KJV Only...which one!

[DavidB]

Alexandria is known for heresy and not faithfulness like Antioch. Certain places have a bad rep (despite any missionaries or churches in a particular place that may be bad spiritually). Arianism and Gnosticism is tied to Alexandria. Egypt is mentioned as predominantly as being negative in the Bible, as well.

Athanasius is also said to be a pope, and he did not have a problem with Monastic life because he wrote a biography on one who lived the life of a monk (Anthony). Believers are called to preach the gospel to people. One cannot do that if they are living a life of solitude.

So then what heresy is has to be determined by what the Bible says not by what area someone came from. Since Jesus said true Christianity would be over sown with weeds we have to recognize the great apostasy that started while the apostles were alive and really took off after their death. The sad historical record of bloodshed and gross immorality committed by professed Christians throughout history testifies to that apostasy. Satanic doctrine produces works of the flesh. You can recognize a tree by its fruit. Still true today.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

So then what heresy is has to be determined by what the Bible says not by what area someone came from. Since Jesus said true Christianity would be over sown with weeds we have to recognize the great apostasy that started while the apostles were alive and really took off after their death. The sad historical record of bloodshed and gross immorality committed by professed Christians throughout history testifies to that apostasy. Satanic doctrine produces works of the flesh. You can recognize a tree by its fruit. Still true today.

This is ironic, my friend. You don’t recognize the fruits of Modern versions and the false beliefs behind the men who created them. Do you believe the Catholic Church is the true church? If so, then there is no more need to talk anymore. But if you feel the Catholic Church is bad in some way, then you will never again want to trust (not use) a Modern English Bible Version again. Why? Because the Modern English Translation Bible movement was started by two men known as Westcott and Hort who were into Catholic practices (among other false beliefs).

See all my posts from post #86 through post number 91 (that are all lined up back to back).

Why would you not want to trust the English Bible Version again? Because the Nestle and Aland Critical Text that all Modern English bibles are based off today was under the direct supervision of the Vatican.

See post #53 within this thread for the proof.

In fact, there are 14 verses to my knowledge where we see corrupted to favor the Catholic Church. But the biggest win for the Vatican is getting you to deny Sola Scriptura (or the Bible Alone) even when you may think you declare such a truth. They want you to move away from trusting the Bible Alone and to get your beliefs also from trusting something additional. For the Catholic wants you to trust the priest (scholar) for the meaning of the Bible. The Catholic Church does not want you to just read the Bible plainly in English and believe it but they want you to fall for their deception that they employed in the past. In the past, the Catholic Church used to have only the priests know the sacred and holy language (Latin), and the layperson had to blindly trust what the priest was saying on the Bible. Granted, in the past at one time, the Catholic Church used to kill even their own people if they possessed these Scriptures for them to study and learn them on their own, but the point here is that the Catholic Church kept the Word of God from men.. They are up to their old bag of tricks again, and many today have fallen for it in the disguise of Modern Scholarship (Which destroys the idea of Bible Alone without you realizing it). You may think you are Bible Alone, but this is not so. Modern Scholars and the new best manuscripts from Rome becomes the authority instead. Today, you must accept the unknown foreign language of the scholars and their dictionaries to understand the Bible, and you cannot just read and believe the Bible in your own language plainly. The Word of God is found only in the hands of the priests (scholars).

Side Note:

Take for example Bruce Metzger (One of the leading Textual Critics revered by many in the Textual Criticism Camp).

However, folks either do not seem to realize or care that Bruce Metzger’s beliefs are in favor in siding with Ecumenicism, and the Roman Catholic church (of which I do not believe is biblical). Folks do not seem to either know or care that Bruce also denies the historical accuracy and account of the Bible in many places.

Metzger’s 1997 autobiography, The Reminisces of an Octogenarian, omitted any reference to a personal salvation experience.

