affirming Jesus was always the Son.

Also consider:

Proverbs 30:4 (KJV)
"Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?"
  • This rhetorical question implies a divine "Son," leading to Christian interpretations that see this as a veiled reference to the Son of God.
Daniel 3:25 (KJV)
"He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God."
  • This passage describes the account of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the fiery furnace, with a divine figure appearing, often interpreted as a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ (a Christophany).

Note: Yes, I believe King Nebuchadnezzar most likely viewed Jesus as an angel (a son of God), but the KJV was written after the fact showing us the truth that this was indeed the Son of God in the fire protecting Daniel's three friends. The point here is that Jesus was being named the Son of God in this story that took place in the Old Testament.

...
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
According to 1 Cor 2:14, The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

God hid the mystery of Christ's doctrine from spiritual Israel, which are not his enemy, but are his disobedient children (Rom 11:7-8)
Unlike my fellow KJV brother here, I believe parables teach doctrine. Yet, I also believe that the KJV being the perfect Word of God for today is a revelation from God that is revealed by reading the Scriptures (if one is open to such a truth).


....
 

Pilgrimshope

Well-known member
Sep 2, 2020
13,879
5,623
113
This is not true. There are changed doctrines in Modern Bibles.

To give you a flavor of the changed doctrines, see: A List of False Doctrines in Modern Bibles (Which is from another thread).

Also, check out Catholic Ideas in the NIV. (Which also appear in other Modern Bibles).

There are Verses that Water-Down the Blood Atonement, and the Substitutionary Atonement.

There are also Verses in Modern Bibles that Align with New Age Practices, too.


And much, much more.

I have come up with 50 serious changed doctrines in my PDF write-up that is a part of a larger defense of the King James Bible. Some of these changes are not listed from what I have shown and they are absolutely bone chilling and evil.

Side Note:

Please understand that I do not have a problem in using Modern English Translations or dictionaries. However, these tools are only supplemental, and not a replacement for the KJV. Meaning, I believe a Christian can only use such tools only under the condition they believe that the King James Bible is the perfect words of God for us today, whereby we are not seeking to change what it says in English. The reasons for this is multi-faced which fall under various categories. In fact, I have come up with 150 Reasons for the KJV being the Pure Word of God for today. 50 of them are doctrinal, and 100 of them are non-doctrinal for the most part. I have prayed and worked hard to only give the best reasons. There were some points or reasons I even removed. But why make this list? Why did I spend 2 years of my life in this study? Well, the alternative is not pretty because it leads a believer to become their own authority or trust different scholars (with their being no real settled standard). But of course, there are more reasons than that.


....
....
Yes there are some who think what you’re saying.
 

Pilgrimshope

Well-known member
Sep 2, 2020
13,879
5,623
113
Unlike my fellow KJV brother here, I believe parables teach doctrine. Yet, I also believe that the KJV being the perfect Word of God for today is a revelation from God that is revealed by reading the Scriptures (if one is open to such a truth).


....
Yep , parables are like narratives of the doctrines we hear in the apostles writings later on , all the things Jesus taught his followers are the foundation of the doctrines they taught. Parables very much reveal doctrine.

for instance what if a believer in Jesus wanted to know what our lord taught regarding forgivness in his kingdom ?

Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. ( he’s giving us something to liken Gods kingdom to do we can understand )

And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his Lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made.

The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the Lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt.

But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt.


So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their Lord all that was done. Then his Lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his Lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.

( as the narrative and lesson story ends he tells them the conclusion of his point bringing it back to peters question about forgivness )

So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭18:21-35‬ ‭KJV‬‬

the thing is it teaches the same thing in these words too the same lesson is learned even though the words are different and modernized your still learning the lesson from the kingdom parable

“Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.

Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. ( he’s giving us something to liken Gods kingdom to do we can understand )

As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand bags of gold was brought to him. Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.

“At this the servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.

But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred silver coins.

He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded. “His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay it back.’ “But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt.

When the other servants saw what had happened, they were outraged and went and told their master everything that had happened. “Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ In anger his master handed him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

( now he concludes the lesson of the kingdom and forgivness )

This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.””
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭18:21-35‬ ‭NIV‬‬

even tho the translation is to different words which people speak now days , it Carrie’s the same message as those who spoke the language of the kjv in tbier time. It’s in the words the people speak , and understand that they need a Bible.

