Bible alone!

[Jim B]

They are all forced to say over 10% different from each other by copyright law, causing a difference of about 50,000 word changes. Times that by dozens of versions.
No book in the world has been rewritten like that, nor would it have a speck of originality..

Why do you keep spouting absurdities? “The Ten Percent Rule” is nothing more than an inconvenient myth without basis in the law and will not be accepted by any court.

Your statement that "no book in the world has been rewritten like that, nor would it have a speck of originality" applies to the King James Bible! Modern translations are much better than the KJV, which was ordered by a secular king to codify his version of Protestantism, not to be an accurate translation of the sources available at the time. The 1599 Geneva Bible is a far better, more accurate translation.

Do you have an aversion to facts? Clearly what you write is often nonsense.

 

[Jim B]

These are the same arguments used by Muslims against the Word of God Jim. the fact is the word of God is the most authenticated and true rendering of the word of God and we as believers have the Spirit of truth which confirms and protects the word of God and its truthfulness. Me thinks this is where your issue lies, you have not had the Spirit of Truth confirm the truthfulness of the word of God and you are merely using your own intellectual prowess, which can neither confirm nor deny the veracity of the word of God, and hence your confusion over the said topic and skepticism.

Blah, blah, blah! Once again: there is no "pure word of God". a) The original texts don't exist. The surviving texts are copies that differ from each other. b) No translation can be called the pure Word of God because the destination language differs in vocabulary, grammar, syntax, cultural understanding, etc.

Saying that I have not had the Spirit of Truth confirm the truthfulness of the word of God is nonsensical garbage. I believe the Bible 100%!

Muslims consider the Koran to be the pure word of God. So you're wrong about that also.

 

[David H.]

Blah, blah, blah! Once again: there is no "pure word of God". a) The original texts don't exist. The surviving texts are copies that differ from each other. b) No translation can be called the pure Word of God because the destination language differs in vocabulary, grammar, syntax, cultural understanding, etc.

Saying that I have not had the Spirit of Truth confirm the truthfulness of the word of God is nonsensical garbage. I believe the Bible 100%!

Muslims consider the Koran to be the pure word of God. So you're wrong about that also.

Have you ever had a confirmation from the Holy Ghost of the veracity of scripture? For example, has the Holy ghost confirmed the veracity of the deity of Christ to you.... personally? You see, this is the one doctrine that is under attack in the "newer" translations based on faulty texts (Sinaiaticus and Vaticanus). This is not a "KJVonly" thing for me, but the KJV is not based on these faulty manuscripts, hence it has remained far more true to the doctrine of the Deity of Christ.

For example, Mark 1:1

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (KJV)

The beginning of the good news about Jesus the Messiah,[fn] the Son of God,[fn] (NIV) (Footnote: Or Jesus Christ.Messiah (Hebrew) and Christ (Greek) both mean Anointed One)\

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.[fn] (ESV) (Footnote: Some manuscripts omit the Son of God)

The Reason why this verse is important is because The Gospel of Mark is, according to most scholars, the first Gospel written, the others synoptic Gospels "Copying" from Mark, and this is the first mention of Jesus as the Son of God, which dates to the very century that the apostles were preaching. drawing doubt on this by adding a footnote (Sinaiaticus being the manuscript that does not have this phrase in it) leads to people making the claim that the deity of Christ was "added" to the scriptures at a later date.

When I first Got my ESV and read this and I saw this footnote, the Holy Ghost drew my attention to this.... and this was well before I knew what KJVonly was and why people believe this. He led me back to the KJV and to ask why this footnote was added. Which led me to study the concerns of the KJV Only side of the debate. What I found is that they are right about this.... Now mind you I still use My ESV and read it, and I am not religious about what version you use, because i know the Holy Ghost can convict us of sin from most versions and lead us to truth and the Gospel through them.... for example a person picking up an NIV placed by the Gideon's in a hotel room can be led to the Gospel just like a KJV can.

My Advice to you is that you actually read and study the concern of the KJV only side, as they do make some very valid points. I do agree that some of them take this too far and make a pharisaical religion out of this, But the Holy Ghost will lead you into all truth, which is known as the unction of the Holy ghost....

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. (John 16:13, KJV)

 

[Truther]

Why do you keep spouting absurdities? “The Ten Percent Rule” is nothing more than an inconvenient myth without basis in the law and will not be accepted by any court.

Your statement that "no book in the world has been rewritten like that, nor would it have a speck of originality" applies to the King James Bible! Modern translations are much better than the KJV, which was ordered by a secular king to codify his version of Protestantism, not to be an accurate translation of the sources available at the time. The 1599 Geneva Bible is a far better, more accurate translation.

Do you have an aversion to facts? Clearly what you write is often nonsense.

So, the NIV has no exclusive copyright protecting it?

You can create a Bible exactly like it?

