King James Version Bible vs. Modern English Perversions

[Marymog]

Read the whole of Matt 18.
It is speaking of "brothers" (relatives, men of one of the 12 tribes, ie men who were called Israelites and Jews).

Then it speaks of a Trespass between "those" "brothers".

Then it speaks of the "accuser";
First going personally to the Trespasser...
To allow the Trespasser opportunity to Correct his Trespass.

If that fails;
The accuser can take the matter to the clergy of the church.
When the accuser takes the matter to the clergy, the accuser is to bring with him, wittnesses regarding the Trespass.
The clergy of the church, hears the matter of Trespass, and the witnesses, and decides if a Trespass occurred or not.
If the clergy concludes a Trespass was committed. They will direct the Trespasser to correct the Trespass, according to the Jewish Religious Law.
If the Trespasser refuses; then treat him like a heathen.
If the Trespasser agrees; THEN the one "Trespassed Against" has GAINED a "brother", who is a "brother" in belief and adherence to the Jewish Religious Law.

Hi,

Fascinating. Your belief is that taking the matter of a trespass to The Church is only a Jewish Religious Law and is not enforceable upon us Christians? This statement by Jesus was for the Jews only and the Jewish Church to decide who is a pagan or tax collector?

If that were true then why in the next sentence did he say, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven and if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Is that for the Jews only also?

That doesn't sound like he is talking about Jewish Religious laws to me.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Not going to happen. We have no king or queen in the U.S.

 

[Marymog]

You neglect to consider the TIME-frame.
Individual men certainly could know if another Trespassed against them; then as today.

However NOT ALL MEN could read, or had access to Scripture. They specifically took the matter to THOSE; the counsel clerics of the church, who were SUPPOSED to be able to read, and have access to the Scriptural Laws.
The Book of Positive Laws, given by Moses.
(Of What one is supposed TO DO)
The Book of Curse Laws, given by Aaron
(Of The penal consequences of What one receives for NOT DOING What one is supposed TO DO);

Today - Men CAN read and CAN have and Do Read and DO have numerous copies of Scripture. And can DO exactly what Scripture teaches.
If a man trespasses against another man...
Take the matter to the man to resolve the matter.

If that fails....AND the men are congregants of the same church, under the same counsel of clergy...take it to the church clergy.

If that fail...a man trespassed against can treat the other man AS A HEATHEN.

Additionally;
It that fails...Men have the option to take the matter to Civil authorities, in order to Civily make the Trespasser be Ordered to Correct his wrong doing.

Now you have me REALLY confused. It appears in your statement just before this you think it is a Jewish thing. Not it seems you are saying we as Christians can take it to our church clergy? I'm confused.

None the less.....I agree with you that individual men certainly could know if another Trespassed against them; then as today. But scripture makes it clear that we MAY not know what a trespass is and we could be trespassing unintentionally. That is why there was disagreement with WHAT a trespass was. That is why we were told to go get two or three other brothers to confer with. If that person didn't listen to us WE didn't decide if it was a trespass. We took it to THE CHURCH and it was THE CHURCH who decided if it was a trespass. The Church may tell the three of us we are wrong and the person that we thought was trespassing was right. It wasn't up to the individual (or the three of us) to decide. It was up to The Church.

Take it up civilly?????? Jesus is CLEARLY talking about the laws of God (sin), not of man. Civil courts don't enforce sin.

What does the time frame matter????? Gods laws are universal and are not held by time. Reading literacy was not prevalent in society for another 1600 years AFTER scripture was written. It doesn't matter if I can read or not. A lot of people today can't read. Does that mean THEY have to go to The Church to get a decision but since I can read I get to decide????? I'm confused.

Scripture CLEARLY says THE CHURCH decides if scripture has been violated. Each individual doesn't decide. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying

 

[Marymog]

That's an abosolutely incorrect statement.

Apostle Paul was a scholar of God's Holy Writ, having been learned under the best Hebrew scholar of his day, Gamaliel. So Paul was not teaching them from an oral tradition, because The Gospel which Jesus revealed to Paul was also actually written in the OT prophets. And that is WHY... those at Berea believed Paul, not because of an oral tradition, but because The Word of God they referred to aligned with The Gospel of Jesus Christ that Paul was preaching. Their understanding had NOTHING to do with an oral tradition of the unbelieving Jews. Verifying for themselves in God's Holy Writ is what caused them to believe Paul, not some oral tradition of the Jews. And Paul commended those at Berea for going into God's Word to check him out!

