Thoughts about using a KJV update?

[ThePuffyBlob]

probably yes if i can get it for free
it's okay to ask for donations
but will not use it if they sell it

selling your service means you are a servant of God?
let's not judge a book by it's front page new kjv 2022

 

[Jim B]

probably yes if i can get it for free
it's okay to ask for donations
but will not use it if they sell it

selling your service means you are a servant of God?
let's not judge a book by it's front page new kjv 2022

You're aware, I'm sure that many Bibles are readable for free online. biblegateway.com is excellent. Many translations, commentaries, etc.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You have some strange thought process! Nobody "hates" the King James Bible; that is a strange delusion.

People express their hate of the King James Bible using different words.

Let me give you some examples.

“It’s time to retire the KJV”
~ Quote by Dave Miller.​

Nobody who doesn’t hate or dislikes the King James Bible would ever say this.

Source:
It’s Time to Retire the KJV

“There are many ways King James and his stooges deceitfully change sacred scripture.”
~ Quote by a Catholic apologist.​

Nobody who doesn’t hate or dislikes the King James Bible would ever say this.

Source:
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/scripture/translations/kjversion.htm

“…it’s really time you shelve the King James Version and pick a new translation!”
~ Quote by Matthew Scott Miller.
​

Nobody who doesn’t hate or dislikes the King James Bible would ever say this.

Source:
3 Reasons You Shouldn't Read the King James Bible | Logos Made Flesh

“Four reasons not to use the King James Bible.”
“…this translation has long outlived its usefulness.”
~ Quotes by Max Aplin.​

Nobody who doesn’t hate or dislikes the King James Bible would ever say this.

Source:
Four Reasons Not to Use the King James Version

“Why I do not think the King James Bible is the best translation available today.”
~ Quote by Daniel B. Wallace.​

Nobody who doesn’t hate or dislikes the King James Bible would ever say this.

Source:
Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today | Bible.org

Side Note: To learn about Daniel B. Wallace’s insane comments about what he really thinks the Bible says, check out this article here.

“I dislike the NAB, and the KJV. I won't use them. The KJV is too difficult for me to read,…”
“When it comes to the KJV, I just don't believe that the Textus Receptus is very accurate compared to the much earlier manuscripts that we have today. It was good for its time, but now, on the lower list in terms of accuracy in my opinion.”
~ Quotes by CF poster Leevo.​

Nobody who doesn’t hate or dislikes the King James Bible would ever say this.

Sources:
Post #1 - Buying a new Bible. Suggestions?
Post #13 - Buying a new Bible. Suggestions?

“Why I hate the King James Version of the Bible.”
“I don’t really hate the King James Version of the Bible. I hate what it represents.”
~ Quotes by Anita Ojeda​

Here we have a lady who completely contradicts herself. She titles her article as saying she hates the King James Version of the Bible, and then she says in the article that she does not hate the King James Version of the Bible but she hates what it represents. That’s hating the King James Bible.

Source:
Why I Hate the King James Version of the Bible | Anita Ojeda

“That said, the way many people respond to us is astounding. Simply going into a large Christian group on Facebook and saying, “I really like the KJV”, often leads to a flame war. I’ve had a number of people mention this to me over the last few weeks. Even going out of our way to qualify that we are NOT King James Onlyists and giving credit where credit is due to translations like the NASB and the ESV (also popular among the confessionally Reformed) doesn’t appear to douse the flames.”
~ Quote by Robert Truelove.
​

This speaks volumes in and of itself. I have been treated like an enemy and called bad names on another Christian forum all because I believe in a perfect Bible that exists today.

Source:
What's the Deal with All the KJV Hate?
(Note: I do not agree with Reformed Theology or Calvinism; I am merely quoting him to reveal his experience to you and others).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The Puritans fled King James' rule with their Geneva Bibles, which James hated because of the footnotes that pointed out the problems with earthly kings' rule. The KJV was created for political purposes, pure and simple. The goal was not to produce an accurate translation but to filter the sources through a clearly political agenda.