If you gave them in 1611 an niv tbey would t be able to badly understand it because they don’t speak the same way we do language has changed but Gods word is able to translate to every language and tongue carrying the message of Christ and salvation

I love the kjv as well but niv is really really a good thing for English speakers , though I would suggest the original version.

those parables are really about doctrine for sure like creative summaries
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
Yes there are some who think what you’re saying.
Did you look at the links of the changed doctrines I provided?
Not sure how you can praise the NIV as a trustworthy translation after reading what I posted.
If that’s not enough, I got more.

….
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
Yep , parables are like narratives of the doctrines we hear in the apostles writings later on , all the things Jesus taught his followers are the foundation of the doctrines they taught. Parables very much reveal doctrine.

for instance what if a believer in Jesus wanted to know what our lord taught regarding forgivness in his kingdom ?

Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. ( he’s giving us something to liken Gods kingdom to do we can understand )

And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his Lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made.

The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the Lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt.

But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt.


So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their Lord all that was done. Then his Lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his Lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.

( as the narrative and lesson story ends he tells them the conclusion of his point bringing it back to peters question about forgivness )

So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭18:21-35‬ ‭KJV‬‬

the thing is it teaches the same thing in these words too the same lesson is learned even though the words are different and modernized your still learning the lesson from the kingdom parable

“Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.

Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. ( he’s giving us something to liken Gods kingdom to do we can understand )

As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand bags of gold was brought to him. Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.

“At this the servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.

But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred silver coins.

He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded. “His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay it back.’ “But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt.

When the other servants saw what had happened, they were outraged and went and told their master everything that had happened. “Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ In anger his master handed him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

( now he concludes the lesson of the kingdom and forgivness )

This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.””
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭18:21-35‬ ‭NIV‬‬

even tho the translation is to different words which people speak now days , it Carrie’s the same message as those who spoke the language of the kjv in tbier time. It’s in the words the people speak , and understand that they need a Bible.

If you gave them in 1611 an niv tbey would t be able to badly understand it because they don’t speak the same way we do language has changed but Gods word is able to translate to every language and tongue carrying the message of Christ and salvation

I love the kjv as well but niv is really really a good thing for English speakers , though I would suggest the original version.

those parables are really about doctrine for sure like creative summaries
Yes, from my perspective, its kind obvious the parables teach doctrine.
There are a lot of great nuggets and lessons to learn from them to the glory of Jesus Christ.

But I would disagree with you that the NIV is a good thing for English speakers unless one does not care about precise truth or one just wants to get the general story with certain facts wrong. As I pointed out before, the NIV teaches Catholic ideas (Among many other problems). But generally a person who is not looking for such problems in their Modern Bible, will not see it. That's what makes these Modern Bibles so deceptive. Again, I am not against their use, but it is only under the condition that a Christian believes that there is one perfect Bible that is the standard (Which I believe is the King James Bible for many reasons).


....
 

Pilgrimshope

Well-known member
Sep 2, 2020
13,879
5,623
113
Yes, from my perspective, its kind obvious the parables teach doctrine.
There are a lot of great nuggets and lessons to learn from them to the glory of Jesus Christ.

But I would disagree with you that the NIV is a good thing for English speakers unless one does not care about precise truth or one just wants to get the general story with certain facts wrong. As I pointed out before, the NIV teaches Catholic ideas (Among many other problems). But generally a person who is not looking for such problems in their Modern Bible, will not see it. That's what makes these Modern Bibles so deceptive. Again, I am not against their use, but it is only under the condition that a Christian believes that there is one perfect Bible that is the standard (Which I believe is the King James Bible for many reasons).


....
Yes like I was saying a lot of people think that you need to only read thier preferred versions of the Bible . You can find links for the Hebrew Bible , the kjv ect claiming all the reasons why thier version is the only one

Other people like me , I don’t think that’s the case at all God was speaking before there was a Bible and then before it was translated by the commission of king James , and he’s speaking even today in English , Spanish , French , Italian Hebrew ect but he’s saying the same things to the people that understand each language and speech

but to be clear it’s only my belief , it’s not like I’m some authority or official just someone in a biblical discussion forum who doesn’t think that anyone has to learn antiquated English to understand the Bible or be saved or know the truth

Some do I realize think that but I don’t . I dont mean any offense to you or anything . But I know that there are several translations of the Bible that are accurate to the original texts of the Hebrew and Aramaic and Greek .

