This is only if you have been convinced of the lie that you are some kind of expert in Hebrew and Greek fluently and you know more than the 47 translators of ...
Closed minds... Never finds.
This is only if you have been convinced of the lie that you are some kind of expert in Hebrew and Greek fluently and you know more than the 47 translators of ...
It does not reveal the true meaning in English... in the manner as you claim.
Yet, in some ways, it's more literal and better when that is the case.
And, modern translations in many ways reveal the true meaning much better in a manner we can understand today.
None are perfect.
Closed minds... Never finds.
What you are proposing is gnosticism or secret knowledge that only a few elite can discover or know about.
I mean, what on Earth do you think it is saying different than the English in this verse?
Closed minds... Never finds.
“For God is my record, how greatly I long after you all in the bowels of Jesus Christ.”
Therefore...
What you admitted to about the Greek? It reveals that the KJV is not always revealing the true meaning of God's Word.
And, besides... if you ventured to tell me what Matthew 4:3 means by reading it from the KJV? You would soon find out it's not the case at all.
The only true translation of God's Word is to be found by locating one of the few pastors who is capable of exegeting the Scriptures accurately from the Hebrew and Greek.
You are entitled to your opinion about the KJV. But, do not do so boastfully as so many KJV Only people do.
For if you could boast as you claim? You should be able to tell me what Matthew 4:3 means, without hesitation.
But, you can't tell me.
If you knew the Bible half as well as you think you do, you would know that verse is not in Matthew at all. Those are Paul’s words.So is that your translation of what you think Matthew 4:3 is actually saying?
(From Genez’ post)
“For God is my record, how greatly I long after you all in the bowels of Jesus Christ.”
If you knew the Bible half as well as you think you do, you would know that verse is not in Matthew at all. Those are Paul’s words.
You said the following....
If it's perfect?
Then it should perfectly say what the Greek says. Right?
Since the KJV is perfect, please tell us what was Satan's objective in Matthew 4:3?
And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
Blah blah blah. Answer his question first.Yes, Paul does say this. This is not news. However, he is directly replying to my question as if to suggest that is the underlying Greek in Matthew 4:3 by my question. My question was asking him what he thinks Matthew 4:3 says. The verse he gave was his response. So blame him, and not me, please. Regardless, even if he think it means something else, he is following one man who has unique interpretations on the Greek that nobody has heard before. This is why the Modern Bible Movement is dangerous. Everyone becomes their own Greek expert, even if it does not align with the Greek world, or early church fathers.
....
You said:
And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God,
command that these stones be made bread.
It does not reveal the true meaning in English... in the manner as you claim.
Yet, in some ways, it's more literal and better when that is the case.
And, modern translations in many ways reveal the true meaning much better in a manner we can understand today.
None are perfect.
======================================================================================================
God is perfect, God’s word is perfect and you are telling us None is perfect?
Romans 4:3
God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Psalms 19:7
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
Let's study your case by comparing scripture with other scriptures that reveal the true meaning we need to understand. Try here to check with the so-called Trojan horse NKJB and other the like with the so-called old-worn KJB
King James Bible
And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
New King James Version
Now when the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”
NASB 1995
And the tempter came and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”
New International Version
The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”
I see differences when the English texts are laid out here,
First, the KJB stated that the “stones be made bread” whereas the three modern Bibles being compared have translated the Greek ‘ginomai’ as “become” bread.
Does the word in Greek mean to become or made in this context? While there is no doubt that KJB was used and translated in other cases for the Greek word ginomai as ‘become’ in many passages of the scriptures. However, I believe the English KJB is the correct or the appropriate word to fit the context.
What’s in the context by the way?
Context: Jesus was tempted by the devil so by the space of 40 days and 40 nights, Jesus hungered. The temptation challenges Christ's divinity if he is the Son of God, the Creator. We know the correlation of the Word in Creation as the plain scripture told us.
John 1:3
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Hebrews 1:2
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Since the context is about challenging Christ's divinity, the KJB precisely translated the Greek genomai as “made” rather than “become” for the following reasons:
- Indicates creation. Here, Satan tempts Jesus to use his power to instantly transform stones into bread, emphasizing creation. This is not true for the word “become” which indicates a process and often indicates a gradual change.
- Implies direct action. The action is directed that stones be made into bread, the occurrence of an undeniable direct action of Christ to satisfy his physical hunger during the time. Where to” become” needs a natural development and lacks divine power that can make all things.
- Thus, bringing with the immediate existence of bread from the stones will manifest the creative power of his divinity. Unlike the word “become” which suggests evolving into something
Thus “Become” does not fit the context. However, the NIV is telling us a different story. Here, he is to “tell the stones to become bread” is absurd. The NIV is saying flat wrong and does not satisfy the context. While the Lord can command anything, this is not an act of creation.