That’s your opinion that is colored by the fact that you dislike the KJB.
Ask yourself what are the reasons why you dislike the KJB.
Does the idea of a perfect Bible not appeal to you?
If so, then ask yourself why.

I see in history that the King James Bible was created out of the fact that King James was trying to unite two religious factions that disagree with each other. King James seen problems in both the Geneva bible with it’s footnotes and problems in the translation with the Bishop’s bible. Before the King James Bible became more readily available to the public: There was no bible yet that was for the common man or people in general to own. This is what I believe the King James Bible helped to serve regardless of any man’s intentions.

The fact that the King James was translated under the authority of a King who was knowledgeable of Scripture shows the truth of this verse.

Ecclesiastes 8:4
“Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?”

"Tell the Baptists to stop using their King James Bible as the Word of God"? Are you having a nervous breakdown? That is beyond sanity!

Are you a mind reader? No nervous breakdowns here. That’s merely a false assumption on your part.
I brought up the Baptists in history to show that there is a line in history of Christians who believed the King James Bible was the very words of God. So this is not some isolated recent thing in history. My point is that if you lived during the time period before Westcott and Hort, we would not even be having this discussion. You would either reject the King James Bible or believe it. That would be your only two options back then. That’s why when you try to attack the King James Bible, you really are attacking Christianity and its history.

When you attack the King James Bible, you are spitting on what made men to trust God here in America.

You are correct in two things...

1) saying that "you don’t believe any perfect Bible exists and it has been lost to time" (which is self-contradictory).

No. I was saying that is what you believe or what Originals Onlyists believe.

No "perfect" Bible exists because a) there are no original sources, only copies and b) it's impossible to create a "perfect" translation because of the difference in the source languages and the destination language.

So you are saying that in Jeremiah 36:27-32 when Jeremiah was told to make another scroll (after the king burned the first one) that it was not a perfect copy of the originals? There were many like words added to that scroll that was rewritten, so it was not the originals being perfectly being transcribed. It was a copy but updated. That’s what the King James Bible is. It’s an updated copy in English. But if you don’t think there can be a perfect translation then you must assume that the translations that the Bible makes itself are false.

Here is one example:

Matthew 1:23
“Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.”

2) Most Christians believe God’s words because they believe that God has preserved His words.

But you really don’t believe God preserved His words. You believe they perished with the originals.

I think you need a "time out" (as I said to my children when they were young and misbehaved). Sit back, have a beer, and watch a baseball game like a real American.

I believe God will convict a Christian to stop drinking socially as they mature in Christ Jesus. For alcohol destroys lives every day. I also believe God will convict a believer to give up worldly forms of entertainment, as well. For we are told not to love the world and neither the things in this world.

I fear that you've "lost it" in your irrational defense of your favorite translation and the criticism of those who know it's just one of many translations.

So you are a mind reader? Again, I am perfectly stable in my mind; Especially on this topic. I am willing to die for my faith in the King James Bible. That is how much I believe in it. I love God’s Word. But many of you see that as idolatry.

And many of you simply do not believe this following verse.

Psalms 119:140
“Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.”

 

[Bible Highlighter]

So are you saying you never sin or are you saying you are only saved if when you die

2 Tmothy 4:7-8;
Nowhere does the Bible say that a Christian in this life will ever be completely perfect—that is, free from all sin (1 John 1:8).
And if we I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. 8 Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day—and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing. re not free from sin, then how do we get to heaven

Paul is saying he is going to heaven.
It is Scripture.
Do you believe it?
He hasn't died yet.
He can still sin.
It seems you are twisting Scripture to suit your needs.

Dear Rollo Tamasi:

To keep things on topic in this thread, I replied to you in an OSAS thread.
Within that OSAS thread: Please see post #917, post #918, post #920, post #923, post #925.

