King James Version Only...?

[Eternally Grateful]

Egad!

I am glad the KJV is easy to carry.

I am glad I was exposed to how poetic and deep the Greek is, and although when I used the KJV only as a kid, how I enjoyed it, it does not compair to the Greek

 

[DNB]

According to their viewpoint, God did not even have the word of the Lord given to us until 1611, so what did Missionaries use before that?

Exactly, every point that they make is filled with unresolved implications and absurdities.
Again, they are a very, scary bunch. I would not trust a single line of Scripture in their hands.

 

[Truther]

Easter is a false interpretation it is not the meaning of the word used

For a supposed word for word translation, They hurt themselves by using the wrong word

No. 400 years ago, it meant "1 Cor 11 feast". This is the English word used for that particular "pascha' feast.

Abusing this sacred feast caused many wealthy or privileged folks to get sick or die prematurely.

And Christianity turned that feast into a wafer recital, telling folks to "pray though or die" before taking the wafer..

 

[Truther]

I am glad I was exposed to how poetic and deep the Greek is, and although when I used the KJV only as a kid, how I enjoyed it, it does not compair to the Greek

Especially if you don't speak ANCIENT Greek.

 

[Enoch111]

Again, they are a very, scary bunch. I would not trust a single line of Scripture in their hands.

The scary guy is DNB, since he does not really believe the Bible (whether KJV or anything else). Just check his past posts.

DENIES THE DEITY OF CHRIST: "A god-man is not a mystery, it's an oxymoron."

REJECTS THE TRINITY: "3 all powerful persons within a single godhead is the epitome of redundancy and confusion, not glory."

 

[BarneyFife]

I never said you did

try to keep up yourself

Then why mention it in a post to me? I'm not in league with anyone.

 

[Nancy]

Then why mention it in a post to me? I'm not in league with anyone.

Huh, and all along I thought you were on Christ's league!

 

[DNB]

The scary guy is DNB, since he does not really believe the Bible (whether KJV or anything else). Just check his past posts.

DENIES THE DEITY OF CHRIST: "A god-man is not a mystery, it's an oxymoron."

REJECTS THE TRINITY: "3 all powerful persons within a single godhead is the epitome of redundancy and confusion, not glory."

Thank you so much Enoch, I can always count on you to represent me well, much appreciated!
Yes, those two were some of my favorite expressions, words of wisdom for sure! They address the issue on a very fundamental level, which therefore, does make them, in and of themselves, irrefutable. And furthermore, due to the coherency that it elicits, it is glorifying to God! But, that's for another time...

And since we're on the topic of wisdom, again, those KJVO folk are truly out-there. What they profess to be a reverent and pious belief, is actually perverse and subversive. Such a narrow, isolated and indemonstrable position on scribal inspiration and divinely appointed translations, can only do more harm than good. They are demeaning the necessity of scholarly textual criticism and correction, and thus inhibiting the promotion of accuracy in, and dissemination of, God's Word.

 

[Davy]

Out of all the theological ideas and topics that I've come across over the years, the issue of KJV only is one that I have not encountered until recently. I do appreciate the KJV and have a few Bibles in that translation, but to say that it is the only true word of God in English seems to be a far stretch. Also, this opens up a can of worms.

a) Do missionaries that travel to foreign countries where English is not the language require the people to learn old school English in order to have God's true Word?

b) Is English the only language that the Bible must be in?

c) What about all the Bible translations before the 1611 KJV?

Those are just a few questions I have regarding this topic. I'd like to ask the members here, what are you thoughts on the subject?

It really depends on what level of understanding and Bible teaching you're talking about. The Gospel of Jesus Christ can be found in all Bible translations. That is the main importance, that Jesus of Nazareth as The Christ came as God in the flesh to die on the cross for the remission of the sins of those who believe.

But did you know that the oldest and best Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts contain a Massorah system in them which the KJV trannslators didn't have possession of with their set of manuscripts? Is there an advantage to going into the original Bible texts then? Yes, obviously, if one wants to study on a deeper level. But just for preaching and spreading of The Gospel, that deeper level is not required.

Through Christ's division of who all Paul was to preach The Gospel to per Acts 9, one could say each group represents understanding in God's Word on 3 levels:

1. to the Gentiles - minus God's law
2. to kings - including God's laws for rule and governing
3. to the children of Israel - including God's laws which Jesus did not nail to His cross.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Especially if you don't speak ANCIENT Greek.

There are enough helps out there now one does not have to be fluent there are also enough teachers out there with years of study that can be trusted.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The scary guy is DNB, since he does not really believe the Bible (whether KJV or anything else). Just check his past posts.

DENIES THE DEITY OF CHRIST: "A god-man is not a mystery, it's an oxymoron."

REJECTS THE TRINITY: "3 all powerful persons within a single godhead is the epitome of redundancy and confusion, not glory."

I guess this answers a lot of questions

wow man like wow

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Then why mention it in a post to me? I'm not in league with anyone.

I was just Responding to what you said

 

[Truther]

It really depends on what level of understanding and Bible teaching you're talking about. The Gospel of Jesus Christ can be found in all Bible translations. That is the main importance, that Jesus of Nazareth as The Christ came as God in the flesh to die on the cross for the remission of the sins of those who believe.

But did you know that the oldest and best Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts contain a Massorah system in them which the KJV trannslators didn't have possession of with their set of manuscripts? Is there an advantage to going into the original Bible texts then? Yes, obviously, if one wants to study on a deeper level. But just for preaching and spreading of The Gospel, that deeper level is not required.

Through Christ's division of who all Paul was to preach The Gospel to per Acts 9, one could say each group represents understanding in God's Word on 3 levels:

1. to the Gentiles - minus God's law
2. to kings - including God's laws for rule and governing
3. to the children of Israel - including God's laws which Jesus did not nail to His cross.

The gospel can be found in the book of Mormon and the NWT, but it is not the Bible.

 

[Truther]

There are enough helps out there now one does not have to be fluent there are also enough teachers out there with years of study that can be trusted.

You believe these modern seminarians over the KJV translators?

 

[YeshuaFan1]

I am glad I was exposed to how poetic and deep the Greek is, and although when I used the KJV only as a kid, how I enjoyed it, it does not compair to the Greek

I am very sure our Lord Jesus did not speak in Kjv !

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Exactly, every point that they make is filled with unresolved implications and absurdities.
Again, they are a very, scary bunch. I would not trust a single line of Scripture in their hands.

One can be Kjv Preferred, but no sense to be Only!

 

[YeshuaFan1]

The gospel can be found in the book of Mormon and the NWT, but it is not the Bible.

Wrong Jesus and wrong Gospel in those "bibles"

 

[YeshuaFan1]

You believe these modern seminarians over the KJV translators?

Were the scholars on the Esc/nas/Niv just as qualified as 1611 team to translate?

 

[Davy]

Were the scholars on the Esc/nas/Niv just as qualified as 1611 team to translate?

No, because Westcott & Hort used a corrupt set of texts for their New Testament translation. The 1611 KJV is from a whole set of different Greek texts. Westcott & Hort actually had questionable credibility.

 

[YeshuaFan1]

No, because Westcott & Hort used a corrupt set of texts for their New Testament translation. The 1611 KJV is from a whole set of different Greek texts. Westcott & Hort actually had questionable credibility.

The scholars on the Modern version translation just as qualified as the 1611 were!