Yes or no?

 

[Jim B]

So, the NIV has no exclusive copyright protecting it?

You can create a Bible exactly like it?

Yes or no?

Every single translation, including the KJV, is copyrighted. Yes, even your beloved KJV is copyrighted because of the nonScriptural content: notes, references, etc. (The "pure" KJV is copyrighted by the Crown in England".

You try to denigrate modern translations using one nonsensical reason after another. You have a transparent agenda, based on nonsense like the 10% rule. IF you want to stick with your preferred translation be my guest. But it is not the pure Word of God!

Have you ever had a confirmation from the Holy Ghost of the veracity of scripture? For example, has the Holy ghost confirmed the veracity of the deity of Christ to you.... personally? You see, this is the one doctrine that is under attack in the "newer" translations based on faulty texts (Sinaiaticus and Vaticanus). This is not a "KJVonly" thing for me, but the KJV is not based on these faulty manuscripts, hence it has remained far more true to the doctrine of the Deity of Christ.

For example, Mark 1:1

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (KJV)

The beginning of the good news about Jesus the Messiah,[fn] the Son of God,[fn] (NIV) (Footnote: Or Jesus Christ.Messiah (Hebrew) and Christ (Greek) both mean Anointed One)\

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.[fn] (ESV) (Footnote: Some manuscripts omit the Son of God)

The Reason why this verse is important is because The Gospel of Mark is, according to most scholars, the first Gospel written, the others synoptic Gospels "Copying" from Mark, and this is the first mention of Jesus as the Son of God, which dates to the very century that the apostles were preaching. drawing doubt on this by adding a footnote (Sinaiaticus being the manuscript that does not have this phrase in it) leads to people making the claim that the deity of Christ was "added" to the scriptures at a later date.

When I first Got my ESV and read this and I saw this footnote, the Holy Ghost drew my attention to this.... and this was well before I knew what KJVonly was and why people believe this. He led me back to the KJV and to ask why this footnote was added. Which led me to study the concerns of the KJV Only side of the debate. What I found is that they are right about this.... Now mind you I still use My ESV and read it, and I am not religious about what version you use, because i know the Holy Ghost can convict us of sin from most versions and lead us to truth and the Gospel through them.... for example a person picking up an NIV placed by the Gideon's in a hotel room can be led to the Gospel just like a KJV can.

My Advice to you is that you actually read and study the concern of the KJV only side, as they do make some very valid points. I do agree that some of them take this too far and make a pharisaical religion out of this, But the Holy Ghost will lead you into all truth, which is known as the unction of the Holy ghost....

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. (John 16:13, KJV)

Believe what you will; I'm not interested. You and "truther" should get together and augment each other's nonsense.

Mark 1:1, "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God." NET

The rest of your post is of no interest to me. Try to gain some knowledge and understanding.

 

[Truther]

Every single translation, including the KJV, is copyrighted. Yes, even your beloved KJV is copyrighted because of the nonScriptural content: notes, references, etc. (The "pure" KJV is copyrighted by the Crown in England".

You try to denigrate modern translations using one nonsensical reason after another. You have a transparent agenda, based on nonsense like the 10% rule. IF you want to stick with your preferred translation be my guest. But it is not the pure Word of God!


Believe what you will; I'm not interested. You and "truther" should get together and augment each other's nonsense.

Mark 1:1, "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God." NET

The rest of your post is of no interest to me. Try to gain some knowledge and understanding.

I can duplicate a KJV word for word, beside the comments, and no law broken in the good 'ol USA.

I can do the same with the NIV but lose my shirt after a cease and desist letter.

 

[theefaith]

Only the original manuscripts are the inerrant word of God

 

[Truther]

Only the original manuscripts are the inerrant word of God

They are KAPUT.

So, the inerrant word of God is KAPUT?

 

[theefaith]

They are KAPUT.

So, the inerrant word of God is KAPUT?

that’s why church founded the church Matt 16:18 the teach all nations Matt 28:19 without error Jn 16:13

 

[theefaith]

And the church authorized valid translations

 

[Truther]

that’s why church founded the church Matt 16:18 the teach all nations Matt 28:19 without error Jn 16:13

The Catholic church replaced the inerrant word of God with their commentary?

 

[Jim B]

I can duplicate a KJV word for word, beside the comments, and no law broken in the good 'ol USA.

I can do the same with the NIV but lose my shirt after a cease and desist letter.

The New International Version (NIV) text may be quoted in any form (written, visual, electronic or audio), up to and inclusive of five hundred (500) verses without the express written permission of the publisher, providing the verses quoted do not amount to a complete book of the Bible nor do the verses quoted account for twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the total text of the work in which they are quoted.

Look in any modern publication of the KJV and you will see that it is also copyrighted. While the actual text may not be protected, all references, footnotes, etc. are the property of the publisher and are protected under US copyright law.