Blessings be unto you in the Lord.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Rollo, I don't know why you are responding to Bible Highlighter's post as he is clearly going "off the rails". The OP is about using a KJV update and he is discussing OSAS -- once saved always saved -- as though they are somehow connected. Your signature -- OSAS is a way of life, not a doctrine --
is correct; there should be no discussion about it, including in this thread.

Well, we all have gone off the rails from the OP. The OP is if there should be a KJV Update and it’s not really KJB vs. Originals Onlyism debate. I think that there is room to go off the rails in describing other things or topics related at brief moments (as long as it is not an endless derail). But OSAS does tie in with whether or not one should desire to have a KJB update or not. I don’t think we need an update of the words because that falls into the danger of changing the Bible. Maybe an updated Defined King James Bible would be good, but actually changing the words is another matter. This is the problem with the Modern Translation movement. They treat the Word of God like silly putty. OSAS is basically a sneaky way of justifying sin on some level. I will show you in my next post how Modern Bibles change verses that sides with a lack of holy living or not treating sin properly.

But I did reply to Rollo (with nobody telling me to do so) in an OSAS thread to keep things a little more closer to the topic. I have posted enough on Christian forums (62,000 posts approximately over the past 11 years) to know that we should strive to keep things on topic (as close as we can).

Post edit update: I did not see your post #640 until after I was finished writing this post. This is a post edit update.

Then he goes on later with "For believing these verses like a child and not as a person being hoodwinked by Modern Scholarship in what they say will simply lead one to conclude that there is a perfect Word of God somewhere on our planet that we can read from."

I seriously think that he is having some kind of breakdown, writing about OSAS then spewing nonsense about "believing these verses like a child and not as a person being hoodwinked by Modern Scholarship".

Perhaps the KJV has so confused his thinking that he has lost whatever sanity he had. My prayer is that he will recover and, with God's help, learn the truth.

This is just a false accusation. I am perfectly sane and I was not even remotely emotional in any kind of bad way when I have written to you at any point. I might have found some of your wording offensive and hateful, but it did not move me emotionally in any strong way. So you are assuming false things about me. So if you are able to misunderstand so greatly in this way involving my actual state of mind, take a step back and think calmly in that you may be doing the same thing involving this topic.

In any event, whether you agree or disagree, may God bless you.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

We don’t need an update of the words of the King James Bible because it would just make it like every other Modern English Bible out there that gives no honor or respect to God’s words in what they say.

Take for example, Modern bibles in how they incorrectly teach on sin.

Battling sin vs. Justifying sin:
(An explanation on 1 John 3:6, and 1 John 3:9):

Modern Translations will say practice sin or continue in sin in 1 John 3:9 (as if to say it is talking exclusively of practicing sin), but this is not the case in the trusted KJV (that existed hundreds of years long before the Modern Translations showed up). (Note: I am not denying that it can be in reference to habitual sin, but it is not exclusively referring to habitual sin but also singular or temporary sin, too.).

The key to understanding 1 John 3:9 is realizing that this "does not commit sin" is in context to the gnostic belief who think sin does not exist or that sin is an illusion in some way (See 1 John 1:8 and 1 John 2:26, Jude 1:4). Christian Scientists today think sin is an illusion. Eternal Security Proponents (i.e. OSAS - Once Saved Always Saved), and or Non-OSAS Sin and Still Be Saved Types (Free Will Baptists) think future sin is forgiven them by having a belief alone on Jesus. So while they believe sin may exist on a physical level, they do not think sin exists for them on a spiritual level because they believe Jesus paid for their future sins (When the Bible never says future sin is forgiven us). In other words, I believe it is those who justify sin in some way who have not been born again spiritually and who have never seen or known Christ and He (the seed) does not abide in them. 1 John 3:6 and 1 John 3:9 is talking about "willful sin" in Hebrews 10:26 in view or light of 1 John 1:8.

In other words, 1 John 3:6, and 1 John 3:9 is in view of "willful sin" or "justifying sin" in some way.

