Not By Works

[Endoscopy]

"For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Romans 10:12-17).

I looked and found something I totally disagree with. NIV rejected and KJV only. KJV was translated in 1611. Languages change over the years. A long term example is Latin turned into Italian. In 1611 the English word kill meant premeditated murder. Not true today. Therefore the commandment Thou shall not kill is currently correctly translated as You shall not murder. This is only one example of the problem of KJV. Here is a list of sites about the problem with the KJV translation.

KJV Issues

https://ehrmanblog.org/problems-with-the-language-of-the-king-james-version/

https://newrepublic.com/article/107222/making-it-new

http://www.bibletexts.com/topics/kjv.htm

http://www.equip.org/article/is-your-modern-translation-corrupt/

http://www.hickoryhammockbaptist.org/kjva1.html

https://www.gotquestions.org/different-gospel.html

The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible: An Interview with Mark Ward
Jonathan Petersen
March 13, 2018

https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2...pJobID=1362532267&spReportId=MTM2MjUzMjI2NwS2

 

[BaptistBibleBeliever]

In what universe does 'kill' and 'murder' not mean the same thing? Context determines the meaning of words - not our preferred translation.

I'm no scholar and I don't intend to become one. My position on the KJB is a matter of conviction and settled simple childlike faith. It hasn't done me any wrong.

An honest man would know that the only changes in the Authorized text from 1611 to 1789 were spelling and punctuation changes.

 

[Magenta]

In what universe does 'kill' and 'murder' not mean the same thing? Context determines the meaning of words - not our preferred translation.

Murder is illegal or unauthorised killing. There is also manslaughter. It is killing also, but not murder.

 

[BaptistBibleBeliever]

I hear so many people that hate the KJB justify their animosity toward it by telling us that it is archaic. Well, guess what - the archaic words are found in the modern versions as well.

http://www.av1611.org/kjv/vanceniv.html

 

[TruthTalk]

Addendum to previous post.
Today in the undeveloped countries missionaries use tape recorders to pass the Bible sections to illiterate people. They didn't have electronics back then. Everyone seems to look at the place we live in taday and impute it to those back then. That is not reality.

Hi Endoscopy, This is very true electronics can be used today wherever it is made affordable. I can recall seeing Hill Tribes people in Thailand walking around talking on their mobile phones. If electronic tablets or tape recorders are not available some missionaries will bring out the old standby method, a Wordless Gospel Book.

 

[calibob]

In what universe does 'kill' and 'murder' not mean the same thing? Context determines the meaning of words - not our preferred translation.

I'm no scholar and I don't intend to become one. My position on the KJB is a matter of conviction and settled simple childlike faith. It hasn't done me any wrong.

An honest man would know that the only changes in the Authorized text from 1611 to 1789 were spelling and punctuation changes.

I am an NIV devotee.* murder is a refined definition of kill used in courts. Thus killing a man is manslaughter but with malice and forethought is murder. Big difference. BTW, the *NIV is a more direct translation from the texts and remnants of the ones used by the council of Trent in 1611 but written and copyrighted in 1974, in modern English. Many others are paraphrased from King James and not direct translations from Greek, Hebrew, Latin etc.

 

[Endoscopy]

In what universe does 'kill' and 'murder' not mean the same thing? Context determines the meaning of words - not our preferred translation.

I'm no scholar and I don't intend to become one. My position on the KJB is a matter of conviction and settled simple childlike faith. It hasn't done me any wrong.

An honest man would know that the only changes in the Authorized text from 1611 to 1789 were spelling and punctuation changes.

Murder is a deliberate act of violence. A person can be killed by unforseen results of actions. One fool jumped into a caged lion in a zoo. He was killed. How is that idiotic act murder? Think about the uses of the word before jumping to conclusions.

 

[BaptistBibleBeliever]

Murder is a deliberate act of violence. A person can be killed by unforseen results of actions. One fool jumped into a caged lion in a zoo. He was killed. How is that idiotic act murder? Think about the uses of the word before jumping to conclusions.

A person could also by 'killed' by a sniper . . . but at least it isn't murder!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I hear so many people that hate the KJB justify their animosity toward it by telling us that it is archaic. Well, guess what - the archaic words are found in the modern versions as well.

http://www.av1611.org/kjv/vanceniv.html

Most people do not hate the KJV, They hate the KJV onliers and their judgmental view that it is the inspired word of God and all others are heretical versions.

 

[Endoscopy]

I am an NIV devotee.* murder is a refined definition of kill used in courts. Thus killing a man is manslaughter but with malice and forethought is murder. Big difference. BTW, the *NIV is a more direct translation from the texts and remnants of the ones used by the council of Trent in 1611 but written and copyrighted in 1974, in modern English. Many others are paraphrased from King James and not direct translations from Greek, Hebrew, Latin etc.

