The Preservation of the Holy Scriptures

[SaintJoeNow]

I don't think anyone ever doubted that God had His correct word all along. So I have not disagreed with that at all.

I have doubted that God's word is perfectly expressed in the KJV. And I think it is certainly stretching the meaning of the word "preserved" if you are saying no one had it until 1611


So by saying does God count as anyone, are you saying no humans had it from the time the autographs were lost until 1611?

I believe His word is perfectly preserved without error and given to me by Him.

You don't.

Right?

Simple. Is it really that big of a deal?

 

[tall73]

I believe His word is perfectly preserved without error and given to me by Him.

You don't.

Right?

Simple. Is it really that big of a deal?

Joe, you are clearly dodging the question because you know what it means if you answer.

Did any human have the word perfectly from the time the autographs were lost until 1611?

 

[SaintJoeNow]

You probably didn't notice but I am not an Alexandrian text proponent either, as I stated in the other thread. However, your reasoning is exactly what they claim.

So did any human have the perfect word of God from the time the autographs were lost until 1611?

Does Jesus count as a "human"? Yes, I know He is God, but was He not a human? is He not a human? I believe He is the human who made sure I got His word in my own language, He is the God who made sure I got His word in my own language. If you think it's wrong to believe that, then don't believe it. If you are going to heaven with your sins forgiven, Jesus is the only way you will be getting there and we are both going to be exactly like Him and in complete agreement with Him and each other when we get there.

I know without a shadow of a doubt that my sins are forgiven and I am going to heaven. I know because His word tells me so. God loves you, God loves me, His word is His love letter to mankind and it tells me that He loves you the same as He loves me. He loves everybody because they are made in His image. He loves his children because He paid for them with His own blood, and that's an extra special love and I'm glad He gave me His word to tell me all about Himself so I could be, and am, saved from the fire of Hell. He made me for Himself and I'm happy that He did because He is good! My sins are forgiven and I'm going to heaven, the Bible tells me so.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

Joe, you are clearly dodging the question because you know what it means if you answer.

Did any human have the word perfectly from the time the autographs were lost until 1611?

I'm dodging nothing except for the rabbit trail you want to run me around in. I'm not interested in it.

 

[tall73]

I'm dodging nothing except for the rabbit trail you want to run me around in. I'm not interested in it.

It is alright, your refusal to answer is answer to those reading. The line of questioning is not a rabbit trail.

You have posted a Scripture and said that God promised to preserve His word. Did that promise NOT apply to the members of His church that He bought with His blood that lived for 1,500 years before the KJV was even conceived? Of course it did.

God did preserve His word for all those people. They all had Scriptures sufficient for salvation, sufficient for faith. Were there variant readings comprising about 2 percent? Yes. That is reality. They still had enough to be God's church.

Now you seem to be claiming that preservation only means that God skipped 1,500 years and gave it just to the English speaking world perfectly. You apparently leave out in the cold all the people of the church before then. Is that what God promised? No.

You have not presented any evidence that says God perfectly preserved His word with no errors in the KJV, and neglected to do so for everyone else for 1,500 years. You have only said you believe it.

You can believe it. It is not going to convince other folks if you don't demonstrate it.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

It is alright, your refusal to answer is answer to those reading. The line of questioning is not a rabbit trail.

You have posted a Scripture and said that God promised to preserve His word. Did that promise NOT apply to the members of His church that He bought with His blood that lived for 1,500 years before the KJV was even conceived? Of course it did.

God did preserve His word for all those people. They all had Scriptures sufficient for salvation, sufficient for faith. Were there variant readings comprising about 2 percent? Yes. That is reality. They still had enough to be God's church.

Now you seem to be claiming that preservation only means that God skipped 1,500 years and gave it just to the English speaking world perfectly. You apparently leave out in the cold all the people of the church before then. Is that what God promised? No.

You have not presented any evidence that says God perfectly preserved His word with no errors in the KJV, and neglected to do so for everyone else for 1,500 years. You have only said you believe it.

You can believe it. It is not going to convince other folks if you don't demonstrate it.