Metzger was a radical ecumenist. He was at the forefront of producing “the Ecumenical Edition” of the RSV in 1973 and personally presented a copy to Pope Paul VI. “In a private audience granted to a small group, comprising the Greek Orthodox Archbishop Athenagoras, Lady Priscilla and Sir William Collins, Herbert G. May, and the present writer, Pope Paul accepted the RSV ‘Common’ Bible as a significant step in furthering ecumenical relations among the churches” (Metzger, “The RSV-Ecumenical Edition,” Theology Today, October 1977). Metzger also presented a Bible to Pope John Paul II.

Metzger and May claim the O.T. contains “a matrix of myth, legend, and history,” deny the worldwide flood, call Job an “ancient folktale,” claim there are two authors of Isaiah, call Jonah a “popular legend,”

Note on the Flood: “Archaeological evidence suggests that traditions of a prehistoric flood covering the whole earth are heightened versions of local inundations, e.g. in the Tigris-Euphrates basin” (Metzger and May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

Notes from “How to Read the Bible with Understanding”: “The opening chapters of the Old Testament deal with human origins. They are not to be read as history ...

(Metzger and May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

Surely God did not leave it to the hands of such doubting men to preserve or translate His words.

Source:
Bruce Metzger, Beloved by Modernists, Evangelicals, and Fundamentalists, Way of Life Literature

 

[Michiah-Imla]

You don’t recognize the fruits of Modern versions and the false beliefs behind the men who created them.

It’s absolutely stunning that many defenders of modern Bible translations don’t seem care about these facts.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It’s absolutely stunning that many defenders of modern Bible translations don’t seem care about these facts.

All we can do sometimes is just pray, and love in return, while preaching such truths, brother.

Blessings be unto you in the Lord today.

 

[DavidB]

This is ironic, my friend. You don’t recognize the fruits of Modern versions and the false beliefs behind the men who created them. Do you believe the Catholic Church is the true church? If so, then there is no more need to talk anymore. But if you feel the Catholic Church is bad in some way, then you will never again want to trust (not use) a Modern English Bible Version again. Why? Because the Modern English Translation Bible movement was started by two men known as Westcott and Hort who were into Catholic practices (among other false beliefs).

See all my posts from post #86 through post number 91 (that are all lined up back to back).

Why would you not want to trust the English Bible Version again? Because the Nestle and Aland Critical Text that all Modern English bibles are based off today was under the direct supervision of the Vatican.

See post #53 within this thread for the proof.

In fact, there are 14 verses to my knowledge where we see corrupted to favor the Catholic Church. But the biggest win for the Vatican is getting you to deny Sola Scriptura (or the Bible Alone) even when you may think you declare such a truth. They want you to move away from trusting the Bible Alone and to get your beliefs also from trusting something additional. For the Catholic wants you to trust the priest (scholar) for the meaning of the Bible. The Catholic Church does not want you to just read the Bible plainly in English and believe it but they want you to fall for their deception that they employed in the past. In the past, the Catholic Church used to have only the priests know the sacred and holy language (Latin), and the layperson had to blindly trust what the priest was saying on the Bible. Granted, in the past at one time, the Catholic Church used to kill even their own people if they possessed these Scriptures for them to study and learn them on their own, but the point here is that the Catholic Church kept the Word of God from men.. They are up to their old bag of tricks again, and many today have fallen for it in the disguise of Modern Scholarship (Which destroys the idea of Bible Alone without you realizing it). You may think you are Bible Alone, but this is not so. Modern Scholars and the new best manuscripts from Rome becomes the authority instead. Today, you must accept the unknown foreign language of the scholars and their dictionaries to understand the Bible, and you cannot just read and believe the Bible in your own language plainly. The Word of God is found only in the hands of the priests (scholars).

Side Note:

Take for example Bruce Metzger (One of the leading Textual Critics revered by many in the Textual Criticism Camp).

However, folks either do not seem to realize or care that Bruce Metzger’s beliefs are in favor in siding with Ecumenicism, and the Roman Catholic church (of which I do not believe is biblical). Folks do not seem to either know or care that Bruce also denies the historical accuracy and account of the Bible in many places.

Metzger’s 1997 autobiography, The Reminisces of an Octogenarian, omitted any reference to a personal salvation experience.