It was the unbelieving Jews from Thessalonica that stirred things up at Berea afterwards when they heard about Paul preaching in the synagogue at Berea. They did that because they WERE following their OWN traditions not written in The Word of God. Now if you deny those unbelieving Jews had created their OWN set of traditions, then it means you deny what our Lord Jesus said about it:

Matt 15:3-9
3 But He answered and said unto them, "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
4 For God commanded, saying, 'Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.'
5 But ye say, 'Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free.' Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8 'This people draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and honoureth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me.
9 But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
KJV

This is why the Protestant Church separated from the Catholic Church, because of the many man-made oral traditions the Catholic Church had created outside of The Word of God. In that respect, their system is not much different than the oral traditions of the Jews.

Paul was taught ORALLY by Jesus. Paul also conferred ORALLY with the other Apostles to make sure his teaching was not in vain. The NT had not yet been written so everything Paul taught the Bereans was based on ORAL TEACHINGS. He wasn't reading from a book!!!!

Are you saying the Bereans accepted Paul's oral teaching with blind faith and that they didn't confer with The Torah to see if what he was teaching was true???

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

I suspect that Jesus would be disappointed with any church he walked into, no matter how zealous they are.
Every church has area where they fall down on, whether its doctrinal or practical help. I seek to follow Jesus.

You are of the belief that no church and no man on earth knows The Truth of scripture? We all have SOME truth but no one has the full Truth?

Mary

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

of course its 'no go', look at the scriptural differences in;
- Matt. 20:20
- Acts 12:4

I'm sticking with King James Only.

Have you read Bel and the Dragon lately?
That was in the original King James.

 

[GodsGrace]

I find it depressing that Christians so dispise the integrity and ability of Chriostian linguists, impling that they cannot accuratly interpret Gods word from Greek, Hebrew and other biblical languages into English using every available manuscript.

The claim that God spoke to mankind via a sacred languge is one the RC church made to prevent the translation of the bible into common langauges, so it is strange that this same claim is made by the KJ onlyists sect.

What sacred language?
What are you making up now?
There's not enough untruth rolling around?
There's no such thing as a sacred language.

 

[GodsGrace]

A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON:

- Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)

- Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times.

- Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV)

Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ"

- 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV)

Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV).

Here is our History:
The Authorized Version: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Through God's will a breakthrough for the Protestant Reformation, for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church; Later revised as the King James Version Bible.



The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset.
The one and only true word of God (in the English Language).
The Holy Bible.

- Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV)

Pre 1611 (Old Testament):
Was known to be in the Hebrew Language.

Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language.

.............................................................................................

Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion):
These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith.

The real only "authorized version" is the one in Koine Greek.
Learn it if you want to read what the N.T. really says, word for word.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

King James came from the Vulgate.
It was called the first Catholic Bible.
The flight of the Phoenix, easter, calvary, all Vulgate words originally found in the King James Bible.

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi,

Fascinating. Your belief is that taking the matter of a trespass to The Church is only a Jewish Religious Law and is not enforceable upon us Christians? This statement by Jesus was for the Jews only and the Jewish Church to decide who is a pagan or tax collector?

If that were true then why in the next sentence did he say, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven and if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Is that for the Jews only also?

That doesn't sound like he is talking about Jewish Religious laws to me.

Mary

Some people believe everything Jesus said is ONLY for the Jews and Paul spoke for the gentiles and changed everything to grace instead of behavior.

This is because these people cannot accept the responsibility of sinning, so they cling to grace and to Paul...
When, in reality, Paul said everything Jesus said. There's no difference.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

All the Bible is relevant.
Just put it together.
Oh yeah, and don't forget to read the Old Testament first.

 

[Davy]

Paul was taught ORALLY by Jesus. Paul also conferred ORALLY with the other Apostles to make sure his teaching was not in vain.

Paul was a scholar of the Old Testament Hebrew first, so when Jesus revealed The Gospel to Paul, The Gospel then came to light as it was first written in the Old Testament Books that Paul already knew. That is why Apostle Paul in his Epistles often quoted from the Old Testament Books when preaching The Gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus made The Gospel clear to His disciples after His resurrection, showing them in the Old Testament Books (Luke 24:40-44).

