What translation has the exact words of God preserved for English speakers?

I shudder to think you might actually influence anyone with this rendering of the Holy Spirit in our lives. For that matter, perhaps He is just another metaphor in a long line of what you believe are metaphors with regards to your belief in preterism.

Not responding further because it's like a dog chasing it's tail and never ends well.

I didn't say 'half', I said 'some translations are more inspired than others'. I hope you know the difference between inspiration and translation.

Ok so you are saying that God partially inspired some translations?

I agree that there are some translations that are "terrible" - the JW "New World Translation for One". But I reiterate my opinion that, though it is not "inspired", the KJV is still one of the best and most accurate translations.

I think that is our difference - and KJV1611 can clarify if I am wrong here - He believes that (for the KJV at least) translation is inspired.

Yes I do believe the KJV is inspired by God. Hundreds of reasons that I believe this.

I agree that "people aren't full of the Holy Spirit at all times during their walk with God." And that is exactly where knowing that the command to "be filled with the Spirit" is in the present tense in Greek is so meaningful and important. It is a daily and ongoing reality that we need to keep yielding ourselves to God so that His Spirit can each day fill our hearts and lives.

The JW Bible is all their own. They have invented it and used translators that were totally ignorant of the original languages. Their views on Jesus and the devil are unique to say the least.

My only concern in this thread is the belief that the KJ is inspired. The rest? Well that is up to the reader. I grew up on the KJ and when I try to think of a verse, it is usually lodged in my brain in the KJ LOL!

The Pharisees had the word of God, and studied it diligently, but it did not save them. They did not have that which does save: faith.

THAT is what I was emphasizing. However, the Spirit of God does not shrink and grow, but rather as you say we need to yield and as the verb tense in Eph 5:18 indicates.

JESUS SAVES

you may have seen that somewhere.

The "Bible" as I use it is the book: the paper, the ink, and the words on the paper.
The "Word of God" is those words on paper empowered by the Holy Spirit and the presence of the Lamb

A KJV (or any version for that matter) Bible will save no one unless the words on the paper are empowered by the Spirit.

Not sure I follow you . . . so I will ask?

You do not believe the KJV is "inspired" - I agree - but I think it is a trustworthy, though imperfect translation.
Other translations - like the NKJV, the ESV, the NASB, the NIV - What do you believe about these? I do not think any of these is any more "inspired" than the KJV. Like the KJV, though, these are all trustworthy, though imperfect translations. Which ones are better is certainly open for discussion.

But the main point of this thread is that I believe the KJV is not "inspired" and thus is not "God's exact words in English".

Quit trying to twist words of others. It's a good thing you are not translating.
God inspired the original writers perfectly. What we have today are translations, not the originals.

It's not complicated. I told you I grew up on the KJ and am very familiar with it. I have stated several times the only inspired version of scripture are the originals and even then there are differences occurring between some.

As you say which ones are better is open for discussion but that is not a hill I'm planting a flag on. I most often use several translations anyway, various books by authors I trust, articles, lexicons etc. There is even disagreement on which books should have been included in scripture but I am not getting into that either

You are allowed your opinion - and you are allowed to say it - at least you say it clearly and don't beat around the bush!

You may have hundreds of reasons you believe the KJV is inspired.

I have only one reason I know it is not "inspired." That reason is this:

Scripture very clearly says that inspiration was closed after the last NT book was written and to add to or take away from God's Word is clearly condemned: Revelation 22: 18,19: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

To say that the "exact words" in the English KJV are inspired as the original manuscript of Revelation is = to add to the words God gave in Revelation. My opinion at least! . . . . . .

They did not have the letter to the Romans. Nor the revelation of Jesus Christ yet.

But they had verses like this:

Psalm 119:9
Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.

Why do I get the feeling that the KJV critics have a problem with the word itself?

Wonderful! I think we are in complete agreement then . . .

It the Bible.

You get that power from the word, the Bible.