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
2,086
339
83
Those were some mighty fine and respected names you associated with textural criticism.

Looks like the devil has gotten a hold of the KJV Only group with textural criticism derangement syndrome.

Sad to say.... It's beginning to look more and more like that is the case.


.........
Funny. You used a spin-off of a Republican line—very clever! But two can play at that game.

If I turn the tables, I might say you have a case of "Simple Bible-Believing Derangement Syndrome" or even "No Settled Text Derangement Syndrome." I say this because the Bible itself teaches that God's Word is perfect and would be preserved forever. It indicates that there would be one Word of God we can trust—not many versions or one corrupted and full of errors. Either you are unaware of these verses, or you simply don't care to know them. If you are a true seeker of truth, you would want to know these verses, or at least be open to them. But if you prefer some wiggle room on what God said, then that is simply your belief or choice (Which is liberal).

....


....
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,086
339
83
None of that is relevant to the topic at hand. You made the accusation that the modern Bibles are the new kids on the block, as though that is some terrible thing. I countered that the KJV was once the new kid. Instead of acknowledging that and retracting your accusatory remark, you have attempted to change the subject three times now.

It ain't gonna fly.
No. Your nonresponses are not going to fly. Go back and look at the evidences that are staring you in the face in regard to how the Modern Bible Movement today is still the Westcott and Hort Movement.

Also, you are the new kids on the block because 413 years of the KJV does not compare to 143 years of the W/H Movement, which did not really ramp up until the 1960s and 1970s (Which is 64 or 54 years away from our present day).


...
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,610
13,863
113
I am saying that a Christian who doubts or does not know where God’s precise and perfect words are is like an agnostic who doubts the existence of God. You do not know where all the words of God are; I do. .
Did Isaiah have all the words of God? Did David? How about Moses? Abraham? Noah? How about Hezekiah, or Huldah, or Hannah?

None of them did, yet they were faithful to what little they did have. That puts them in a different category than you, who claim to have all the words of God but don't follow them. Your arrogance, unteachable attitude, and personal insults are utterly unbecoming of one claiming to follow Christ.

Until you treat those who disagree with you, even vehemently, with respect, you might as well have no Bible at all.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,610
13,863
113
But if you prefer some wiggle room on what God said, then that is simply your belief or choice (Which is liberal).
Says the guy who wiggles out of "what God said" in 2 Kings 8:26 and 2 Chronicles 22:2.

Hypocrite.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,610
13,863
113
No. Your nonresponses are not going to fly. Go back and look at the evidences that are staring you in the face in regard to how the Modern Bible Movement today is still the Westcott and Hort Movement.

Also, you are the new kids on the block because 413 years of the KJV does not compare to 143 years of the W/H Movement, which did not really ramp up until the 1960s and 1970s (Which is 64 or 54 years away from our present day).


...
Oh My. Goodness. You're still trying to change the subject.

D'oh!
 

Bob-Carabbio

Well-known member
Jun 24, 2020
1,618
810
113
Actually, many Christians have fell away from the faith when they learned of the false Science of Textual Criticism in Bible colleges.
Agreed -"false Science of Textual Criticism" IS "Theology" in it's academic development.

The Bible is truth, and it gives us Theology.
But the "Theology" that we generate (by human wisdom as mentioned above) may be as false as a $3 bill

The Spirit is given to those who obey Him (Acts 5:32).
The Holy Spirit INDWELLS everybody who has been Born Again by Him.
 
Jul 15, 2024
108
24
18
What most everyone is not understanding is that the KJV is sufficient to relay God's main messages, which can only be understood by those selected by the Father to receive His Holy Spirit. With the KJV, scripture fits together nicely so that the message is clear and consistent and easy to work with when doing research. It seems to me that with the KJV God is involved in its endurance and even though it is not perfect, it is sufficient. God's message to mankind through the ages is directed by Him.
 

Genez

Junior Member
Oct 12, 2017
3,460
541
113
Did Martin Luther start his reformation using the KJV?

Did Huldrych Zwingli?

Did John Knox?

Did John Calvin?


Amazing, how they did so well without the KJV....
How did they ever manage it without the KJV?


grace and peace .......
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,969
13,625
113
What most everyone is not understanding is that the KJV is sufficient to relay God's main messages, which can only be understood by those selected by the Father to receive His Holy Spirit. With the KJV, scripture fits together nicely so that the message is clear and consistent and easy to work with when doing research. It seems to me that with the KJV God is involved in its endurance and even though it is not perfect, it is sufficient. God's message to mankind through the ages is directed by Him.

does anything you said here apply "only" to the kjv?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,969
13,625
113
I am saying that a Christian who doubts or does not know where God’s precise and perfect words are is like an agnostic who doubts the existence of God. You do not know where all the words of God are; I do.
how much are two sparrows sold for?
 