Metzger was a radical ecumenist. He was at the forefront of producing “the Ecumenical Edition” of the RSV in 1973 and personally presented a copy to Pope Paul VI. “In a private audience granted to a small group, comprising the Greek Orthodox Archbishop Athenagoras, Lady Priscilla and Sir William Collins, Herbert G. May, and the present writer, Pope Paul accepted the RSV ‘Common’ Bible as a significant step in furthering ecumenical relations among the churches” (Metzger, “The RSV-Ecumenical Edition,” Theology Today, October 1977). Metzger also presented a Bible to Pope John Paul II.

Metzger and May claim the O.T. contains “a matrix of myth, legend, and history,” deny the worldwide flood, call Job an “ancient folktale,” claim there are two authors of Isaiah, call Jonah a “popular legend,”

Note on the Flood: “Archaeological evidence suggests that traditions of a prehistoric flood covering the whole earth are heightened versions of local inundations, e.g. in the Tigris-Euphrates basin” (Metzger and May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

Notes from “How to Read the Bible with Understanding”: “The opening chapters of the Old Testament deal with human origins. They are not to be read as history ...

(Metzger and May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

Surely God did not leave it to the hands of such doubting men to preserve or translate His words.

Source:
Bruce Metzger, Beloved by Modernists, Evangelicals, and Fundamentalists, Way of Life Literature

Since you only accept scholars who agree with you I won’t bother to quote all the other translators who reject the Johannine Comma. What really matters anyway is that it is inconsistent with the clear Bible truth that Jesus is the Son of God, that God is the head of Christ.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Since you only accept scholars who agree with you I won’t bother to quote all the other translators who reject the Johannine Comma. What really matters anyway is that it is inconsistent with the clear Bible truth that Jesus is the Son of God, that God is the head of Christ.

It's not about just agreeing with scholars alone that I prefer. I have done the comparisons myself between the KJB vs. Modern Bibles and seen the facts. Modern Bibles actually change good doctrines (See: Post #458, post #459, post #460), Modern bibles place the devil's name in the Bible where they do not belong (See here), and Modern bibles make Jesus appear to sin (See point #24 here), etcetera. There is so much more, too. But of course you see what you like. The Word of God is silly putty in the hands of Modern Scholars.

 

[Naomanos]

I have done the comparisons myself between the KJB vs. Modern Bibles and seen the facts.

That is a false equivalency! You cannot compare the KJB to modern versions as if the KJB is the source material.

You err from the start!

 

[DavidB]

It's not about just agreeing with scholars alone that I prefer. I have done the comparisons myself between the KJB vs. Modern Bibles and seen the facts. Modern Bibles actually change good doctrines (See: Post #458, post #459, post #460), Modern bibles place the devil's name in the Bible where they do not belong (See here), and Modern bibles make Jesus appear to sin (See point #24 here), etcetera. There is so much more, too. But of course you see what you like. The Word of God is silly putty in the hands of Modern Scholars.

Thank you for a concise post. I actually do appreciate a lot about the KJV. I have used it for many years. I used to love seeing my fathers old KJV that he studied in as a young man. The wide distribution of it has made the Bible available to millions. I don’t agree with you that is the only acceptable translation as if somehow inspired of God.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

@Nancy

I don't mind corrections when all the words and verses are there. What I take issue with is in the modern versions that used the Alexandrian codices, by leaving out key words, the whole meaning of the verse is altered. And in their margins they write that it is the translations like the KJV that added words, when in reality (seeing as church fathers quoted those 'added' words (???) before the Alexandrian codices were created, it is more likely the Alexandrians subtracted words to fit some doctrine they had issue with (like the Trinity).

KJV (King James Version)

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.


NASB (New American Standard Bible

1 John 5:7 For there are three that testify:

Romans 8:1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

Simple fact is people are going to exercise their right to use the version of the Bible they choose to use. There is always going to be people who judge them as wrong for using whatever version of the Bible they choose to use or what manuscripts they choose to believe are accurate and authoritative.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You cannot compare the KJB to modern versions as if the KJB is the source material.

Sure I can because God make copies of the Scriptures as told to us in the Bible.

