1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Another question for mormons.

Discussion in 'Christian Theology Forum' started by justbyfaith, Nov 21, 2020.

  1. Grailhunter

    Grailhunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,405
    Likes Received:
    2,590
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    At one time the Catholics believed that St. Jerome's Latin version was the true testament. Being translated around 380 ad.

    Now the early Protestants...lol Puritans were fond of the Geneva Bible, circa 1560 ad ~ Which was based on the hand written William Tyndale Bible of 1535 ad. Of course when they came out, the Catholics thought both were a corruption of the true scriptures.

    Then came the King James Version which came out with it own style of poetic language in 1611 ad. Both the Catholics and those fond of the Geneva Bible considered the KJV a corruption of the scripture. And some of those that like the KJV do not like the NKJV lol. It's just something people do.

    As it is today we have actual scriptures that are older than any of those that these earlier translators had. So it is a matter of if you just like to argue or are to lazy to go look it up yourself. Since at no time did God come down and endorse any one of the translations it is up to you to find out for yourself. You cannot justifiably say that any one of the translations is better than another unless you have a working knowledge of the biblical languages and compare the translations to the ancient scriptures.

    Unlike any other Bible in some ways the KJV is its own religion, even with in Protestantism. Those that still believe that the world is flat, adhere to the KJV. And really what is wrong with that? Believe what you want. But the fact is the truth is out there, all you have to do is get off your duff and start looking for it.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2020
  2. amadeus

    amadeus Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,907
    Likes Received:
    17,580
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Oh...sorry! I guess I forgot that about you. I do read the KJV along with a Luther Schlachter 2000 and a Reina Valera 1960. Do you not believe a person led by the Holy Spirit could hear the Word of God through one of those just as well or from another English version? Consider how the following words relate to this thing of best Bible versions...and the question regarding truth to be found in the Book of Mormon and such places:

    "For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk?
    But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house." Matt 9:5-6

    If you understand that then perhaps you will begin to understand what I meant here:


     
  3. justbyfaith

    justbyfaith Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    18,318
    Likes Received:
    3,506
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
     
  4. ReChoired

    ReChoired Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,638
    Likes Received:
    398
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    justbyfaith likes this.
  5. justbyfaith

    justbyfaith Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    18,318
    Likes Received:
    3,506
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
  6. Christophany

    Christophany Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,116
    Likes Received:
    1,097
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    The KJV Only movement claims its loyalty to be to the Textus Receptus, a Greek New Testament manuscript compilation completed in the 1500s. To varying degrees, KJV Only advocates argue that God guided Erasmus (the compiler of the Textus Receptus) to come up with a Greek text that is perfectly identical to what was originally written by the biblical authors. However, upon further examination, it can be seen that KJV Only advocates are not loyal to the Textus Receptus, but rather only to the KJV itself. The New Testament of the New King James Version is based on the Textus Receptus, just as the KJV is. Yet, KJV Only advocates label the NKJV just as heretical as they do the NIV, NAS, etc.

    Beyond the NKJV, other attempts (such as the KJ21 and MEV) have been made to make minimal updates to the KJV, only "modernizing" the archaic language, while using the exact same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. These attempts are rejected nearly as strongly as the NKJV and the other newer Bible translations. This proves that KJV Only advocates are loyal to the King James Version itself, not to the Textus Receptus. KJV Only advocates have no desire or plan to update the KJV in any way. The KJV certainly contains English that is outdated, archaic, and sometimes confusing to modern English speakers and readers. It would be fairly simple to publish an updated KJV with the archaic words and phrases updated into modern 21st century English. However, any attempt to edit the KJV in any way results in accusations from KJV Only advocates of heresy and perversion of the Word of God.

    When the Bible is translated for the first time into a new language today, it is translated into the language that culture speaks and writes today, not the way they spoke and wrote 400 years ago. The same should be true in English. The Bible was written in the common, ordinary language of the people at that time. Bible translations today should be the same. That is why Bible translations must be updated and revised as languages develop and change. The KJV Only movement is very English-focused in its thinking. Why should people who read English be forced to read the Bible in outdated/archaic English, while people of all other languages can read the Bible in modern/current forms of their languages?

