KJV Dispute (Split from "Biblical "Women" in the Eyes of God")

mjrhealth · Dec 12, 2013

For one to call the bible Gods word, would be too call God a hypocrit, liar, deceiver and fool, and to make a mockery of Christ which even the bible declares is the word of God . Of course the word of God is pure and undefiled, for even the bible says, " the words that I speak are Spirit and they are Life", as for the bible.

The letter killeth,

So who is willing to call God a liar stand up and be counted.

In all His LOve

whirlwind · Dec 12, 2013

Dodo_David said:
Now, that is what I call non sequitur.

Are you certain you know the meaning of non sequitur? As I clearly answered the question of why I felt the KJV has God's stamp of approval...WITH SCRIPTURE....I am baffled as to why you should write what you did. :huh:

An example of a non sequitur would be; say you were speaking to me about the church you attend and I replied with "I'm going to the grocery store." That is a non sequitur. So, if you still see my reply in that light....please explain why.

veteran · Dec 12, 2013

whirlwind said:
The King James is The Holy Bible and I believe has God's stamp of approval for those of us unable to understand Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. If I ever have a question on translations I refer to E.W. Bullinger who gives notes in the KJ Companion Bible and the Strong's Concordance. If I still have questions I refer to the Young's Literal.

I do not trust the others. There have been too many occasions where the meaning is totally destroyed by the new and improved versions.

And with this I must totally agree!

All English Bible translations have some errors in translation. Some have more. I've found later so-called 'modern' versions having more errors, and sometimes getting far away from the original Message in the manuscripts.

The Companion Bible is still the best KJV study Bible on the market today in my opinion. One of the main reasons is the notes from the Massorah which Bullinger included in it from Ginsbergs Massorah critical texts taken from Hebrew manuscripts that included those ancient notes.

The NIV and many later Bible versions use a lesser recognized set of Greek manuscripts from the Alexandrian school in Egypt, and not the Majority Texts which show widest usage by the early Christian Churches. The Alexandrian school in Egypt was subject to early Gnosticsm and Neo-Platonism, whereas the origin of the Majority Texts which the KJV uses was not.

whirlwind · Dec 12, 2013

____________________________________________________________________

mjrhealth said:
For one to call the bible Gods word, would be too call God a hypocrit, liar, deceiver and fool, and to make a mockery of Christ which even the bible declares is the word of God . Of course the word of God is pure and undefiled, for even the bible says, " the words that I speak are Spirit and they are Life", as for the bible.

The letter killeth,

So who is willing to call God a liar stand up and be counted.

In all His LOve

As the "words of the Lord" were "purified seven times" we know then that the verse is NOT saying (nor am I) that the Bible is God's Word for the Word is God. Rather the verse is saying that the Bible contains the words (plural) of the Lord.

Psalm 12:6 (666) The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

The King James was the seventh version of the English translation of God's Pure Words.

"The letter killeth" is quite true for some see only the letter of the word...not the Spirit. It is the Spirit that giveth life. That in no way means the written words kill. Rather it is that we are to see and hear...spiritual understanding of God's Words.

ccfromsc · Dec 12, 2013

Ok for the KJV Onlyists.... you do know that the KJV has over 28 revisions to it? The original from 1611 had 2 versions, a "he" & a "She" version!! Also the apocrypha was included in the KJV until the last "revision." Why is that?

whirlwind · Dec 12, 2013

Purity said:
Whirlwind

I understand "why" you do not agree, I think its plainly obvious where you are at in your learning. Its often telling when a person disagrees with everything which is written. You disagree with those Hebrew Scholars who interpreted the text and then disagreed with the other texts in support of the correct interpretation.

Maybe you could explain where under the law they were commanded to sew wrist bands of people and veil their followers

Thanks for the interaction

LW

Ya' know Purity....this is just another sort of snide comment and not worthy of a child of God. Because you disagree with me you belittle me as well as exaggerate.

Haggai 1:7 Thus saith the Lord of hosts; Consider your ways.