The only difference is that they come to people in thier own languages saying the same things to either believe or reject

you don’t find anyone on a mission in an Indian speaking country speaking “ thou shalt not do this or that “ no one would ever understand it it would be jibberish if it’s not in a la gauge they can hear and understand

God wasn’t making his word a secret or hard to hear he was sending it to everyone in all nations in all the world until the end
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,330
13,715
113
Note: Yes, I believe King Nebuchadnezzar most likely viewed Jesus as an angel (a son of God), but the KJV was written after the fact showing us the truth that this was indeed the Son of God in the fire protecting Daniel's three friends. The point here is that Jesus was being named the Son of God in this story that took place in the Old Testament.
After all, it makes perfect sense that a pagan king would acknowledge a foreign god.

No. The KJV might be theologically accurate here but it’s contextually incorrect. It is extremely unlikely that the original Hebrew has ‘the son of God’.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,330
13,715
113
Did you look at the links of the changed doctrines I provided?
Not sure how you can praise the NIV as a trustworthy translation after reading what I posted.
If that’s not enough, I got more.

….
Your argument is based on a fallacy. You need to establish first that the KJV is a perfect translation of perfect manuscripts before using it as the standard against which other translations are measured.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
After all, it makes perfect sense that a pagan king would acknowledge a foreign god.

No. The KJV might be theologically accurate here but it’s contextually incorrect. It is extremely unlikely that the original Hebrew has ‘the son of God’.
Uh, no. King Nebuchadnezzar admitted in context the following words.

"Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him,..." (Daniel 3:28).​
This truth is expressed even in Modern Bibles.

...
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
Your argument is based on a fallacy. You need to establish first that the KJV is a perfect translation of perfect manuscripts before using it as the standard against which other translations are measured.
Did you carefully look at the points I made on each of those links?

....
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
Yes like I was saying a lot of people think that you need to only read thier preferred versions of the Bible . You can find links for the Hebrew Bible , the kjv ect claiming all the reasons why thier version is the only one
When somebody tells you they have 150 Reasons for something, I think the information they provide deserves a look.
I provided several links to certain posts on this forum revealing changed doctrine for the worse in Modern Bibles when compared to the KJV. So while others may make the claim that their Bible is perfect and inspired, I highly doubt they have the same amount of good reasons I have come up with.

Are you even aware that that the underlying Greek texts for the New Testament between the KJV and Modern Bibles is different?
Are you even aware that there are changes even in the underlying Greek texts?

The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus (for the NT Greek).
The Modern Bibles are based on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus (for the NT Greek).
Are you even remotely aware of the history behind these two lines of Bibles?

You said:
Other people like me , I don’t think that’s the case at all God was speaking before there was a Bible and then before it was translated by the commission of king James , and he’s speaking even today in English , Spanish , French , Italian Hebrew ect but he’s saying the same things to the people that understand each language and speech
Most modern foreign language Bibles are based on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts, which form the foundation of the Critical Text, also known as the Nestle-Aland or United Bible Societies (UBS) Greek New Testament. These translations often align with the same textual basis used for modern English versions like the NIV or ESV. This should scare you because these Modern Bibles clearly teach false doctrines in many places. I gave you the links to look at. Why didn't you go there to check them out?

You said:
but to be clear it’s only my belief , it’s not like I’m some authority or official just someone in a biblical discussion forum who doesn’t think that anyone has to learn antiquated English to understand the Bible or be saved or know the truth
That is correct. You are not the authority. The Bible is the authority.
But how can the Modern Bibles be your authority if they all say different and conflicting things?
Who then becomes the authority? Is it you or the scholar?

As for the antiquated English: Would you call the Greek antiquated and therefore refuse to learn even one or two Greek words along the way in your walk with God?