    Our loyalties are to the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Only the original languages are the Word of God as He inspired it. A translation is only an attempt to take what is said in one language and communicate it in another. The modern translations are superb in taking the meaning of the original languages and communicating it in a way that we can understand in English. However, none of the modern translations are perfect. Every one contains verses that are at least somewhat mistranslated. By comparing and contrasting several different translations, it is often easier to get a good grasp on what the verse is saying than by only using one translation. Our loyalty should not be to any one English translation, but to the inspired, inerrant Word of God that is communicated by the Holy Spirit through the translations (2 Timothy 3:16-17).got?

    hope this helps !!!
     
  7. Christophany

    Christophany Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,116
    Likes Received:
    1,097
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Johannine comma alone should be the end of story for the kjv only crowd but they turn a blind eye to the truth.

    With the “comma,” 1 John 5:7-8 reads, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” If the Comma Johanneum was originally part of 1 John 5:7-8, it would be the clearest and most direct reference to the Trinity in the entire Bible.

    However, it is highly unlikely that the Comma Johanneum was originally a part of 1 John. None of the oldest Greek manuscripts of 1 John contain the comma, and none of the very early church fathers include it when quoting or referencing 1 John 5:7-8. The presence of the Comma Johanneum in Greek manuscripts is actually quite rare until the 15th century A.D. It is primarily found in Latin manuscripts. While some of the Latin manuscripts containing the Comma Johanneum are ancient, the Comma Johanneum did not appear in the original Latin Vulgate written by Jerome.

    In the 16th century, when Desiderius Erasmus was compiling what became known as the Textus Receptus, he did not include the Comma Johanneum in the 1st or 2nd editions. Due to intense pressure from the Catholic Church and others who wanted it included because of its support for trinitarianism, Erasmus included the Comma Johanneum in later editions of the Textus Receptus. His decision resulted in the Comma Johanneum being included in the King James Version of the Bible and later in the New King James Version. None of the modern Greek texts (UBS 4, Nestle-Aland 27, Majority Text) contain the Comma Johanneum. Of all the modern English translations, only the New King James Version and Modern English Version include the Comma Johanneum.

    While it would be convenient for there to be an explicit statement confirming the Trinity in the Bible, it is highly unlikely that the Comma Johanneum was originally a part of 1 John. Some ancient scribe, either intentionally or accidentally added it to a Latin manuscript, and then that addition was copied thousands upon thousands of times. This eventually resulted in the Comma Johanneum appearing in the vast majority of Latin manuscripts. Whatever the scribe’s motives, it is absolutely wrong to add to God’s Word. While what the Comma Johanneum says is true, it is not a God-breathed statement and does not belong in the Bible. The doctrine of the Trinity is taught and implied in many other biblical passages. If God thought an explicit mention of the Trinity was necessary, He Himself would have made sure it was in His Word.got?


    hope this helps !!!
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2020
  8. Grailhunter

    Grailhunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,405
    Likes Received:
    2,590
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I understand your preference and belief in the JKV, what is wrong with that?
    I understand those that prefer and believe in the NJKV, what is wrong with that?
    I understand those that prefer and believe in the NIV, what is wrong with that?
    I understand those that prefer and believe in the NASB, what is wrong with that?
    And all the other Bible translations....
    What is wrong with that? Can they all lead you to salvation? I don't believe in any of them, I believe in God and track the rest.
    You will never know until you compare them to the scriptures.
    As far as the KJV I have a long list of translational errors and additions, if you want it again.
    Neither God or any Professor of Greek will endorse the KJV.
    Still I believe the KJV gives all the information needed to be saved and does it in a poetic fashion.
    It is mostly about accuracy and thereby understanding.
    Then again, if you are at a yard sale and find one of these versions of the KJV...send them my way... The Adulterers Bible, The Vinegar Bible, The Murmurers Bible, The Wife Hater's Bible, etc.
     
  9. Grailhunter

    Grailhunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,405
    Likes Received:
    2,590
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Praise the Lord!
     