1 John 3:9 should read like this:

"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin [willfully, as if to justify it]; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin [willfully], because he is born of God."​

1 John 3:6 should read like this:

"Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not [willfully, seeking to justify their sin]: whosoever sinneth [as if to justify their sin] hath not seen him, neither known him."​

This would be in view or light of applying the context of the false gnostic belief that John warned the brethren about in 1 John 1:8.

Christians can battle with sin. This is why they need to confess of their sins in order to be forgiven of sin as per 1 John 1:9, 1 John 2:1-2 (cf. with: Proverbs 28:13, Psalms 51, Luke 15:18-21, Luke 18:9-14). But Christians are told to "sin no more" by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself (John 5:14, John 8:11). The apostle John said to "sin not" (1 John 2:1).

Christians are to enter the Sanctification Process and put away sin by God's power.
It's why Paul said let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Corinthians 7:1). Romans 8:13 essentially says if we live after the flesh, we will die, but if we put to death the misdeeds of the body by the Spirit, we shall live. Two ways are set before us. We either seek to justify sin and die, or we seek to put to death the misdeeds of the body by the Spirit and live (live eternally). Both God's grace (confessing sin to the Lord), and in forsaking our sin, and battling against putting it away by His power and help (and by putting the Word on the inside of us) is going to help us to overcome and live holy in this life. 1 Peter 4:1-2 says he that has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin (Note: I believe that the way they cease from sin was in the fact that they denied themselves sin, and prayed, and fasted, and suffered persecution for Christ); And this passage also says that we should live the rest of our time (here on Earth obviously) not to the lusts of the flesh, but to the will of God.

Paul says that they that are Christ's have crucified the affections and lusts (Galatians 5:24).
So we have to in time have the victory over our sin. The time for each believer on this is between that person and God. Every man is different. Only God can know a person's heart ultimately. But this does not mean we should not warn believers to keep the faith in Jesus, and or to confess and forsake sin and to battle against sin. For Jesus said that a person is in danger of being cast bodily into hellfire if they look upon a woman in lust (Matthew 5:28-30). But obviously many men who first come to Christ do struggle greatly with this kind of sin. So God is obviously patient and long suffering towards believer in them repenting (confessing of their sin with the intent of putting that sin away for good) (2 Peter 3:9). Believers must seek to overcome grievous sin in this life and not think that they do not need to worry about sin in this life.

In other words, God's grace is there for a person if they are truly seeking to battle and fight and put away sin. This does not mean that believers cannot stumble into doing a sin on rare occasion. Let me give you an example:

The drunk who has no intention of giving up his sin of alcoholism may join a drug program to take advantage of a family member, or temporarily quite them for a time. They are justifying their sin and have no real intention of reforming and or changing their bad behavior.

On the other hand, the drunk who joins a drug program to overcome their sin of alcoholism may stumble on rare occasion, but they pick themselves back up and they fight, and battle against their sin of alcoholism with ever fiber of their being and seek to conquer their sin.

The thing is that men have overcome the sin of alcoholism by drug programs without them asking God to help them. Imagine how much more God can do in a faithful believer's life because they have the living God residing within in them?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I am open to a new “Defined King James Bible” (See here and here to check out what I am talking about), but there should be no update of the words of the King James Bible itself. Why?

We all still speak like the King James Bible because we use phrases that come from the King James Bible. 250 phrases approximately. KJB is a book that changed the world. It’s influence is great. Words we use today are from the KJB; Even Modern Bibles still use words from the KJB.

Here is just a sampling.