Oh, and I believe that a person can be saved by a Modern Bible. However, that said, I believe a believer will more likely fall into false doctrines and or be more liberal if they are in support of reading conflicting Modern Bible Versions. I believe they are even more likely to lose their faith, as well. In fact, it has happened already many times in Bible college.

You said:
you don’t find anyone on a mission in an Indian speaking country speaking “ thou shalt not do this or that “ no one would ever understand it it would be jibberish if it’s not in a la gauge they can hear and understand
When it comes to a foreign country getting a Bible: I am not against honest god fearing made Bible translations based off the King James Bible and the Textus Receptus underlying Greek for the New Testament. Granted, it is more difficult to do such a thing in these last days.

You said:
God wasn’t making his word a secret or hard to hear he was sending it to everyone in all nations in all the world until the end
Then why talk about Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, which is far more difficult to grasp?
Surely learning 1600s is easier.

Anyway, are you aware that 1 John 5:7 is not in Modern Bibles?
There are other missing verses that are really important to the faith.
So while Mark Ward may cry about false friends, we are concerned about our missing friends (like all the missing verses that are chopped out of the Bible). I say they are chopped out because even your own Modern Bibles will admit that they are omitted.



....
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,330
13,715
113
Uh, no. King Nebuchadnezzar admitted in context the following words.

"Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him,..." (Daniel 3:28).​
This truth is expressed even in Modern Bibles.

...
Yes… later. You’re employing a fallacy of anachronism.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
Yes… later. You’re employing a fallacy of anachronism.
Contextually, this is not an anachronism. Job 38:7 tells us that “sons of God” are angels. King Nebuchadnezzar calls the fourth in the fire, “the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.” (Daniel 3:25). So Nebuchadnezzar is saying the fourth is like the angel of God. This is exactly what we read in context in Daniel 3:28. The King refers to the God of Shadrach, Mechach, and Abednego and calls their God as being blessed who has sent his angel (i.e. referring back to the phrase “the Son of God”). While there was no such thing as capitalization in Hebrew, we do serve a God who was able to translate languages just fine in Acts chapter 2. Clearly this was Jesus in the fire. John 5:39 says, “"Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." So it make sense that Daniel 3:25 is seen as the angel of God from the pagan king’s perspective, and yet it also refers to our Lord Jesus Christ because that is who was in the fire. For how else would you know it was Jesus in the fire?


 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,330
13,715
113
Contextually, this is not an anachronism. Job 38:7 tells us that “sons of God” are angels. King Nebuchadnezzar calls the fourth in the fire, “the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.” (Daniel 3:25). So Nebuchadnezzar is saying the fourth is like the angel of God. This is exactly what we read in context in Daniel 3:28. The King refers to the God of Shadrach, Mechach, and Abednego and calls their God as being blessed who has sent his angel (i.e. referring back to the phrase “the Son of God”). While there was no such thing as capitalization in Hebrew, we do serve a God who was able to translate languages just fine in Acts chapter 2. Clearly this was Jesus in the fire. John 5:39 says, “"Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." So it make sense that Daniel 3:25 is seen as the angel of God from the pagan king’s perspective, and yet it also refers to our Lord Jesus Christ because that is who was in the fire. For how else would you know it was Jesus in the fire?


I certainly don’t need a mistranslation to know it was Jesus.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
I certainly don’t need a mistranslation to know it was Jesus.
So now we are basing the faith off our own subjective feelings, thoughts, and or popular beliefs instead of the Bible?
The point here is where do you get understanding of the knowledge of the things of God?
Its by the Bible. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). It's by hearing the words from the Bible, and then believing them. That is why we have faith in Jesus in the first place. If we had no Bible, then what thing would we be building our faith upon? That is the question. People have visions of false Christs or a Jesus that contradicts Scripture. We have to test everything with Scripture. Acts 17:11 ays the Bereans were more noble because they searched the Scriptures to see whether those things be so or not.


...
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,013
332
83
So now we are making gross unwarranted assumptions?
So then, if your right, which Bible verse tells you it was Jesus in the fire?
My Bible (the KJV) tells me straight out flat it was the Son of God in the fire with Daniel's three friends.
What does your Bible say that would clearly lead you to that conclusion?

...