They don't have to be convinced and neither do you. Many are, most are not. I believe, you don't. Many do, most do not. I have to, you don't. I do, and I guess you won't. Maybe you can't. I don't know. If you won't believe God has given you His Word in English, you won't believe it. I believe it. You can't change that. Sorry. You're barking up the wrong tree here.

I am demonstrating God's word is true as best as I can. I can never prove it to somebody who won't believe it. You won't, I guess. So why should I beat my head against the trees as I let you lead me around in a never ending rabbit trail as I chase you trying to convince you that you don't have to run and you don't have to fight with me on this issue?

It's very simple. I'm going to heaven with my sins forgiven, bought and paid for by the blood of Jesus Christ and I am fully assured of this because I know God keeps His word and the Bible tells me so. I hope to see you there my friend....no wild rabbit trails in heaven.

That about covers it all, doesn't it?

 

[SaintJoeNow]

It is alright, your refusal to answer is answer to those reading. The line of questioning is not a rabbit trail.

You have posted a Scripture and said that God promised to preserve His word. Did that promise NOT apply to the members of His church that He bought with His blood that lived for 1,500 years before the KJV was even conceived? Of course it did.

God did preserve His word for all those people. They all had Scriptures sufficient for salvation, sufficient for faith. Were there variant readings comprising about 2 percent? Yes. That is reality. They still had enough to be God's church.

Now you seem to be claiming that preservation only means that God skipped 1,500 years and gave it just to the English speaking world perfectly. You apparently leave out in the cold all the people of the church before then. Is that what God promised? No.

You have not presented any evidence that says God perfectly preserved His word with no errors in the KJV, and neglected to do so for everyone else for 1,500 years. You have only said you believe it.

You can believe it. It is not going to convince other folks if you don't demonstrate it.

You need to wait for Jack Koons to take you up the way you want to go on this issue again. Your approach of scoffing the KJV no longer interests me. I will be interested in how Jack Koons answers you. He answered you very well in his way before. I think I have answered you more than enough in my way...which really is in agreement with Mr. Koons as I think He is in agreement with me on the whole issue. I'll watch him when he gets back, but so far I think him and I are in complete agreement. You might nitpick and trip him up a little bit in technicalities, but that has little effect on him, he recovers. It has no effect on me because I keep the focus simple. Your long drawn out arguments are a waste of time with me, but I do enjoy watching Mr Koons answer you in all the details you demand.

 

[tall73]

So why should I beat my head against the trees as I let you lead me around in a never ending rabbit trail as I chase you trying to convince you that you don't have to run and you don't have to fight with me on this issue?

The rabbit trail was all of one question long that you have been studiously avoiding this whole time.

How can you say God preserved it when you don't think it was around for 1,500 years?

Yet God did preserve it, in that the church had the Scriptures all along. They might not always have agreed with the KJV word for word. But God still preserved His church and His word.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

The rabbit trail was all of one question long that you have been studiously avoiding this whole time.

How can you say God preserved it when you don't think it was around for 1,500 years?

Yet God did preserve it, in that the church had the Scriptures all along. They might not always have agreed with the KJV word for word. But God still preserved His church and His word.

You are very scholarly and I'm sure you mean well by trying to tell me I am supposed to believe that I don't really know exactly what God said in English.
You are only trying to prove God did not give me His Word in English. You are wasting your time with me. I know what God said, I have it in black and white. Why do you want to take that away from me?

I'm not interested in a long drawn out scholarly scoffarism approach to saying what the devil said in only four words in the garden of Eden..."yea, hath God said...?" To you and to the devil I say, "Yes, God said it and I know He said it because I have it in black and white and I believe it because I know He said it and He cannot lie. I can lie. You can lie. The devil is a liar, and the father of lies. God cannot lie. I am not interested in your twisted imposter versions of the Bible." Faith in God has a childlike simplicity and it's wonderful.
Remember, Jesus said " But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God." I don't know if or how that is written in your personal choice of fraudulent, copyrighted versions of God's word, but you can read it in the real English Bible which cannot be copyrighted at Luke 18:16. If you know a place in the Bible (not in "a" Bible, but in "the" Bible) where it says the kingdom of heaven is of scholars, please tell me where it is. The Bible tells me the kingdom of heaven is of such as little children, not of such as scholars.