A law unto themselves
A man after his own heart
A stumbling block
A thief in the night
A thorn in the flesh
All these things must come to pass
All things to all men
And the word was made flesh
At their wit's end
Be fruitful and multiply
Born again
Bottomless pit
By their fruits ye shall know them
Charity shall cover the multitude of sins
Crumbs which fall from ... table
Death, where is thy sting
Den of thieves
Dreamer of dreams
Eat, drink and be merry
Eye for an eye
Fallen from grace
Fatted calf
Fell by the way side
Fell flat on his face
Fell on stony ground
Fight the good fight
From strength to strength
Get thee behind me
Give up the ghost
God forbid
Holier than thou
Honour thy father and mother
How are the mighty fallen
In the twinkling of an eye
Land of Nod
Led as a sheep to the slaughter
Left hand know what thy right hand doeth
Let my people go
Let there be light
Love thy neighbour as thyself
Milk and honey
Money is the root of all evil
My brother's keeper
My name is legion
New wine into old bottles
No room for them in the inn
Out of the mouths of babes
Physician, heal thyself
Put the words in her mouth
Scapegoat
Seek and ye shall find
Set thine house in order
Sheep's clothing
Suffer fools gladly
Take root
The blind lead the blind
The last shall be first
The leopard [change] his spots
The lost sheep
The powers that be
The signs of the times
The skin of my teeth
The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak
They know not what they do
Thou shalt not bear false witness
To give than to receive
Turn to him the other [cheek]
Turned the world upside down
Two are better than one
Two-edged sword
Vengeance is mine
Wandering stars
White as snow
Woe is me

Article source:
Phrases from the King James Bible

 

[Jim B]

I am open to a new “Defined King James Bible” (See here and here to check out what I am talking about), but there should be no update of the words of the King James Bible itself. Why?

We all still speak like the King James Bible because we use phrases that come from the King James Bible. 250 phrases approximately. KJB is a book that changed the world. It’s influence is great. Words we use today are from the KJB; Even Modern Bibles still use words from the KJB.

Here is just a sampling.

A law unto themselves
A man after his own heart
A stumbling block
A thief in the night
A thorn in the flesh
All these things must come to pass
All things to all men
And the word was made flesh
At their wit's end
Be fruitful and multiply
Born again
Bottomless pit
By their fruits ye shall know them
Charity shall cover the multitude of sins
Crumbs which fall from ... table
Death, where is thy sting
Den of thieves
Dreamer of dreams
Eat, drink and be merry
Eye for an eye
Fallen from grace
Fatted calf
Fell by the way side
Fell flat on his face
Fell on stony ground
Fight the good fight
From strength to strength
Get thee behind me
Give up the ghost
God forbid
Holier than thou
Honour thy father and mother
How are the mighty fallen
In the twinkling of an eye
Land of Nod
Led as a sheep to the slaughter
Left hand know what thy right hand doeth
Let my people go
Let there be light
Love thy neighbour as thyself
Milk and honey
Money is the root of all evil
My brother's keeper
My name is legion
New wine into old bottles
No room for them in the inn
Out of the mouths of babes
Physician, heal thyself
Put the words in her mouth
Scapegoat
Seek and ye shall find
Set thine house in order
Sheep's clothing
Suffer fools gladly
Take root
The blind lead the blind
The last shall be first
The leopard [change] his spots
The lost sheep
The powers that be
The signs of the times
The skin of my teeth
The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak
They know not what they do
Thou shalt not bear false witness
To give than to receive
Turn to him the other [cheek]
Turned the world upside down
Two are better than one
Two-edged sword
Vengeance is mine
Wandering stars
White as snow
Woe is me

Article source:
Phrases from the King James Bible

So there are a bunch of phrases that we still use after centuries; so what? How do you know that they didn't precede the KJV, in common use before 1611? You can probably find them in the Geneva Bible also, for example. BTW, some of those phrases are clearly wrong. "No room for them in the inn" is nonsense; even if there was an "inn" in Bethlehem, Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem for the census because Joseph had family there. The custom of the time would have required them to stay with family. And I have never heard anyone say "Left hand know what thy right hand doeth". And some are clearly wrong: "Money is the root of all evil" is wrong; the correct phrase is "the love of money is the root of all evil" or "For the love of money is the root of all evils." 1 Timothy 6:10 And what is "Turn to him the other [cheek]" Matthew 5:39, KJV, "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Nobody talks like that! Better is "But whoever strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well." (which is still awkward).