 

[Jim B]

Only the original manuscripts are the inerrant word of God

But they don't exist.

 

[Jim B]

They are KAPUT.

So, the inerrant word of God is KAPUT?

They -- the original manuscripts -- haven't been discovered (if they even exist). And you falsely change the subject to claim that "the inerrant word of God is KAPUT?". More of your usual twisting of what is said.

 

[Jim B]

And the church authorized valid translations

Where and how did the church authorize valid translations?

 

[amadeus]

Only the original manuscripts are the inerrant word of God

And NOT then the actual Words out of God's mouth?

 

[theefaith]

The Catholic church replaced the inerrant word of God with their commentary?

the church is the word of God!

the church “IS” the pillar of truth!
1 Tim 3:16

Jesus Christ extends his mission, power, and authority to His church of His apostles!

Even His judging!
Matt 19:28
His teaching authority!
Matt 28:19 and Jn 20:21
His power to forgive sins!
Jn 20:23
His being the light of the world!
Matt 5:14
His ministry of reconciliation!
2 cor 5:18
His authority in governing the church and administering the kingdom!
Matt 16:18-19 & 18:18 Jn 21:17
Lk 22:29
Apart from me you can do nothing. Jn 15:5
So the church is subject to Christ!
Eph 5:24
Christ shares His glory! 2 thes 1:10 rev 12:1


Jesus Christ continues HIS ministry in His new covenant church thru Peter, the apostles, and their successors with the same mission, power, and authority!
Mt 16:18 Mt 28:19 Matt 18:17 Acts 1:17 acts 8:31 & 35 acts 9:4 Lk 10:16 Jn 8:32 Jn 13:20 Jn 15:5 Jn 16:13 Jn 20:21-22 eph 2:20 acts 2:42 1 Tim 3:15

Fundamentalism drives a wedge between Christ and his church, separates Christ from His kingdom, and the authority of Christ from the new covenant!

1 Corinthians 16:22
If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema

Extends to the truth and the church

Cos Christ is the truth and His church teaches the truth without error! Jn 14:6 matt 28:19 matt 18:17 1 Tim 3:15 Jn 29:21-23 Jn 16:13

Christ and His church are one! Acts 9:4 eph 5:32

Authority of the Apostles!

What authority does Christ have?
What power does Christ have?
What mission / ministry does Christ have?

Peter, the apostles and their successors have the same authority, power, and mission! Jn 20:21 as my father sent me, even so send I you!

John 17:18
As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

The apostles are Christ’s successors!
They have authority to send others as well, apostle means one who is sent!

Therefore the apostles have authority to send more apostles or successors!
Apostolic succession!

The nations still need to be taught, disciples still need to be baptized and the church the new covenant kingdom of christ still needs to be governed!

Hebrews 3:1
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Christ is an apostle, and has authority to send other apostles, the apostles also have this authority, so the apostles continue down thru the centuries as Christ promised! Matt 28:19-20

Keys of authority! And power to bind and loose! Matt 16:18 and Matt 18:18 matt 28:19 Isa 22:21-22

Moral authority:
(Teaching)
Necessity of being taught by Christ:
Two edge sword: defining truth and condemning errors, and Interpreting scripture.

Jurisdictional authority:
(Governing / administering)
Necessity of Peter and the apostles and their successors to govern the holy church.

Spiritual authority:
(Life of Grace)
Sanctifying thru the mass and Sacraments

The apostles teaching is Christ’s teaching, Christ and His church are one! Acts 9:4

Christian rule of faith is not the Bible alone! But the doctrine of the apostles! Acts 2:42

Jesus Christ continues HIS ministry in His new covenant church thru Peter, the apostles, and their successors with the same mission, power, and authority!
Mt 16:18 Mt 28:19 Acts 1:17 acts 8:31 & 35 Lk 10:16 Jn 8:32 Jn 13:20 Jn 15:5 Jn 16:13 Jn 20:21-22 eph 2:20

 

[theefaith]

The church of the apostles is God breathed! Jn 20:21-23

 

[theefaith]

But they don't exist.

but church founded by Christ and His apostles do exist!
Teaching all! Matt 28:19

 

[Truther]

The New International Version (NIV) text may be quoted in any form (written, visual, electronic or audio), up to and inclusive of five hundred (500) verses without the express written permission of the publisher, providing the verses quoted do not amount to a complete book of the Bible nor do the verses quoted account for twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the total text of the work in which they are quoted.

Look in any modern publication of the KJV and you will see that it is also copyrighted. While the actual text may not be protected, all references, footnotes, etc. are the property of the publisher and are protected under US copyright law.

Are you going to duplicate a 500 verse Bible?

Also, the footnotes etc in the KJV are copyrighted, not the scriptures.

Omit the maps too.