You can be scholarly, I'll be childish in simple faith believing God gave me His Word in English, and believing that for good reasons, reasons so good in fact that you will never by a multitude of scholarly lifetimes of studies and presentations convince me that God did not give me His Word in my own language.

 

[Hammster]

I have no problem with the KJV. The few errors in it are easy to deal with. But I also don't have problems with the NASB, ESV, or HCSB.

 

[brinny]

I have no problem with the KJV. The few errors in it are easy to deal with. But I also don't have problems with the NASB, ESV, or HCSB.

I have no problem with the KJV either. God bless us, ev'ry one.

 

[tall73]

I know what God said, I have it in black and white.

Where do you have it in black and white that God would give you the Bible exactly as it was written in English?

Why do you think God did not give this to people for 1,500 years?

Why do you want to take that away from me? Why do you think it's so important to prove that God's Word is not given to the English speaking world?

You are voluntarily participating in a discussion on the topic. Why would you wonder that folks are discussing it?

I'm not interested in a long drawn out scholarly scoffarism

You can hide behind the "scholarly scoffarism" charge. You have not told us where you have it in black and white that God would give you the Bible exactly right in English.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

It's wonderful that so many people don't have a problem with the King James Bible. It's also wonderful that so many scholarly and thoughtful people who love God have joined this discussion.

Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, who wrote the preface for the NASB, also had no problem with the King James Bible. His comments after comparing differences between the NASB and the KJV were these:

"I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version....I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord....We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translators; I wrote the preface...I'm in trouble. I can't refute these arguments (referring to the arguments presented in "Which Bible" http://www.amazon.com/Which-Bible-G...d=1427908189&sr=1-5&keywords=gail+riplinger); it's wrong; it's terribly wrong; it's frighteningly wrong; and what am I going to do about it?....you can say the Authorized Version (KJV) is absolutely correct."

The NASB, which has been revised six times, has 24,338 changes and 6,966 new omissions between it's 1994 and 1995 printings alone, not counting changes made from previous editions. The NASB is a fraudulent imposter being sold as "a" Bible.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

Is your book called "A Bible" actually the Holy Bible?

NIV, NASB, ESV, and HCSB remove holy from each of the following words in the verses given. The Holy Bible, the one authorized by the King God placed over England to commission the translation of His word into English under His authority, does not remove the word "holy" from the following:

2 Pet 1:21 ........... KJV : ... holy men
Matt 25:31........... KJV:.... holy angels
1 Thess. 5:27........KJV: ..... holy brethren
Rev 22:6...............KJV:.......holy prophets
Rev 18:20..............KJV:......holy apostles and prophets
John 7:39 ..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
1 Cor 2:13..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
Matt 12:31..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
Acts 6:3.................KJV........Holy Ghost
Acts 8:18..............KJV.........Holy Ghost

NIV, NASB, ESV, and HCSB all remove the word "holy" in all of these places. The Holy Bible does not remove "holy" from any of these places. Why? because it's God's word. "The" Bible is God's word.

This only scratches the surface of the thousands of changes and deletions which undermine if not completely change key doctrines of the Bible.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

Where do you have it in black and white that God would give you the Bible exactly as it was written in English?

Why do you think God did not give this to people for 1,500 years?



You are voluntarily participating in a discussion on the topic. Why would you wonder that folks are discussing it?




You can hide behind the "scholarly scoffarism" charge. You have not told us where you have it in black and white that God would give you the Bible exactly right in English.

I answered you in Post 91.

 

[Hammster]

It's wonderful that so many people don't have a problem with the King James Bible. It's also wonderful that so many scholarly and thoughtful people who love God have joined this discussion.

Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, who wrote the preface for the NASB, also had no problem with the King James Bible. His comments after comparing differences between the NASB and the KJV were these:

"I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version....I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord....We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translators; I wrote the preface...I'm in trouble. I can't refute these arguments (referring to the arguments presented in "Which Bible" Which Bible Is God's Word?: Gail Riplinger: 9780963584588: Amazon.com: Books it's wrong; it's terribly wrong; it's frighteningly wrong; and what am I going to do about it?....you can say the Authorized Version (KJV) is absolutely correct."