Also, why don't you write in 17th Century Englyshe? We don't all still speak or write like the King James Bible (which neither writes nor speaks!). We speak and write in the English of modern Bibles; they are written so that we can clearly understand God's word. That is the reason that many of us use modern translations: they are written in our language, so the meaning is clear.

Please stop posting irrelevant nonsense to justify the out-of-date KJV.

 

[Jim B]

Also, there's this: The Defined King James Bible has been Out of Stock / Out of Print for several years now and we do not have any official update from the publisher as to if or when these will ever be printed / published again. - The KJV Store

 

[1stCenturyLady]

I wonder how different it will be from the NKJV?

I like referring to the Tyndale New Testament from the 1500's where the KJV originated.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Also, there's this: The Defined King James Bible has been Out of Stock / Out of Print for several years now and we do not have any official update from the publisher as to if or when these will ever be printed / published again. - The KJV Store

You can get the Defined King James Bible at Ebay and a select few other places.

defined king james bible: Search Result | eBay

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I wonder how different it will be from the NKJV?

I like referring to the Tyndale New Testament from the 1500's where the KJV originated.

Watch this video on the New King James Bible.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Yes. I just know the groom will not allow the bride to enter his wrath before the wedding. He will rescue her prior to the Tribulation

Actually Truth, some will remain here until the return of Jesus, which actually ends the tribulation Mat 24:22; 1 Thes 4:17; 2 Thes 1:6-9

 

[Robert Gwin]

Nope. I initially chose the King James Bible because I noticed a corruption for the worse and not for the better with Modern English Translations. It's not that I don't use Modern bibles. I do. But they are not my final Word of authority. Since my many years as a believer, I have found more reasons to stick to the King James Bible as the pure Word of God and not less. I have come up with 101 reasons for the KJB being the pure Word of God for today.

Anyways, the teaching that Jesus is God is not exclusive to the King James Bible. Such a teaching is found even in Modern Bibles (Although some Modern bibles do attack the deity of Christ of which I am sure you prefer). All Modern Bibles come from Rome, and they come from the work of two men (Westcott and Hort) who held to heretical beliefs (Including Catholicism). There are subtle changes in Modern bibles that favors the Catholic church and their teachings.

Jesus is eternal and uncreated. He came into the flesh. For the Word who was God (John 1:1) was made flesh (John 1:14). Many believe Jesus was a created dem-god in the Incarnation. But this is a denial of Jesus (the Eternal Logos) coming into the flesh.

1 John 4:3 says:
“And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.”

Jesus said, “if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.” (John 8:24).

The word “he” is not in the Greek. So Jesus is saying, that if we do not believe He is the “I AM,” we will die in our sins. For in the following scene in Scripture: We learn that when Jesus declared Himself to be the Great “I AM” in Exodus chapter 3, the Jews went ape crazy and wanted to stone him over it.

“Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.” (John 8:57-59).

There are tons of reasons why Jesus is GOD.

You can check out the many points in Scripture for this here.



You are assuming that I don't know God. Only God can truly know this and the individual. But every believer who knows God keeps His commandments (1 John 2:3). The person who says they know God and yet they don't keep His commandments is a liar and the truth is not in Him (1 John 2:4).



Mirror reflected back at you. I can say the same for you. I agree that we live in an age of information which makes us without excuse, but that does not mean you are correct in denying the plain biblical teaching that Jesus is God. Christian men for hundreds of years had the King James Bible long before the Modern Bibles showed up with the heresy that denied that Jesus is God. Your trying to tell me that God would intentionally mislead many Christian believers for hundreds of years with a false bible? Yeah, I am not buying that. But you can. Good luck on explaining to the Lord Jesus would you denied how He is the I AM.

To deny Jesus is GOD is to deny who God is.
This is a very dangerous place to be.