What do you think happened in Jeremiah 36:28-32? When the original was destroyed… a copy was made by Jeremiah AND… something amazing happened. New words were added to the copy. It did not remain exactly like the original. So the idea of originals only is just a sham. God can edit His Words as He sees fit so as to preserve His Words for us today in the English (See: Psalms 12:6-7). Granted, I am not saying God is making radical changes or anything, but God is making the necessary changes in the English to reflect what was said in the originals. For not all languages translate word for word. God knows this. So God is capable of adding words to a copy. He did it before, and He can do it again as a part of the preservation of His own words.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Since you only accept scholars who agree with you I won’t bother to quote all the other translators who reject the Johannine Comma. What really matters anyway is that it is inconsistent with the clear Bible truth that Jesus is the Son of God, that God is the head of Christ.

Do you believe the standard definition of the Trinity in that the Lord our God is one God, and yet He also exists as three distinct persons?

 

[Naomanos]

Sure I can because God make copies of the Scriptures as told to us in the Bible.

What do you think happened in Jeremiah 36:28-32? When the original was destroyed… a copy was made by Jeremiah AND… something amazing happened. New words were added to the copy. It did not remain exactly like the original. So the idea of originals only is just a sham. God can edit His Words as He sees fit so as to preserve His Words for us today in the English (See: Psalms 12:6-7). Granted, I am not saying God is making radical changes or anything, but God is making the necessary changes in the English to reflect what was said in the originals. For not all languages translate word for word. God knows this. So God is capable of adding words to a copy. He did it before, and He can do it again as a part of the preservation of His own words.

No, you really cannot as the KJB is not the source material. It is a false equivalency. The KJB is itself a translation.

If you notice I'm not saying originals only, so stop dating that in reference to me. I am literally saying that the KJB isn't the source material and therefore a translation and that modern Bibles cannot be compared to it for that reason.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

No, you really cannot as the KJB is not the source material. It is a false equivalency. The KJB is itself a translation.

If you notice I'm not saying originals only, so stop dating that in reference to me. I am literally saying that the KJB isn't the source material and therefore a translation and that modern Bibles cannot be compared to it for that reason.

You said original source material. That sounds like the originals only argument to me. If not, then please explain what you mean. Do you believe all English bibles say the same thing and are perfect? Do you believe the Nestle and Aland text is perfect? Do you see the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text, and the other manuscripts combined as being perfect? Do you believe some other manuscripts are perfect? How is that the source material seeing they are but copies? The manuscripts in the original languages we have today are but copies and not the originals. Would not the source material be the originals?

As for my point on Jeremiah 36: You have to understand that the copy made by Jeremiah was not the original source material. It was a copy and not the original (or original source material). So if God can have a copy made, then it is just as important as the original (or original source material). God also was able to translate languages at Pentecost just fine in Acts 2. Psalms 12:6-7 says the words the Lord are pure words and the Psalmist tells God that He shall keep His words forever. So seeing according to the Bible that God can make copies, He can translate languages, and His words are perfect and forever that means there is a perfect Word for today, it is only logical that there is a perfect copied translation today. Seeing God used Greek at one time to write NT Scripture (Note: Greek was the world language at one time) it seems consistent with God’s character and ways to provide His written Word in the world language of today (Which is English), too.

Then again, you said before God led you to the NKJV because you prayed. If so… which NKJV Edition? Not all the NKJV Editions say the same thing. The 2013 NKJV does not say the same exact thing as the NKJV 1982 edition (and the NKJV creators never told of the changes). Did God clarify to you which NKJV Edition you were to follow? So why didn’t God lead you to the original manuscripts? Why are you fighting for the original source material if God led you to the NKJV? Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. If you are for the original languages… which manuscripts? Not all manuscripts agree with each other. There is no originals (or original source material) anymore. So who gets to decide what the Bible says then? Where is your perfect Bible that you can hold in your hands right now? Do you have one? How do you know you have the correct doctrines if you don’t have a perfect Bible?