Whereas the Jews claimed Moses' teachings in the Torah (first five Books of the Old Testament), they also created their OWN set of traditions OUTSIDE the Torah, and that's a strictly ORAL tradition, because it had NO SUPPORT in God's Holy Writ. That Jesus rebuked.

John 5:39
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me.
KJV

The only "scriptures" available when Jesus said that above were the Old Testament Books. So where do the Old Testament Books testify of Jesus? I showed you some examples in one of my previous posts, and you said nothing.

The NT had not yet been written so everything Paul taught the Bereans was based on ORAL TEACHINGS. He wasn't reading from a book!!!!

You mean you... don't even realize that the New Testament Books are about FULFILLMENT of what the Old Testament Books prophesied??? Not all written in the Old Testament Books was history. There's still prophecy yet to come to pass that's written in the Old Testament Books, even in Genesis. How could you be trying to exhibit knowledge of the Scriptures and not know this?

Are you saying the Bereans accepted Paul's oral teaching with blind faith and that they didn't confer with The Torah to see if what he was teaching was true???

Curious Mary

No, I said just the opposite. Those at Berea consulted God's Holy Writ to confirm what Paul was preaching to them. And Paul commended them for doing that. They consulted the Old Testament Books, because that was all that was written at that time, and by that it reveals The Gospel of Jesus Christ had been written in the Old Testament Books all along.

But when the Jews in Thessalonica heard about Paul's preaching in Berea, these Jews went to Berea and stirred up the people. Those were keeping to their own traditions of men, which were oral traditions of the Jews that formed their books like the Babylonia Talmud, a book of Jewish sage sayings.

Acts 17:13-14
13 But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people.
14 And then immediately the brethren sent away Paul to go as it were to the sea: but Silas and Timotheus abode there still.
KJV

That's Acts, a NT Book. Why would that say "the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea" instead of "the gospel was preached of Paul at Berea"? The Jews of Thessalonica had no knowledge of The Gospel, even though it was written in the Word of God that they had in their possession. Per Paul in Romans 11, God blinded Israel in part, pointing to his brethren the Jews and quoting from Isaiah, and David in the Psalms.

So the Jew's oral tradition was NOT all about the Word of God like many think. It was especially about their OWN oral traditions their fathers created, what Jesus called "the commandments of men", making the Word of God null and void.

I thus will repeat what I said before. For that same reason, men's traditions not written but because of Catholic ORAL traditions outside the Word of God, Protestant Christianity broke off from the Catholic Church.

 

[Davy]

King James came from the Vulgate.
It was called the first Catholic Bible.
The flight of the Phoenix, easter, calvary, all Vulgate words originally found in the King James Bible.

"Yet among English Catholics the King James Version was widely accepted from the 18th century; moreover, when the Douai-Reims Bible was updated in the mid-18th century, the translator, Richard Challoner (1691–1781), a convert from Protestantism to Catholicism, largely worked from the King James Version. Both the King James Version and the Douai-Reims Bible were finally supplanted in popularity by the Jerusalem Bible (1966)."
(Encyclopedia Britannica)

 

[mjrhealth]

I don't understand you because the question wasn't for you and you didn't answer it

You dont understand anything because you listen to men and not God. You follow after religion and not Christ this bit

Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

But like so many you prefer religion to teh truth,

 

[Taken]

Hi,

Fascinating. Your belief is that taking the matter of a trespass to The Church is only a Jewish Religious Law and is not enforceable upon us Christians? This statement by Jesus was for the Jews only and the Jewish Church to decide who is a pagan or tax collector?

If that were true then why in the next sentence did he say, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven and if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Is that for the Jews only also?

That doesn't sound like he is talking about Jewish Religious laws to me.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Paul was a scholar of the Old Testament Hebrew first, so when Jesus revealed The Gospel to Paul, The Gospel then came to light as it was first written in the Old Testament Books that Paul already knew. That is why Apostle Paul in his Epistles often quoted from the Old Testament Books when preaching The Gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus made The Gospel clear to His disciples after His resurrection, showing them in the Old Testament Books (Luke 24:40-44).