I don't disagree with "everything which is written." Far from it for I believe the Word of the Lord. Perhaps you failed to notice that I quoted SCRIPTURE in the reply where I answered your request? What I am in disagreement with is....YOU as well as YOUR BOGUS translations. I find them to be another set of false divinations and therefore....I am prophesying against this false teaching and sharply rebuking you!!!

The chapter of [Ezekiel 13] sets the subject at the beginning. That subject is....FALSE PROPHETS. The false prophets lie concerning the Word of the Lord which they try to pass off as being from God as Divine divinations, much as your false translation!

Ezekiel 13:1-2 And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel that prophesy, and say thou unto them that prophesy out of their own hearts, Hear ye the word of the Lord; Thus saith the Lord God; Woe unto the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing!

Again...foolish prophets, liars, deceivers is the topic!

Ezekiel 13:6-7,23 They have seen vanity and lying divination, saying, The Lord saith: and the Lord hath not sent them: and they have made others to hope that they would confirm the word. Have ye not seen a vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying divination, whereas ye say, The Lord saith it; albeit I have not spoken? (23) Therefore ye shall see no more vanity, nor divine divinations: for I will deliver My people out of your hand: and ye shall know that I am the Lord.

These foolish prophets lie by saying the Lord said it...they, as do the false translations, keep truth from us. We can't know He is the Lord if we believe them.

The specific lie being dealt with in this chapter is.....

Ezekiel 13:10,16-17 Because, even because they have seduced My people, saying, Peace; and there was no peace; and one built up a wall, and, lo, others daubed it with untempered morter: (16-17) To wit, the prophets of Israel which prophesy concerning Jerusalem, and which see visions of peace for her, and there is no peace, saith the Lord God. Likewise, thou son of man, set thy face against the daughters of thy people, which prophesy out of their own heart; and prophesy thou against them,

The lie is the false divination of God saying there would be peace. As God speaks against it He asks us, as the son of man, to also speak against that lie! And that lie is rapture! The false diviners say..."oh, we'll fly away and won't see the tribulation and God said this." LIARS, DECEIVERS...there will be no peace.

Ask yourself why "daughters" is used in that verse. Check the Strong's and see the definitions given. Apply that same question to "women" used in the following and understand....there is no definition given for woman in that usage. Why?

Ezekiel 13:18-19 And say, Thus saith the Lord God; Woe to the women that sew pillows to all armholes, and make kerchiefs upon the head of every stature to hunt souls! Will ye hunt the souls of My people, and will ye save the souls alive that come unto you? And will ye pollute Me among My people for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread, to slay the souls that should not die, and to save the souls alive that should not live, by your lying to my people that hear your lies?

The false prophets, liars, deceivers...that teach rapture are those that "sew" coverings to God's outstretched saving hands and they do so for money and fame...writing their deceiving books, lying at the pulpit while they pass the plate! They preach peace and there is no peace.

Ezekiel 13:20- 23 Wherefore thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against your pillows, wherewith ye there hunt the souls to make them fly, and I will tear them from your arms, and will let the souls go, even the souls that ye hunt to make them fly. Your kerchiefs also will I tear, and deliver my people out of your hand, and they shall be no more in your hand to be hunted; and ye shall know that I am the Lord. Because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life: Therefore ye shall see no more vanity, nor divine divinations: for I will deliver My people out of your hand: and ye shall know that I am the Lord.

To conclude....it is all about false prophets that lie. In that I would include false translations for they too lie. "Magic bands, mantic acts and magic" is nothing more than...FALSE DIVINATION that cover God's truth.

Purity · Dec 12, 2013

whirlwind said:
I don't disagree with "everything which is written." Far from it for I believe the Word of the Lord. Perhaps you failed to notice that I quoted SCRIPTURE in the reply where I answered your request? What I am in disagreement with is....YOU as well as YOUR BOGUS translations. I find them to be another set of false divinations and therefore....I am prophesying against this false teaching and sharply rebuking you!!!

Justification at best...Bogus? You confirmed the correct translation in your comment below.