 

[Naomanos]

You said original source material. That sounds like the originals only argument to me. If not, then please explain what you mean. Do you believe all English bibles say the same thing and are perfect? Do you believe the Nestle and Aland text is perfect? Do you believe some other manuscripts are perfect? How is that the source material seeing they are but copies? Would not the source material be the originals?

Besides you have to understand that the copy made by Jeremiah was not the original source material, either. It was a copy and not the original. So if God can have a copy made, then it is just as important as the original. God also was able to translate languages at Pentecost just fine in Acts 2. Psalms 12:6-7 says the words the Lord are pure words and the Psalmist tells God that He shall keep His words forever. So seeing according to the Bible that God can make copies, He can translate languages, and His words are perfect and forever that means there is a perfect Word for today, it is only logical that there is a perfect copied translation today. Seeing God used Greek at one time to write NT Scripture (Note: Greek was the world language at one time) it seems consistent with God’s character and ways to provide His written Word in the world language of today (Which is English), too.

Then again, you said before God led you to the NKJV because you prayed. If so… which one? Not all the NKJV bibles says the same thing. Did God specific to you which NKJV? So why didn’t God lead you to the original manuscripts? Why are you fighting for the original source material if God led you to the NKJV? Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. If you are for the original languages… which manuscripts? Not all manuscripts agree with each other. There is no originals anymore. So who gets to decide what the Bible says then? Where is your perfect Bible that you can hold in your hands right now? Do you have one? How do you know you have the correct doctrines if you don’t have a perfect Bible?

I'm done arguing this with you because as usual you are twisting my words and I have explained things to you ad nauseum qnd you still want me to repeat myself.

It's the typical BH MO.

I will literally say this one last time, what you say matters not because God lead me to a modern version Bible. His leading matters, yours, not so much. You doubt God, that much is apparent when you continue to question me over and over again.

I will leave you with some scripture that the Holy Spirit impressed upon me to leave for you as I prayed this morning when I woke up and had this thread on my mind.

Proverbs 23:9 “Do not speak in the hearing of a fool, For he will despise the wisdom of your words.”

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I'm done arguing this with you because as usual you are twisting my words and I have explained things to you ad nauseum qnd you still want me to repeat myself.

It's the typical BH MO.

I will literally say this one last time, what you say matters not because God lead me to a modern version Bible. His leading matters, yours, not so much. You doubt God, that much is apparent when you continue to question me over and over again.

I will leave you with some scripture that the Holy Spirit impressed upon me to leave for you as I prayed this morning when I woke up and had this thread on my mind.

Proverbs 23:9 “Do not speak in the hearing of a fool, For he will despise the wisdom of your words.”

I am asking you questions to understand your position better. I have no idea what you really believe on this matter other than that you prayed and God led you to the NKJV (Note: But you did not clarify which NKJV Edition this was that God led you to by way of your prayer. Was it the New Testament NKJV 1970’s edition? The 1982 edition? The 2013 NKJV Edition?). You refer to the source material, but you did not clarify what that was and you said that it was not the originals only position. You simply call me a fool by quoting a verse in the Bible that talks about fools because you are unwilling to clarify your position to me? This simply sounds like an ad hominem attack because your belief cannot be clarified to me and others. I am willing to explain my belief in truth, love, and respect. Are you willing to do the same? But if you feel I missed your belief being clarified in this thread, please share with me the post #’s and I will carefully re-read them (Note: Don’t do it for me, but do it to help another).

My position is one of belief in God’s Word. I believe the King James Bible is the preserved Word of God for today because I believe verses like Psalms 12:6-7, Jeremiah 36:28-32, Acts of the Apostles 2:5-12, and Acts of the Apostles 10:34. Faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God. All Scripture is profitable for doctrine and instruction in righteousness so that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works (See: 2 Timothy 3:16-17). Timothy was told that he knew the Holy Scriptures since he was a child (2 Timothy 3:15). But Timothy did not have the originals. Timothy had copies of the Scriptures and they were called the Holy Scriptures. Many today say there are errors in all bibles and errors in all manuscripts used to make English Modern Bibles. But how can something imperfect make one perfect? This must lead us to the conclusion that there must be a perfect Word of God in existence that we can hold in our hands. God preserved His words in the world language of Greek at one time when the New Testament was first written. Copies were made. Were the copies any less authoritative? Did God lose His power to preserve His exact words when copies were made? I don’t believe so. I believe Psalms 12:6-7. Sure, there were corrupt copies. No doubt about it. But I believe there were perfect copies made throughout time because I believe the promise of God in Psalms 12:6-7. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). My belief is one of faith in what His Word says. I see the Modern Bible viewpoint as one of doubt and not faith, but that is just my opinion. If you believe otherwise, please carefully show me otherwise.