I will follow the actual teaching of the Bible sir. Jehovah is Jesus' God, he stated very clearly that it is Him that we should serve and worship exclusively Mat 4:10. You and I have chosen to serve different Gods. I am simply pointing out that the reason we have chosen our path, was likely because of the version of the Bible we have selected to follow.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

some of those phrases are clearly wrong. "No room for them in the inn" is nonsense

And I have never heard anyone say "Left hand know what thy right hand doeth"

And some are clearly wrong: "Money is the root of all evil" is wrong;

And what is "Turn to him the other [cheek]" Matthew 5:39 …Nobody talks like that!

why don't you write in 17th Century Englyshe? We don't all still speak or write like the King James Bible (which neither writes nor speaks!

Please stop posting irrelevant nonsense to justify the out-of-date KJV.

That is the reason that many of us use modern translations: they are written in our language, so the meaning is clear.

Boy are you thoroughly deceived.

So you’re okay with some “updated” language in the modern Bibles even though they leave out scriptures, weaken the doctrine of hell, weaken the status of Christ, introduce contradictory statements, strengthen many heresies, and so on.

You have the same relentless spirit that Paul had before his miraculous conversion. I bet you’d be prepared to hunt us down and imprison us if given the authority to do so.

I am in awe of how fooled you are by all the anti-KJV propaganda.

They caught a big one with you!

 

[Robert Gwin]

That gets a little sticky.....According to Jewish tradition, the number of divine names that require the scribe's special care is seven: El, Elohim, Adonai, YHWH, Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh, Shaddai, Tzevaot, and will include Yahweh. Are they names or designations. And the funny...look up God in the strong's and note the different definitions and look up goddess

El/god
Elohim/God
Adonai/Lord
YHWH/Jehovah
Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh/I am who I am
Shaddai/Almighty
Tzevaot/of armies
Yahweh/Hebrew pronunciation of God's name YHWH

Many titles, one name Grail.

 

[Robert Gwin]

A little more to add.
The Strong’s is great, especially for the money. Over 95% accurate. It’s errors, are linked to its direct association with the KJV so it inherits all that, and then also the modifications to the Bible.

That last 5% are categorical. When they removed God’s name (YHWH) from the Bible, and replaced it with God or LORD or both, that accounted for nearly 6,000 modifications in the Old Testament alone….not counting the rearranging of words to make the sentences read correctly. So the Strong’s has a lot of references for the word God instead of His name.

In the actual scriptures they very seldom just referred to Yahweh as God, for a very good reason. The Hebrew language is not made up of lower case and upper case letters….just upper case….and the word for God…Yahweh….and the word for false gods….and the word for goddess is the same. So that is why they didn’t like just using God to reference Yahweh.

The other errors are associated with Christianity’s attempt to put a devil and hell in the Old Testament. They did not understand why the devil – Satan was not more apparent in the Old Testament…They could not find a scripture where Yahweh or the prophets warned people about the devil – Satan. They could not find a scripture where Yahweh or the Prophets threatened or warned people about hell in the Old Testament.

In the study of how false beliefs that occurred long ago and have staying power, this is classic and well known. A very interesting study. Satan is not called a devil in the Old Testament and this really confused them. How could it be that Satan was not called the devil in the Old Testament but so clearly a devil in the New Testament?

It was just too much for them! So they went back to the Old Testament and started to insert him….Lucifer into Isaiah….words that they could translate serpent they made it dragon or jackal(s) to dragon. In numbers where his advisories incited King David to number his army…..they got a lot of mileage out of that….Hebrew word for Satan has been translated accuser or advisory.

This went on for centuries. I guess they never thought to get with the Jews about the Hebrew Bible….Why would they do that! LOL Why not ask them about the devil and hell. Well as it turns out the Israelites of the Old Testament did not believe in a devil or a hell and consequently they still do not believe it today. So they do not believe there is a devil that tempts people or a place of torture.