You left out Aramaic. LOL

 

[Endoscopy]

A person could also by 'killed' by a sniper . . . but at least it isn't murder!

ROFL
Depends on which side you are on.
I agree that police snipers kill a person to prevent other possible murders at the hand of the target. Therefore is not murder. However political assinations are murder. It depends on the purpose of the sniper. Murder is a specific type of kill. A sniper killing a current elected official is very different from a person killed in an unforseen accident especially when mechanical failure is involvedl

 

[Magenta]

One fool jumped into a caged lion in a zoo. He was killed. How is that idiotic act murder?

Sounds more like suicide, though intent plays a role

 

[Rosemaryx]

You have a point. Let me revise the example. I was baptized of the Holy Spirit, and have faith in Jesus and trust in Jesus and my new person and as so many in the bible start out on fire for Jesus, but then something happens and they start slowing down and eventually fall away or turn from the truth and back to their unrighteousness.

Do you know any born-again Christian who was very active in their new person, but is no longer serving Jesus, and in fact has fallen away? You can say, they never were saved in the beginning, or you can say they were saved, but lost their way and will lose their salvation unless they see their fall and repent and come back to Jesus. Either way OSAS is not a correct doctrine.

Hi Ben...Maybe if you read about the soils of the heart , it might help you understand what happens when one hears the word...xox...

 

[Endoscopy]

Sounds more like suicide, though intent plays a role

That was my point. Murder is a deliberate act of violence killing someone. Accidental killing is not murder. Stupid actions resulting in someone being killed is not murder. In 1611 the word kill meant premeditated murder.

 

[BaptistBibleBeliever]

And still folks 'strain at a gnat.'

 

[VCO]

While it is ok to use commentaries. It is not required. God will hold us accountable to what we believe, not what some man says we shoudl believe, Commentaries may be a guide, but I have yet to read a commentary or any writting n end time events where I agree with the person 100%. To say DC is in error because he does not use commentaries is not very good. I grew up listening to my pastors. And was so sure they was right, I would argue to my death what they believed was true, Until I started to do as DC did and study for myself. And realise much of what I taught was wrong. While yes, I did use books, and commentaries to see what others believed, no one commentator or book gave me what I believe.
However, It would be a good idea to study others, that way you do not come up with some believe no one has ever heard of.. which should give you a warning that maybe you on the wrong track. Even so, it does not mean we shoudl attack our brother because he has not used them.

No you do not understand WHY I said it that way. The Error is Post-Tribulation, no matter where he got it from. When I said, I could tell that He did not use commentaries, I was referring to Every WIDELY Respected Commentary that I own, and they are in agreement that the Calling Out of the Bride is most definitely PRE-TRIBULATION, as well as Messianic Scholars, and MY personal study, BUT MOST OF ALL the Holy Spirit has Convinced me in my human spirit, To Expect my Bridegroom to send the Archangel to SHOUT and Call all those Waiting for the Bridegroom; and it will be Pre-Trib. You have to be Expecting and Watching for the Bridegroom, to be invited to the wedding in HEAVEN, that comes from the Holy Spirit.


1 Thessalonians 5:4 (HCSB)
4 But you, brothers, are not in the dark, for this day to overtake you like a thief.

1 Thessalonians 5:6 (TLB)
6 So be on your guard, not asleep like the others. Watch for his return and stay sober.

Matthew 25:13 (ESV)
13 Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour.

Matthew 24:44 (HCSB)
44 This is why you also must be ready, because the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.


The Son of Man comes at an hour you do not expect, to snatch the BRIDE away to GO to HIS FATHER'S House for the Wedding.

The KING OF kings, Returns to Make War on His Enemies, and to SET UP a 1000 Year Kingdom on the Throne of David.

TWO totally different EVENTS. Anyone who thinks the Bride has to go through the WRATH, or GREAT TRIBULATION, not only are wrong, but they will GET TO GO THROUGH IT. I and all others who are Watching and Expecting the Bridegroom to Come, will by INVITE, be at that Wedding of the Lamb in Heaven.


Matthew 22:2-5 (HCSB)
2 “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son.

3 He sent out his slaves to summon those invited to the banquet, but they didn’t want to come.
4 Again, he sent out other slaves, and said, ‘Tell those who are invited: Look, I’ve prepared my dinner; my oxen and fattened cattle have been slaughtered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.’

5 “But they paid no attention and went away, one to his own farm, another to his business.

 

[Endoscopy]

"For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Romans 10:12-17).