To conclude....it is all about false prophets that lie. In that I would include false translations for they too lie. "Magic bands, mantic acts and magic" is nothing more than...FALSE DIVINATION that cover God's truth.

That wasn't hard now was it?

The original point which is now been proved is the translators of the KJV in some parts did not understand how to interpret certain sections of Scripture; they did their best with what they had.

Its a matter of perspective on your part.

veteran · Dec 13, 2013

ccfromsc said:
Ok for the KJV Onlyists.... you do know that the KJV has over 28 revisions to it? The original from 1611 had 2 versions, a "he" & a "She" version!! Also the apocrypha was included in the KJV until the last "revision." Why is that?

That's easy. Later revisions came from the same kind of 'thinking' that some have today in wanting a Bible version that's more befitting to their language usage of the day. Thus some of those revisions were about getting away from the Old English style of characters, a revision that did not change the actual English words, but mainly how they were presented in script. Then some of the later KJV revisions came out attempted corrections until it started including changes that began to leaves parts of the original version out, like the Apocrypha and the Letter To The Reader and Letter To King James, Defender Of The Faith, and especially the margin notes in the original version given by the translators themselves.

One can easily solve that though, the original 1st Edition 1611 King James Version Bible is still in print by Thomas Nelson publishers, complete with the Apocrypha, the translators margin notes, the two Letters in the introduction by the translators, the daily reading plan of the Psalms, and of course the Old English style letter characters.

whirlwind · Dec 13, 2013

Purity said:
Justification at best...Bogus? You confirmed the correct translation in your comment below.

That wasn't hard now was it?

The original point which is now been proved is the translators of the KJV in some parts did not understand how to interpret certain sections of Scripture; they did their best with what they had.

Its a matter of perspective on your part.

You have confirmed a great deal about your spirit in your comment....and no, it isn't hard to determine at all.

Ezekiel 3:11 And go, get thee to them of the captivity, unto the children of thy people, and speak unto them, and tell them, Thus saith the Lord God; whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear.

I provided His Words...and you will not hear. Be happy with your choice.

Purity · Dec 15, 2013

whirlwind said:
You have confirmed a great deal about your spirit in your comment....and no, it isn't hard to determine at all.

Ezekiel 3:11 And go, get thee to them of the captivity, unto the children of thy people, and speak unto them, and tell them, Thus saith the Lord God; whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear.

I provided His Words...and you will not hear. Be happy with your choice.

Yes, on one side a spirit of wanting to make a point, while on the other, a spirit of saving face - both of us could learn from this interaction.

Some would not have bothered to demonstrate the inadequacy of the AV, even at the risk of causing a little offence, but its important Christians understand the quality of modern translations far surpass the AV. The NT based on 4 MSS compared to the NET 5700 should be enough, but then there are those idealist who defend to their own hurt.

In terms of Ezek 3:11 I cannot see us being exiled for our discussion over which translation of the Bible is acceptable in His sight. I am sure people are still being called from a vast more than we care to consider viable versions

Purity.

Dodo_David · Dec 16, 2013

whirlwind said:
Are you certain you know the meaning of non sequitur? As I clearly answered the question of why I felt the KJV has God's stamp of approval...WITH SCRIPTURE....I am baffled as to why you should write what you did. :huh:

An example of a non sequitur would be; say you were speaking to me about the church you attend and I replied with "I'm going to the grocery store." That is a non sequitur. So, if you still see my reply in that light....please explain why.

Yes, I know the meaning of non sequitur. . . and the Bible doesn't say anything about the KJV. That is why the argument that you presented is non sequitur.

whirlwind · Dec 17, 2013

Dodo_David said:
Yes, I know the meaning of non sequitur. . . and the Bible doesn't say anything about the KJV. That is why the argument that you presented is non sequitur.

And...post #18 demonstrates why it is NOT.

Harry3142 · Dec 17, 2013

John 7:53-8:11 (the woman caught in adultery) and Mark 16:9-20 (Jesus appearance to his disciples following his resurrection) are seen by many as examples of Jesus' wisdom and his commission to his disciples. But they are also pure fiction. They are not found in the earliest manuscripts, and even those who try to claim that they should be accepted as Scripture also say that Scripture itself needed to be corrected centuries after it was originally written via their addition to it.