So don’t throw away your Strong’s, its errors, that are categorical are very few, it is just that there is a lot of words in those categories. Very easy to keep track of or annotate.

And we were talking about El as a general name for Yahweh. The name El was very useful because they could get away with using it. So if they wanted to name a shrine or an altar or a town, or even a person after Yahweh they could use this name. For example El-paran, El-elohe-Israel, El-beth-el, and Elisabeth and Elijah are a good examples. El is a name for Yahweh but it means God, but the only true God and it would be completely correct to call it a title.

Addressed in a different post Grail.

 

[Grailhunter]

El/god
Elohim/God
Adonai/Lord
YHWH/Jehovah
Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh/I am who I am
Shaddai/Almighty
Tzevaot/of armies
Yahweh/Hebrew pronunciation of God's name YHWH

Many titles, one name Grail.

All good.
Names, titles, references....I have already explained this. Jehovah?... No J's. Then we can discuss "proper names" abbreviations and designations. When I am referring to the removal of God the Father's name and God the Son's name I am referring to Proper names. YHWH replaced His proper name...then Elohim/God and Adonai/Lord replaced the tetragrammaton. They took any reference to His proper name out and put in positional names. Yes Yahweh is God....but God is a position. Yahweh's name is not God!

As I explained the "Hebrews" usually did not refer to Yahweh just using the word God....Elohim. The reason? Technically Elohim is plural and can be used to reference false gods.

You shall have no other gods before Me. Exodus 20:3



Note here that Elohim/God is in fact a generic designation for gods. This concept that God is Yahweh's name has caused considerable harm to the understanding of the scriptures.

The bigger question, the bigger offense is how can you justify taking God's name out of the scriptures...nearly 6,000 times. And it is an offense of removing and inserting into the scriptures. You can say it is a sin to remove from the scriptures and a sin to add/insert, so you could say 12,000 sins, with just one being worthy of hell. Shame on them! For the "Bible only" people, they should be up in arms.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I will follow the actual teaching of the Bible sir. Jehovah is Jesus' God, he stated very clearly that it is Him that we should serve and worship exclusively Mat 4:10. You and I have chosen to serve different Gods. I am simply pointing out that the reason we have chosen our path, was likely because of the version of the Bible we have selected to follow.

Yes, you reject the Trinity or the Godhead as taught in Scripture.

However, there are those who deny the Trinity or that Jesus is God (like you), and they are King James Only.
But your position here is silly because if we were discussing this issue here in America before Westcott and Hort came along with their Critical Text in the 1880's, we would not be having this discussion of which line of manuscripts to follow (Textus Receptus vs. the Critical Text). You would be using a King James Bible or another Textus Receptus Bible (which is closely related to the KJB). So you ignore history in order to make your theology work and to justify your denial of God as revealed in Holy Scripture. While certain Modern Bibles do corrupt the Bible and say that Jesus or the Word did not exist from Eternity's past, etcetera, there are those Modern Bibles that don't say that. There are also many verses even in Modern Bibles that defend how Jesus is God. But you are either ignorant of these verses or you have chosen to twist them. But yes. You prefer the corrupted line of bibles that became popular later in order to cater to how you prefer God to be.

Again, that said, on the other hand, I find Modern Bibles invaluable at times because it can bring clarity to the archaic words I am not used to in the King James Bible. But my final Word of authority is the King James Bible because I see a pattern for the worse and not for the better in Modern Bibles. The devil's name is even placed in Modern Bibles where it does not belong. Holy living is subtly attacked or watered down in Modern Bibles. So choose your weapon. My sword will stand and rest ultimately with the King James Bible. In most cases (not all): You don't have a Bible that is perfect and without error if you are not KJB Only. Generally anyone who is not KJB Only believes in ever changing bible and they believe only the Originals were perfect and THEY and the SCHOLARS get to decide what is in the Bible and what is not. They become the authority and not GOD's WORD (the Holy Bible).