The big problem in the US today is a little less than 50% of the people attend church. All major protestant denominations have been secularized by secular ministers who only want access to the money. They are known by the fact they never ever preach the gospel message. I met a Lutheran who attended a special evening invitational service with a planned fellowship event following with refreshments. He said it was the first time he heard the gospel message. Only a fraction of the churches preach it, mostly the sub denominations formed to preach the gospel are doing it. Even they have to constantly defend themselves from being infultrated be secular ministers. They immediately defrock any who have infiltrated and never preach the gospel message at almost every service.

Presbyterian PCA and Lutheran Missouri Synod are 2 examples. I go to a Presbyterian PCA church and had dealings with Lutherans attending a Missouri Synod church.

 

[VCO]

You ignore the history of the creeds. They were written in the 200s to 500. Keep in mind the history of how things were back then. No printing presses then so Bibles were extremely rare and expensive. The word was spread by word of mouth and memorization of some documents or section of documents were used in place of the written words. This caused the creeds to be developed to spread the word of God. I have challenged some on this board to explain where any of these creeds were in error. They just say they ignore anything written by man. Their attitude ignores history of how Bibles were written. They were laboriously hand copied by scribes thus were rare and expensive. Also many of the common people were illiterate. So even if they somehow got one of the rare and extremely expensive Bibles they couldn't read it. At that time in history it was common for people to memorize important documents that were secular in nature. They did this with creeds and sections of the Bible. Using these is how the gospel was spread. Why do you and others ignore this part of history of how life was lived before printing presses and almost universal education of children in developed countries. Go look at how sections of the world are today in the very undeveloped areas. Poor illiterate scratching out a living with no schools, hospitals, and other things we take for granted living in North America. Even Mexico is head and shoulders above the way of life in these areas. Life was like that in the time of these creeds were written.

WHY DO YOU AND OTHERS IGNORE THE REALITY OF LIFE BACK THEN!!

We have the LIVING WORD IN OUR HANDS NOW.

Why do you Trust the CREEDS more than the BIBLE?

Many People erroneously TRUST THE FACT THAT THEY BELIEVE IN THE CREEDS,

Rather than TRUST TOTALLY IN JESUS, establishing a REAL intimate, personal, LOVE relationship with the LORD, JESUS CHRIST.


Matthew 7:20-23 (HCSB)
20 So you’ll recognize them by their fruit.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord!’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but ⌊only⌋ the one who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 On that day many will say to Me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in Your name, drive out demons in Your name, and do many miracles in Your name?’
23 Then I will announce to them, ‘I never knew you! Depart from Me, you lawbreakers!’

 

[Endoscopy]

I hear so many people that hate the KJB justify their animosity toward it by telling us that it is archaic. Well, guess what - the archaic words are found in the modern versions as well.

http://www.av1611.org/kjv/vanceniv.html

I tried to post the following but something messed up the posting.

KJV Issues

https://ehrmanblog.org/problems-with-the-language-of-the-king-james-version/

https://newrepublic.com/article/107222/making-it-new

http://www.bibletexts.com/topics/kjv.htm

http://www.equip.org/article/is-your-modern-translation-corrupt/

http://www.hickoryhammockbaptist.org/kjva1.html

https://www.gotquestions.org/different-gospel.html

The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible: An Interview with Mark Ward
Jonathan Petersen
March 13, 2018

https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2...pJobID=1362532267&spReportId=MTM2MjUzMjI2NwS2

 

[Endoscopy]

We have the LIVING WORD IN OUR HANDS NOW.

Why do you Trust the CREEDS more than the BIBLE?

Many People erroneously TRUST THE FACT THAT THEY BELIEVE IN THE CREEDS,

Rather than TRUST TOTALLY IN JESUS, establishing a REAL intimate, personal, LOVE relationship with the LORD, JESUS CHRIST.
5

Matthew 7:20-23 (HCSB)
20 So you’ll recognize them by their fruit.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord!’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but ⌊only⌋ the one who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 On that day many will say to Me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in Your name, drive out demons in Your name, and do many miracles in Your name?’
23 Then I will announce to them, ‘I never knew you! Depart from Me, you lawbreakers!’

As I have previously challenged people on this site. Refute anything in the creeds that is anti Biblical. Fine and dandy we now all have access to Bibles today but before printing presses were invented Bibles were rare and very expensive. The creeds were written between 312 and 500. They served as a tool to easily momorize along with sections of scripture to spread the gospel message. Why does everyone ignore this point by saying only the Bible. Back then people didn't have a Bible. Many were illerate. Creeds and selected memorized verses were all they had. Quit imputing our modern civilization on ancient times. They didn't have access to a Bible unless they were rich. Currently in many gospel preaching denominations the Apostles Creed or another Creed is spoken by the congregation as part of the early part of the service.