So why do we find these passages in the KJV Bible? It's due to the socalled greek manuscripts they translated actually being a Greek Bible that was itself written in 1550. And the oldest Hebrew 'manuscripts' translated were actually a Hebrew Bible that was itself written in 1503. All other sources that the translators used in order to write the KJV Bible were themselves current with1611.

Also, I can safely say that none of us has ever read, or even seen, an original KJV Bible of 1611. The original Bible was so flawed that it needed to be corrected multiple times, so what many people think is the KJV Bible of 1611 is actually The Authorized KJV Bible of 1749. And it is still considered as so flawed that the Episcopal Church where I read Scripture as a layreader from 1973 to 2003 forbade its usage when we layreaders brought our own Bibles to the worship service in order to read from them.

Dodo_David · Dec 17, 2013

For the record, this website's Bible Version Statement says the following:

Christianity Board uses the New International Version (NIV) Bible as the default translation for the entire website and community. . .

. . . We frequently use and considered the following versions, so we feel quite safe recommending them (they are listed in no particular order): Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB or CSB), New King James Version (NKJV), English Standard Version (ESV), New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), New American Standard Bible (NASB or NASV), King James Version (KJV) and the New Living Translation (NLT). These Bibles all provide slightly different English perspective on the truth of Holy Scripture, even though they all have varying strengths and weaknesses. In fact, we recommend owning at least three of them (or using internet resources) to consult a variety of renderings on a certain text.

Do not mistake the abundance of translations for errors or disagreement on major Christian beliefs. In fact, we confidently assert (along with many, many others) that all of the above versions offer no major deviation on essential Christian doctrines. The misunderstanding comes in how we read and apply verses, but that is topic for another day.

KingJ · Dec 18, 2013

whirlwind said:
Thank you for your reply but...as women are NOT weaklings and as women prove to be strong soliders...I think you need to discard your references for truth found in the KJV. Your understanding of what "these Prophets mean" is not God's meaning:

Any history study will show you that by large woman were rather useless soldiers until the discovery of gun powder. Forget attacking the KJV, you need a history lesson.

You aim to prove that God did not create woman a weaker sex? you are offended by that idea? Woman were created the same as man?

Tell me, what drugs / drinks do woman take to be stronger?

FHII · Dec 18, 2013

KingJ said:
Any history study will show you that by large woman were rather useless soldiers until the discovery of gun powder. Forget attacking the KJV, you need a history lesson.

You aim to prove that God did not create woman a weaker sex? you are offended by that idea? Woman were created the same as man?

Tell me, what drugs / drinks do woman take to be stronger?

What about Joan of Arc?

KingJ · Dec 19, 2013

FHII said:
What about Joan of Arc?

How many did she kill?

Dodo_David · Dec 19, 2013

FHII said:
What about Joan of Arc?

Joan of Ark? Wasn't she Noah's wife?

horsecamp · Dec 21, 2013

whirlwind said:
Thank you for your reply but...as women are NOT weaklings and as women prove to be strong soliders...I think you need to discard your references for truth found in the KJV. Your understanding of what "these Prophets mean" is not God's meaning:

one of the rules of bible translation is to understand the bible is a old book .. God was using the understanding of what women were capable of in hand to hand combat back then .. even now we know most women do not have the upper body strength to wield a heavy sword like most men can ..

even to day most dads do not want their daughters any where near a field of battle where there daughters body strength must be matched against a mans in life threatning engagements.. in simple words get real BACK THEN WOMEN HAD NO TANKS OR FIGHTER PLANES or machine guns that leveled the playing field .. if one wanted to win a fight they fought with strong guys..

KJV Dispute (Split from "Biblical "Women" in the Eyes of God")

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Melmacian in human guise

New Member

New Member

Melmacian in human guise

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Melmacian in human guise

New Member

Similar threads