  10. Grailhunter

    Grailhunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,405
    Likes Received:
    2,590
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Do you want me to give you the names of the only individuals that are inerrant? A Bible is not a God.
     
    amadeus likes this.
  11. Triumph1300

    Triumph1300 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,007
    Likes Received:
    3,511
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
     
    amadeus likes this.
  12. MattMooradian

    MattMooradian Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    334
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Regarding the scriptures you quoted and the question of a second death: like any denominational question, you will find support for the Mormon belief in the Bible and you will find a lack of support for the Mormon belief in the Bible. We can say the same thing about the beliefs of the Methodists, the Lutherans, the Catholics, etc. etc. There are scriptures that prove the Methodists have the correct beliefs and there are scriptures that prove the Methodists are incorrect about their beliefs. This is why there are so many contradictory denominations: many different beliefs about Christianity can be supported from a scriptural point of view. Humans have a way of bending things to fit what they already believe.

    If you hope to find a definitive answer about the Mormon's, you are going to be disappointed. If you have doubts about the Mormon beliefs, then avoid them. If you believe the Mormons may have something to add to your spiritual quest, then study the Mormon books. What is your purpose of wanting to know the answer to your question? Is it that you want to have/find additional messages from God that will advance your spiritual life? Or, are you seeking to accuse Mormons of not being real Christians? There is no edification in the second question, but the first question does have merit. I, for one, do not see any value in studying the Mormon books because they do not have historical merit. For myself, the Gospel of James holds more merit as a book worthy of consideration. (Please note, there are two 'Gospels of James', one of them is a Gnostic text; the one I am referring to is nothing but the sayings of Jesus and there is no story accompanying such sayings).
     
    amadeus and Jane_Doe22 like this.
  13. justbyfaith

    justbyfaith Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    18,318
    Likes Received:
    3,506
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    The kjv is perfectly understandable if you read it with an English dictionary in hand. And it is indeed inerrant and inspired. To say otherwise is to go with the Alexandrian/Egyptian paradigm that was spoken of in the video; they went about things with the paradigm that the Bible can be improved upon...and therefore they changed certain things as they went through the process of translating the Bible into English. And I see that they also had this paradigm when they translated the nkjv.
     
  14. justbyfaith

    justbyfaith Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    18,318
    Likes Received:
    3,506
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Of course, without the Johannine comma it is easier to deny the Trinity; so you are playing right into the hands of the cults.
     
  15. MattMooradian

    MattMooradian Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    334
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    So, you have concluded that the Mormons are wrong in their beliefs. OK. Now what? If you have been called to convert Mormons to the 'true beliefs' of Christianity, then go to a Mormon site and argue with them. Are there any Mormons on this site? If there are, you are reaching very few, I would guess. There are more Mormons on Mormon web sites - your crusade will be much more effective at such a site. Otherwise, this is nothing more than an argument with a bunch of believer's who are not Mormons - we all agree with you. If you are attempting to hone your argument before going to the Mormons with your message, that I can understand. However, every denomination can be proven correct by the Bible. That is why there are so many denominations. Are you certain that Mormons are rejected by Jesus? Maybe there are over 100 denominations that are truly not Christian and will be rejected by Jesus? Maybe every denomination is false except one? In this case we are all in danger of being rejected by Jesus. It would be pride to believe that I (or you) have the one true belief to avoid rejection by Jesus. So, if we are not full of pride, we are probably believing some things that are incorrect - just like the Mormons. Only one belief is necessary!
     
    amadeus, Jane_Doe22 and Christophany like this.
  16. Jane_Doe22

    Jane_Doe22 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,099
    Likes Received:
    2,562
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    There's only one "Mormon" on this site: me.
    No one comes to Christ via somebody arguing them there, such a premise is fundamentally flawed. Rather, conversion comes from testimony of the Holy Spirit.

    Trying to argue somebody to Christ with with complete strawman arguments (which JBF's are) is trolling and convinces others to flee that person, no matter how noble a person feels by doing such. A Christian (of any denomination) has no need for such tactics: we can treat our fellow men with respect, and be civilized while disagreeing with each other.
     
  17. Grailhunter

    Grailhunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,405
    Likes Received:
    2,590
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    No, a book is not God, but what's in it is certainly from God.
    And that's all that counts.


    Which book?
     
  18. justbyfaith

    justbyfaith Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    18,318
    Likes Received:
    3,506
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2020
  19. Grailhunter

    Grailhunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,405
    Likes Received:
    2,590
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    You so funny! God love ya!
    What makes you think I am a Mormon?
    Do you claim a denomination?
     
  20. Triumph1300

    Triumph1300 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,007
    Likes Received:
    3,511
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    The Bible of course.
     
Loading...