The NASB, which has been revised six times, has 24,338 changes and 6,966 new omissions between it's 1994 and 1995 printings alone, not counting changes made from previous editions. The NASB is a fraudulent imposter being sold as "a" Bible.

How many changes did the KJV go through after its first printing?

 

[brinny]

Is your book called "A Bible" actually the Holy Bible?

NIV, NASB, ESV, and HCSB remove holy from each of the following words in the verses given. The Holy Bible, the one authorized by the King God placed over England to commission the translation of His word into English under His authority, does not remove the word "holy" from the following:

2 Pet 1:21 ........... KJV : ... holy men
Matt 25:31........... KJV:.... holy angels
1 Thess. 5:27........KJV: ..... holy brethren
Rev 22:6...............KJV:.......holy prophets
Rev 18:20..............KJV:......holy apostles and prophets
John 7:39 ..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
1 Cor 2:13..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
Matt 12:31..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
Acts 6:3.................KJV........Holy Ghost
Acts 8:18..............KJV.........Holy Ghost

NIV, NASB, ESV, and HCSB all remove the word "holy" in all of these places. The Holy Bible does not remove "holy" from any of these places. Why? because it's God's word. "The" Bible is God's word.

This only scratches the surface of the thousands of changes and deletions which undermine if not completely change key doctrines of the Bible.

Interesting. Makes one wonder why they were ever removed.

Thank you kindly.

 

[Hammster]

Is your book called "A Bible" actually the Holy Bible?

NIV, NASB, ESV, and HCSB remove holy from each of the following words in the verses given. The Holy Bible, the one authorized by the King God placed over England to commission the translation of His word into English under His authority, does not remove the word "holy" from the following:

2 Pet 1:21 ........... KJV : ... holy men
Matt 25:31........... KJV:.... holy angels
1 Thess. 5:27........KJV: ..... holy brethren
Rev 22:6...............KJV:.......holy prophets
Rev 18:20..............KJV:......holy apostles and prophets
John 7:39 ..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
1 Cor 2:13..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
Matt 12:31..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
Acts 6:3.................KJV........Holy Ghost
Acts 8:18..............KJV.........Holy Ghost

NIV, NASB, ESV, and HCSB all remove the word "holy" in all of these places. The Holy Bible does not remove "holy" from any of these places. Why? because it's God's word. "The" Bible is God's word.

This only scratches the surface of the thousands of changes and deletions which undermine if not completely change key doctrines of the Bible.

So the KJV has ADDED words? I guess that's one more reason not to use it.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by SaintJoeNow View Post
Is your book called "A Bible" actually the Holy Bible?

NIV, NASB, ESV, and HCSB remove holy from each of the following words in the verses given. The Holy Bible, the one authorized by the King God placed over England to commission the translation of His word into English under His authority, does not remove the word "holy" from the following:

2 Pet 1:21 ........... KJV : ... holy men
Matt 25:31........... KJV:.... holy angels
1 Thess. 5:27........KJV: ..... holy brethren
Rev 22:6...............KJV:.......holy prophets
Rev 18:20..............KJV:......holy apostles and prophets
John 7:39 ..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
1 Cor 2:13..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
Matt 12:31..............KJV.......Holy Ghost
Acts 6:3.................KJV........Holy Ghost
Acts 8:18..............KJV.........Holy Ghost

NIV, NASB, ESV, and HCSB all remove the word "holy" in all of these places. The Holy Bible does not remove "holy" from any of these places. Why? because it's God's word. "The" Bible is God's word.

This only scratches the surface of the thousands of changes and deletions which undermine if not completely change key doctrines of the Bible.

So the KJV has ADDED words? I guess that's one more reason not to use it.

Interesting take on it brother.

Thank you kindly for sharing your viewpoint.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

How many changes did the KJV go through after its first printing?

That's a very good question, I'm sure you can look it up because you are very smart. I'm not interested in that question so I'm not going to look it up for you.