GWH

Groovy
Oct 19, 2024
1,891
459
83
What most everyone is not understanding is that the KJV is sufficient to relay God's main messages, which can only be understood by those selected by the Father to receive His Holy Spirit. With the KJV, scripture fits together nicely so that the message is clear and consistent and easy to work with when doing research. It seems to me that with the KJV God is involved in its endurance and even though it is not perfect, it is sufficient. God's message to mankind through the ages is directed by Him.
I like your saying "sufficient", because in this fallen world that is what we must be content with (and all translations are sufficient), but I find your saying that God only wants to save a few to be deficient per JN 3:16, 1TM 2:3-4, etc. (in all versions).
 

Bob-Carabbio

Well-known member
Jun 24, 2020
1,618
810
113
What most everyone is not understanding is that the KJV is sufficient to relay God's main messages, which can only be understood by those selected by the Father to receive His Holy Spirit.
Which is EVERY CHRISTIAN who's been Born again of the Holy SPirit.

The KJV is all well and good - personally I'm a KJVP I prefer the KJV - since I've been reading it for 70 years, know the work-arounds for the lousy places of translation, and use it to find things in concordances (like Blue Letter Bible).

KJVO is a rabbit trail claiming that the KJV IS THE ONLY "Perfect translation" which is easily demonstraterd to be FALSE.

Almost ANY Bible translation is as good as any other since the Holy Spirit is ever-present to lead us into truth - IF WE WANT IT.
 

Bob-Carabbio

Well-known member
Jun 24, 2020
1,618
810
113
Did Martin Luther start his reformation using the KJV?
Since the KJV DIDN'T COME ALONG UNTIL 1611, and the Douay-Rhiems was 1582, Martin Luther, who died in 1546 wouldn't have known about either version.

Luther produced his own translation in German from the Latin Vulgate - introduced aroound 400 a.d.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,086
339
83
how much are two sparrows sold for?
As you know, Matthew 10:29 provides the answer to the question you asked. However, I can't help but feel this is just a lead-in to attack the King James Bible. Yes, the KJV does occasionally employ dynamic equivalence to convey clarity to the reader rather than expecting them to navigate foreign currency or cultural references on their own. In contrast, Modern Bibles have introduced so many heretical changes that any true seeker of truth should feel disturbed. Just as an atheist attacks the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Bible agnostic attacks the English Bible that has faithfully guided English-speaking Christians for over four centuries—the KJV.

Yet, while you may be groaning in your spirit in disgust at the idea of God preserving His Word in 1600s English, the Bible says: "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise" (1 Corinthians 1:27). One either believes in God's promises, that His Word is pure and perfect (Psalms 12:6-7), or one does not believe those promises. Remember, faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God (Romans 10:17). This refers to hearing Scripture; that’s how you gain faith. But if your Bible has errors, or you believe God speaks through a sea of conflicting Bibles, you risk entering into confusion, making either yourself or the scholar the authority.

But you are straining at gnats, focusing on supposed little problems, as you swallow doctrinal camels. Consider these significant doctrinal changes in Modern Bibles:

  1. Direct References to the Trinity Removed: Clear references to the Trinity are missing in Modern Bibles, including the Comma in 1 John 5:7, which explicitly states, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." The term "Godhead" is omitted in Modern Bibles, while it appears in the KJV. Although the Greek words underlying “Godhead”—theion in Acts 17:29, theiotēs in Romans 1:20, and theotēs in Colossians 2:9—primarily convey the idea of "divine nature" or "deity," the Cappadocian Fathers in the 4th century emphasized that this divine nature is most fully realized within the context of the Trinity. Much like the word "love," which can refer to a feeling of deep affection, the term reaches its highest and truest meaning when it involves a person laying down their life for others, as Jesus Christ did on the cross. Similarly, the term "Godhead" is fully expressed when understood as referring to God’s triune nature. Removing these direct references to the Trinity only waters down this beautiful truth about the Lord our God in Scripture.
  2. Abortion Justified: Certain Modern Bibles, such as the CEV and GNT, in Luke 1:15 state that John the Baptist would be filled with the Holy Spirit from birth rather than from his mother’s womb, as the KJV says. This subtle change implies that life does not begin until birth, which could potentially lead readers to justify abortion by implying that the unborn child is not yet considered alive in God’s sight. In contrast, the KJV preserves the message that John was called and filled with the Holy Spirit even in the womb, underscoring the value of life before birth.
  3. Characteristics of God's Word Altered: Modern translations adjust key verses that communicate the nature and attributes of God’s Word, often aligning them with the subjective perspectives of textual critics. For example, Psalms 12:6-7 in the KJV states, "The words of the Lord are pure words...Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever," indicating the preservation of God's words. Modern versions, however, sometimes reinterpret this to refer to God's preservation of people rather than His words. Similarly, Psalms 138:2 and 2 Corinthians 2:17 in the KJV emphasize the Word’s perfection and integrity, while Modern Bibles sometimes adjust the language in ways that lessen this focus. These changes raise questions about the intentions behind the rewording, as they affect the clarity of God’s promise to preserve His Word.
  4. Repentance for Sinners Inconsistent: Modern Bibles create inconsistency by stating in Luke 5:32 that Jesus calls sinners to repentance, while in Matthew 9:13 and Mark 2:17, He is said to call sinners with no mention of repentance. The NASB 2020 even goes so far as to imply that Jesus does not call sinners to repentance at all, potentially weakening the focus on repentance as a crucial step in turning to God. In the KJV, the call to repentance is a clear and unifying theme, underscoring the importance of this doctrine in the life of a believer.
  5. Omission of Apostolic Authority on Circumcision: In Acts 15:24, Modern Bibles omit the phrase “subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment.” This omission is significant, as it leaves out the apostles’ clarification that Gentile believers were not required to follow Jewish customs, such as circumcision, to be saved. By removing this direct statement, Modern Bibles potentially obscure the apostles’ intent and undermine the clarity with which they established Christian liberty from the Law of Moses for Gentile converts.

If your Bible contains these kinds of changes, it risks weakening key doctrines, leading to confusion, and making the reader dependent on scholars for interpretation. Stand firm on God’s promises and rely on His pure Word, instead. Do not be duped by the Scribes of our day.



....
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,086
339
83
Agreed -"false Science of Textual Criticism" IS "Theology" in it's academic development.
So those who have fallen away when they learned of such a false Science are to be ignored?
I believe it is the bad fruit of Textual Criticism.

You said:
But the "Theology" that we generate (by human wisdom as mentioned above) may be as false as a $3 bill
Which pretty much sums up the scholarly Modern Bible Movement today.

You said:
The Holy Spirit INDWELLS everybody who has been Born Again by Him.
So you don't believe the verse in Acts I quoted to you?


...
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
2,086
339
83
Since the KJV DIDN'T COME ALONG UNTIL 1611, and the Douay-Rhiems was 1582, Martin Luther, who died in 1546 wouldn't have known about either version.

Luther produced his own translation in German from the Latin Vulgate - introduced aroound 400 a.d.
An atheist might attack the resurrection by pointing out things from a natural man's perspective. Ultimately, it requires faith in your Bible when it speaks of the resurrection (which I am sure you believe). Similarly, you must approach the issue of the Bible itself with faith in the Bible. Does the Bible refer to itself as perfect and preserved? Yes. Does the Bible say that we can have certainty in the knowledge of the words of truth? Yes, it does. Does the Bible instruct us all to speak the same thing? Yes, it does. But such unity is not possible in the Modern Bible Movement. Only the modern-day scribes (whom Jesus warns us about) have removed God’s words from men’s hearts, leading people away from a simple, plain belief in the Bible.

Looking at Bible history with a perspective of doubt—like the atheist’s perspective on the resurrection—is not the way forward. Believing in the Good Book and then examining history to support it is the way. We see in Bible history that the KJV is unlike any other Bible translation: it has led to three great revivals. The KJV has also brought hundreds of its idioms into daily speech among English-speaking believers and even unbelievers. Is it really a coincidence that the King James Bible was almost destroyed by a super bomb launched by Catholics? Is it a coincidence that Catholics once warned their followers not to read the KJV, as seen in the New American Catholic Bible? Granted, this has changed, and there is now a Catholic edition of the KJV. But the point is, they once saw it as enough of a threat to ban reading it.

These should be reasons why you should trust the King James Bible as the perfect Word of God for today.



...
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,610
13,863
113
As you know, Matthew 10:29 provides the answer to the question you asked. However, I can't help but feel this is just a lead-in to attack the King James Bible.
When you can’t distinguish between criticism and “attack”, you’re acting like the leftists do.

In contrast, Modern Bibles have introduced so many heretical changes …
Yup… sidestep into making an “attack” before you have even heard the criticism.

Proverbs 18:3 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is a folly and shame unto him.