You ask a trivia question and is not related to Bible version issue but let me try it for you. The key verse is found in v7 and 10 as Jesus answered him that God cannot be tempted which simply shows that he is God and he is worthy of woship. Satan on the otherhand, the tempter shows that he is the Father of liar and the truth is not in him. He knows the verse but he did not apply.I am simply asking you what your interpretation would be of Matthew 4:3, being based upon the assumption that the KJV is a perfect English translation.
King James Bible
And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God,
command that these stones be made bread." Mat 4:3
Well? Was Satan tempting Jesus to prove something about himself?
Its a simple question...
Try again, please? Keep it short and simple, please. No need for commentary quotes.
You ask a trivia question and is not related to Bible version issue but let me try it for you. The key verse is found in v7 and 10 as Jesus answered him that God cannot be tempted which simply shows that he is God and he is worthy of woship. Satan on the otherhand, the tempter shows that he is the Father of liar and the truth is not in him. He knows the verse but he did not apply.
Hope this answers your question.
How about, could you enlighten us? You might be a good teacher.![]()
Jesus had made himself to be as a man.You ask a trivia question and is not related to Bible version issue but let me try it for you. The key verse is found in v7 and 10 as Jesus answered him that God cannot be tempted which simply shows that he is God and he is worthy of woship. Satan on the otherhand, the tempter shows that he is the Father of liar and the truth is not in him. He knows the verse but he did not apply.
Hope this answers your question.
How about, could you enlighten us? You might be a good teacher.![]()
You probably aren't aware of this nuance of English grammar (despite claiming to read the KJV, which has excellent grammar). The way you opened your post, you have identified yourself with the "democratic left". If you did not include the words, "I believe", you would not have done this. You have essentially said, "I, along with the democratic left, believe...."Just like the democratic left, I believe those who prefer Modern scholarship over simply believing the Bible at face value in what it says about itself are simply ignoring the facts on the matter.
You have done exactly the same thing, only in favour of the KJV.They have chosen to simply see a narrative they desire to be true for their own preferred reasons.
When you use verses that don't say what you claim they say, your integrity and reliability are questioned, and people rightly ignore your claims. That said, you also don't listen to people who claim, as you do, to believe in the perfection and preservation of God's word, though in a different form than you hold. Will my efforts in correcting you help you? God only knows. For now, I doubt it; you haven't demonstrated yourself to be teachable at all.If people cannot see the truth that the Bible teaches that His Word is perfect and it will be preserved forever after my showing them the verses straight out of the Bible many times, I cannot force them to see it. Will my efforts in showing them the Bible help them? Only God knows.
I'd say they were, in fact, successful, as there are users of the latter two. I haven't heard of the KJVER.The creators of the KJVER, NKJV, MEV, and more.
It does no such thing.Many are unqualified because they are secretly for the Critical Text and not the Textus Receptus, which simply shows that the Critical Text movement is not trustworthy.
Well, as the KJV is demonstrably not the perfect words of God for today, your entire premise is faulty.If a KJV update were to happen properly: A group of believers need to be convicted that the Textus Receptus is the superior Greek text that has led to the KJV being the perfect and inerrant words of God for today.
Your arrogance is unbecoming and your broad-brushing is inappropriate. You are welcome to level specific criticisms at specific people (and support them with evidence), but generalizing puts you in the camp with the Accuser, aka Satan.But critical text advocates cannot be trusted. Take for example, Westcott and Hort. They lied by saying that the Revised Version was the version set forth in A.D. 1611, when it clearly wasn't (Seeing they snuck in their own Greek text based on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus). Then there is 1 John 5:7. Instead of Modern scholars being honest that verse 7 should be blank, they try to deceive people by moving certain words from a nearby verse to fill in the gap in verse 7. There are many other deceptions like this, of course. Most in your camp cannot see them.
Here's an important difference between us: I wouldn't ask an AI search anything about Christian history, because I wouldn't trust the results to be complete, unbiased, and truthful.If you ask an AI search, "Did the KJV lead to three of the great revivals?",.
Instead of making several insulting assumptions and bleating endlessly about your preferred translation, why don't you simply ask what he means?I looked at Biblehub and compared the top popular Modern Versions (NIV, ESV, CSB, NASB) with the KJV. How do you see these corrupted Alexandrian Modern Bibles as saying something better than the KJV?
The only difference I noticed was that some of these Modern Bibles say "loaves of bread."
How is that significant?
Are you trying to suggest that this verse is proof that all Modern Bibles basically say the same thing?
Some in the Modern Bible camp have actually did tell me such nonsense. In this case, I believe such individuals are living in an alternative universe who are simply ignoring the facts. I have shown 50 plus false doctrines in Modern Bibles. Then there are the changed truths, as well. All these changes are for the worse, and not for the better.