King James Version Only...?

[Enoch111]

Remember baptism is not even an English word it is a Greek word where they change the o (baptiso) to an e (baptize)

It is just as well that the word was transliterated from the Greek. That does not mean that any false teachings can be attributed to that transliteration. Essentially you are simply nit-picking because you do not have a leg to stand on.

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Don't forget "unicorn." lol

And "Piss"

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Man has a responsibility to understand gods word. He is not held accountable if someone tells him wrong he is held responsible if he gets it wrong

it is more dangerous to misunderstand a word because the English word or lack of language rules are misunderstood then to use textual criticism to understand more deeply what the word or words are really saying

baptismal regeneration as a means of salvation is proof if this if the word was translated and not transliterated no one would misunderstand what was being said about immersion (baptism)

The original Books were perfect and were directly inspired!

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Trying to beat a dead horse. But under the circumstances "Easter" was more comprehensible than "Pascha" at that time. This is trivial and childish, compared to the damage done by modern versions (to which you have simply turned a blind eye).

So the Holy Spirit placed an error in there then?

 

[YeshuaFan1]

It is just as well that the word was transliterated from the Greek. That does not mean that any false teachings can be attributed to that transliteration. Essentially you are simply nit-picking because you do not have a leg to stand on.

The translators on the 1611 Kjv were of Church of England, so desired to maintain some of their doctrines and theology, as in baptism!

 

[Pearl]

The KJV wouldn't be possible in a foreign (non-English) language so I don't know why people still harp on about it as being the 'only true' translation.

 

[YeshuaFan1]

The KJV wouldn't be possible in a foreign (non-English) language so I don't know why people still harp on about it as being the 'only true' translation.

We should translate of the Hebrew and Greek, not off the Kjv!

 

[BarneyFife]

I am not the one touting one English translation as the only one the world can trust

Neither am I. Read the thread and try to keep up.

 

[BarneyFife]

And "Piss"

And just like that, I have mixed feelings about "like"-ing your post. lol

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It is just as well that the word was transliterated from the Greek. That does not mean that any false teachings can be attributed to that transliteration. Essentially you are simply nit-picking because you do not have a leg to stand on.

Actually a false gospel has arisen because they did not interpret it. You are just unable to see any issue because YOU do not have a leg to stand on

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The original Books were perfect and were directly inspired!

Yep

the autographs penned by the writers are perfect

 

[BarneyFife]

Actually a false gospel has arisen because they did not interpret it. You are just unable to see any issue because YOU do not have a leg to stand on

Porcupine Petunias

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Actually a false gospel has arisen because they did not interpret it. You are just unable to see any issue because YOU do not have a leg to stand on

My understanding is that many of them wanted to go with Immersion. but got overridden by the final authority...

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Yep

the autographs penned by the writers are perfect

What the Kjvo gives to the Kjv, should be given instead to the originals!

 

[Truther]

Easter?

Easter is a correct word in the KJV.

It has nothing to do with Herod or ancient paganism.

Easter was a Christian "passover"(pascha) feast celebrated consecutively with the Jews pascha feast. Both groups had a different meaning to their feasts.

The KJV translators used the word "Easter" to define this feast found in 1 Cor 11.

 

[Truther]

I already mentioned some

the lack of the proper form of the word love in Jesus talk with peter (Peter do you love me)

Failing to interpret the Greek baptizo which has caused many a division

if the Bible was translated correctly using all tools the nt would be almost twice as large as it is

Egad!

I am glad the KJV is easy to carry.

 

[Grailhunter]

So then what doctrines do you find affected?

Much love!

The formula for the Trinity for one.
But as to what all it has affected, that question would take some time. The King James Version of Christianity is of itself unique. It is a matter of additional scriptures and misinterpretations.

Then again there is the whole insertion of a new name for Satan in the OT...and the rearrangement of the scripture to accommodate it. Lucifer is a female name and it is Latin for planet Venus....the morning star....now this error first occurred in the Catholic Bible...The protestant Bible just carried it on.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Neither am I. Read the thread and try to keep up.

I never said you did

try to keep up yourself

 

[Eternally Grateful]

My understanding is that many of them wanted to go with Immersion. but got overridden by the final authority...

Would not surprise me, at the time they still believed baptism was a sacrament if I remember right

Saying one is immersed in Christ

is far different than saying one is baptized in Christ

sadly to many people take romans 6 to mean water baptism, which if they used the word immerse, it would be impossible to think that

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Easter is a correct word in the KJV.

It has nothing to do with Herod or ancient paganism.

Easter was a Christian "passover"(pascha) feast celebrated consecutively with the Jews pascha feast. Both groups had a different meaning to their feasts.

The KJV translators used the word "Easter" to define this feast found in 1 Cor 11.

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