Whereas the Jews claimed Moses' teachings in the Torah (first five Books of the Old Testament), they also created their OWN set of traditions OUTSIDE the Torah, and that's a strictly ORAL tradition, because it had NO SUPPORT in God's Holy Writ. That Jesus rebuked.

John 5:39
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me.
KJV

The only "scriptures" available when Jesus said that above were the Old Testament Books. So where do the Old Testament Books testify of Jesus? I showed you some examples in one of my previous posts, and you said nothing.

Davy,

Your response makes my statement no less true: Paul was taught ORALLY by Jesus. Paul also conferred ORALLY with the other Apostles to make sure his teaching was not in vain.

In Luke 24 and John 5:39 Jesus said he has fulfilled the law of Moses, the prophets and psalms (scripture). I don't see anywhere in scripture that Jesus said don't follow tradition. Scripture clearly says stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle (2 Thessalonians).

Mary

 

[Taken]

Hi,

Fascinating. Your belief is that taking the matter of a trespass to The Church is only a Jewish Religious Law

Nope, didn't say that.


God Bless,
Taken

 

[Marymog]

You mean you... don't even realize that the New Testament Books are about FULFILLMENT of what the Old Testament Books prophesied??? Not all written in the Old Testament Books was history. There's still prophecy yet to come to pass that's written in the Old Testament Books, even in Genesis. How could you be trying to exhibit knowledge of the Scriptures and not know this?

Davy,

I do realize that the NT books are a fulfillment of the OT. I am not sure how you come to that conclusion.

Your response makes my statement no less true: The NT had not yet been written so everything Paul taught the Bereans was based on ORAL TEACHINGS. He wasn't reading from a book!!!!

Mary

 

[Marymog]

No, I said just the opposite. Those at Berea consulted God's Holy Writ to confirm what Paul was preaching to them. And Paul commended them for doing that. They consulted the Old Testament Books, because that was all that was written at that time, and by that it reveals The Gospel of Jesus Christ had been written in the Old Testament Books all along.

But when the Jews in Thessalonica heard about Paul's preaching in Berea, these Jews went to Berea and stirred up the people. Those were keeping to their own traditions of men, which were oral traditions of the Jews that formed their books like the Babylonia Talmud, a book of Jewish sage sayings.

Acts 17:13-14
13 But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people.
14 And then immediately the brethren sent away Paul to go as it were to the sea: but Silas and Timotheus abode there still.
KJV

That's Acts, a NT Book. Why would that say "the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea" instead of "the gospel was preached of Paul at Berea"? The Jews of Thessalonica had no knowledge of The Gospel, even though it was written in the Word of God that they had in their possession. Per Paul in Romans 11, God blinded Israel in part, pointing to his brethren the Jews and quoting from Isaiah, and David in the Psalms.

So the Jew's oral tradition was NOT all about the Word of God like many think. It was especially about their OWN oral traditions their fathers created, what Jesus called "the commandments of men", making the Word of God null and void.

I thus will repeat what I said before. For that same reason, men's traditions not written but because of Catholic ORAL traditions outside the Word of God, Protestant Christianity broke off from the Catholic Church.

Davy,

I think we are in agreement here. Those at Berea consulted God's Holy Writ to confirm what Paul was preaching (preaching is ORAL) to them. And Paul commended them for doing that. They DID NOT accept only what Paul was telling them ORALLY the consulted scripture to confirm it. They came to believe in Jesus because of BOTH the written AND the ORAL word. Not one OR the other. The Thessalonians REJECTED the oral teaching of Paul. Maybe we are talking past each other....

Jesus rebuked the Jewish leaders because they were hypocrites for not practicing what they preached: The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. He didn't reject them because of their ORAL traditions. In fact Jesus instructed his disciples to observe what they tell you since they sat in Moses seat.

Do you know what "Moses seat" is? The significance of it?

The Protestants who broke away from the RCC have their own ORAL traditions that they follow.

The Protestants who broke away from those Protestants have their own oral traditions that they follow.

The Protestants who broke away from the broken away Protestants have their own oral traditions that they follow.

And so on, and so on until today, 500 years later, we have churches that perform gay marriages and teach abortion is not murder. How sad.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

You dont understand anything because you listen to men and not God. You follow after religion and not Christ this bit

Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

But like so many you prefer religion to teh truth,

Thank you. What man do you listen to?

Curious Mary