Just as an atheist attacks the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Bible agnostic attacks the English Bible that has faithfully guided English-speaking Christians for over four centuries—the KJV.
Fallacious personification again.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,969
13,625
113
As you know, Matthew 10:29 provides the answer to the question you asked. However, I can't help but feel this is just a lead-in to attack the King James Bible. Yes, the KJV does occasionally employ dynamic equivalence to convey clarity to the reader rather than expecting them to navigate foreign currency or cultural references on their own. In contrast, Modern Bibles have introduced so many heretical changes that any true seeker of truth should feel disturbed. Just as an atheist attacks the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Bible agnostic attacks the English Bible that has faithfully guided English-speaking Christians for over four centuries—the KJV.

Yet, while you may be groaning in your spirit in disgust at the idea of God preserving His Word in 1600s English, the Bible says: "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise" (1 Corinthians 1:27). One either believes in God's promises, that His Word is pure and perfect (Psalms 12:6-7), or one does not believe those promises. Remember, faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God (Romans 10:17). This refers to hearing Scripture; that’s how you gain faith. But if your Bible has errors, or you believe God speaks through a sea of conflicting Bibles, you risk entering into confusion, making either yourself or the scholar the authority.

But you are straining at gnats, focusing on supposed little problems, as you swallow doctrinal camels. Consider these significant doctrinal changes in Modern Bibles:

  1. Direct References to the Trinity Removed: Clear references to the Trinity are missing in Modern Bibles, including the Comma in 1 John 5:7, which explicitly states, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." The term "Godhead" is omitted in Modern Bibles, while it appears in the KJV. Although the Greek words underlying “Godhead”—theion in Acts 17:29, theiotēs in Romans 1:20, and theotēs in Colossians 2:9—primarily convey the idea of "divine nature" or "deity," the Cappadocian Fathers in the 4th century emphasized that this divine nature is most fully realized within the context of the Trinity. Much like the word "love," which can refer to a feeling of deep affection, the term reaches its highest and truest meaning when it involves a person laying down their life for others, as Jesus Christ did on the cross. Similarly, the term "Godhead" is fully expressed when understood as referring to God’s triune nature. Removing these direct references to the Trinity only waters down this beautiful truth about the Lord our God in Scripture.
  2. Abortion Justified: Certain Modern Bibles, such as the CEV and GNT, in Luke 1:15 state that John the Baptist would be filled with the Holy Spirit from birth rather than from his mother’s womb, as the KJV says. This subtle change implies that life does not begin until birth, which could potentially lead readers to justify abortion by implying that the unborn child is not yet considered alive in God’s sight. In contrast, the KJV preserves the message that John was called and filled with the Holy Spirit even in the womb, underscoring the value of life before birth.
  3. Characteristics of God's Word Altered: Modern translations adjust key verses that communicate the nature and attributes of God’s Word, often aligning them with the subjective perspectives of textual critics. For example, Psalms 12:6-7 in the KJV states, "The words of the Lord are pure words...Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever," indicating the preservation of God's words. Modern versions, however, sometimes reinterpret this to refer to God's preservation of people rather than His words. Similarly, Psalms 138:2 and 2 Corinthians 2:17 in the KJV emphasize the Word’s perfection and integrity, while Modern Bibles sometimes adjust the language in ways that lessen this focus. These changes raise questions about the intentions behind the rewording, as they affect the clarity of God’s promise to preserve His Word.
  4. Repentance for Sinners Inconsistent: Modern Bibles create inconsistency by stating in Luke 5:32 that Jesus calls sinners to repentance, while in Matthew 9:13 and Mark 2:17, He is said to call sinners with no mention of repentance. The NASB 2020 even goes so far as to imply that Jesus does not call sinners to repentance at all, potentially weakening the focus on repentance as a crucial step in turning to God. In the KJV, the call to repentance is a clear and unifying theme, underscoring the importance of this doctrine in the life of a believer.
  5. Omission of Apostolic Authority on Circumcision: In Acts 15:24, Modern Bibles omit the phrase “subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment.” This omission is significant, as it leaves out the apostles’ clarification that Gentile believers were not required to follow Jewish customs, such as circumcision, to be saved. By removing this direct statement, Modern Bibles potentially obscure the apostles’ intent and undermine the clarity with which they established Christian liberty from the Law of Moses for Gentile converts.

If your Bible contains these kinds of changes, it risks weakening key doctrines, leading to confusion, and making the reader dependent on scholars for interpretation. Stand firm on God’s promises and rely on His pure Word, instead. Do not be duped by the Scribes of our day.



....
uh huh.

so how much are two sparrows sold for?

an assarion.

as you know.
and you also know you did not learn that from kjv.

so.
you do know where God's word is, and you know it isn't the kjv, it's the original language.