 

[Naomanos]

I am asking you questions to understand your position better. I have no idea what you really believe on this matter other than that you prayed and God led you to the NKJV (Note: But you did not clarify which NKJV Edition this was that God led you to by way of your prayer. Was it the New Testament NKJV 1970’s edition? The 1982 edition? The 2013 NKJV Edition?). You refer to the source material, but you did not clarify what that was and you said that it was not the originals only position. You simply call me a fool by quoting a verse in the Bible that talks about fools because you are unwilling to clarify your position to me? This simply sounds like an ad hominem attack because your belief cannot be clarified to me and others. I am willing to explain my belief in truth, love, and respect. Are you willing to do the same? But if you feel I missed your belief being clarified in this thread, please share me the post #’s and I will carefully re-read them.

My position is one of belief in God’s Word. I believe the King James Bible is the preserved Word of God for today because I believe verses like Psalms 12:6-7, Jeremiah 36:28-32, Acts of the Apostles 2:5-12, and Acts of the Apostles 10:34. Faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God. All Scripture is profitable for doctrine and instruction in righteousness so that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works (See: 2 Timothy 3:16-17). Timothy was told that he knew the Holy Scriptures since he was a child (2 Timothy 3:15). But Timothy did not have the originals. Timothy had copies of the Scriptures and they were called the Holy Scriptures. Many today say there are errors in all bibles and errors in all manuscripts used to make English Modern Bibles. But how can something imperfect make one perfect? This must lead us to the conclusion that there must be a perfect Word of God in existence that we can hold in our hands. God preserved His words in the world language of Greek at one time when the New Testament was first written. Copies were made. Were the copies any less authoritative? Did God lose His power to preserve His exact words when copies were made? I don’t believe so. I believe Psalms 12:6-7. Sure, there were corrupt copies. No doubt about it. But I believe there were perfect copies made throughout time because I believe the promise of God in Psalms 12:6-7. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). My belief is one of faith in what His Word says. I see the Modern Bible viewpoint as one of doubt and not faith, but that is just my opinion. If you believe otherwise, please carefully show me otherwise.

I have explained my belief to you not just here, but also on CFs as well.

You still want more and more. I'm done playing your games.

It wasn't me that left the scripture reference, the Holy Spirit impressed upon me to do so while I was praying this morning with this thread on my mind. Either you heed it the scripture or not. It's your choice. I did what the Holy Spirit wanted me to do.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I have explained my belief to you not just here, but also on CFs as well.

You still want more and more. I'm done playing your games.

Surely you must realize that when we speak on the forums, we are being an example unto others in love, patience, gentleness, and or trying to help others, right? It’s not just a two way conversation here, my friend. If you believe you have the truth, surely you would want to repeat that truth or show post numbers of what you believe so as to help others who come across this website looking for truth. So I am puzzled as to why you feel like you don’t want to help.

Also, I am not playing any games with you (even if you might think otherwise). I am merely speaking what I believe is the truth. Could I be wrong? Sure I could. But that’s what faith is about, right? But I would rather be a fool for God in trusting in His Word by faith, than rely on my own thoughts alone outside of the Bible, or to rely on the thoughts of men or scholars. I simply read the Bible and believe it with a childlike faith.

Anyways, I don’t remember us having any kind of discussion at CF involving the KJV. I don’t recall anyone there talking to me about the NKJV being the Bible that God led them to believe by way of prayer at CF. My username is also BibleHighlighter at CF. I looked up your username and the topic (KJV) at CF, and only found two KJV threads that I have never seen before until today. After reading the two short threads: I want to first say… sorry to hear about your wife and her condition. May you find strength in the Lord as you study the Bible with her more.

But just so that you may know: I am not like other KJB Only Christians. I don’t believe the KJB is easy to read. I believe this was intentional by God because I believe God wants us to study to show ourselves approved unto Him (2 Timothy 2:15). In other words, it’s sort of like exercise. No pain and no gain. Sure, Modern bibles read like a modern newspaper or magazine, but they lack the spiritual richness and beautiful poetry that the King James Bible has. But is it easy to understand? No. Not by any means. But then again, the parables of Jesus were not easy to understand without the Lord Jesus explaining them. Jesus also spoke about His death and resurrection with His disciples before the cross and they did not understand what He was talking about. So just because God speaks does not mean that He must be 100% crystal clear every time in what He says. God wants us to study.

It wasn't me that left the scripture reference, the Holy Spirit impressed upon me to do so while I was praying this morning with this thread on my mind. Either you heed it the scripture or not. It's your choice. I did what the Holy Spirit wanted me to do.

The Holy Spirit inspired this passage.

2 Timothy 2:24-25
“And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;”

It says we are to be gentle unto all me, apt to teach, patient, in meekness we are to instruct for those we believe who oppose themselves.

Meekness is defined as the state of being meek.

Source:
Meek | Definition of Meek by Webster's Online Dictionary

Have you been trying to instruct me in meeknesses, gentleness, and with patience, brother?

Anyways, whether you agree with me or not, may God’s blessings shine upon you today.

 

[Naomanos]

Surely you must realize that when we speak on the forums, we are being an example unto others in love, patience, gentleness, and or trying to help others, right? It’s not just a two way conversation here, my friend. If you believe you have the truth, surely you would want to repeat that truth or show post numbers of what you believe so as to help others who come across this website looking for truth. So I am puzzled as to why you feel like you don’t want to help.

Also, I am not playing any games with you (even if you might think otherwise). I am merely speaking what I believe is the truth. Could I be wrong? Sure I could. But that’s what faith is about, right? But I would rather be a fool for God in trusting in His Word by faith, than rely on my own thoughts alone outside of the Bible, or to rely on the thoughts of men or scholars. I simply read the Bible and believe it with a childlike faith.

Anyways, I don’t remember us having any kind of discussion at CF involving the KJV. I don’t recall anyone there talking to me about the NKJV being the Bible that God led them to believe by way of prayer at CF. My username is also BibleHighlighter at CF. I looked up your username and the topic (KJV) at CF, and only found two KJV threads that I have never seen before until today. After reading the two short threads: I want to first say… sorry to hear about your wife and her condition. May you find strength in the Lord as you study the Bible with her more.

But just so that you may know: I am not like other KJB Only Christians. I don’t believe the KJB is easy to read. I believe this was intentional by God because I believe God wants us to study to show ourselves approved unto Him (2 Timothy 2:15). In other words, it’s sort of like exercise. No pain and no gain. Sure, Modern bibles read like a modern newspaper or magazine, but they lack the spiritual richness and beautiful poetry that the King James Bible has. But is it easy to understand? No. Not by any means. But then again, the parables of Jesus were not easy to understand without the Lord Jesus explaining them. Jesus also spoke about His death and resurrection with His disciples before the cross and they did not understand what He was talking about. So just because God speaks does not mean that He must be 100% crystal clear every time in what He says. God wants us to study.



The Holy Spirit inspired this passage.

2 Timothy 2:24-25
“And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;”

It says we are to be gentle unto all me, apt to teach, patient, in meekness we are to instruct for those we believe who oppose themselves.

Meekness is defined as the state of being meek.

Have you been trying to instruct me in meeknesses, gentleness, and with patience, brother?

I said I was done. So I am done.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I said I was done. So I am done.

Big hugs to you in the Lord. May God’s love shine upon you.

 

[Naomanos]

Big hugs to you in the Lord. May God’s love shine upon you.

I will give you a heads up as to who I am on CF. This should jog your memory. This way you know who you are conversing with and understand the comment argued ad nauseam.