Reasons why I believe the KJV is the divinely inspired perfect Word of God.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,767
7,910
NW England
✟1,041,208.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Bible contains the words of God, reveals God, his will and his salvation to us and is inspired and true.
Its books were written in Hebrew and Greek, translated into Greek and Latin and then English. The KJV was not the first Bible to be translated into English. Many people became Christians and had, believed, taught, and lived by, God's word long before the KJV came along - like the Apostles, for example.
There were a number of discoveries made after the KJV was written, and language has changed a lot since then.

Jesus is THE Word of God.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Lost4words
Upvote 0

Lost4words

Jesus I Trust In You
Supporter
May 19, 2018
10,943
11,697
Neath
✟1,002,161.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
The Bible contains the words of God, reveals God, his will and his salvation to us and is inspired and true.
Its books were written in Hebrew and Greek, translated into Greek and Latin and then English. The KJV was not the first Bible to be translated into English. Many people became Christians and had, believed, taught, and lived by, God's word long before the KJV came along - like the Apostles, for example.
There were a number of discoveries made after the KJV was written, and language has changed a lot since then.

Jesus is THE Word of God.

Excellent post. Strongly agree
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Strong in Him
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟107,962.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
All I've seen from Bible Highlighter here is horse feathers. First, the thrice-married Riplinger is a quack. Her work has been mostly discredited, even by other KJVOs.

Next, the KJV is wrong in Daniel 3. The Aramaic reads "son of the gods". And Nebuchadnezzar could not have known who Jesus is; not even Daniel knew then.

And, of course, the KJV has many other goofs & booboos. "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is a glaring one. there are many more mistranslations , such as 1 Tim. 6:10, whSHOULD read "the love of silver (money) is A root of ALL SORTS of evil." And the KJV's Ex. 20:13 reads "Thou shalt not KILL", when it SHOULD be "murder".

And the KJV's language is outdated & archaic. It was written for the British of 400 years ago, in THEIR English. Since then, God has caused updated English Bible translations to be made, just as He caused the KJV to be made to replace then-archaic versions such as the "Great Bible" of 1539. (Named for its physical size)

And there's absolutely NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for the KJVO myth. Without Scriptural support, no doctrine of faith/worship can be true.

Call it an attack if you wish, Sir. For all I care, you can call call it a yellow bluebell. But, whatever ya choose to call it, it's the **TRUTH** !
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiwimac
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
All I've seen from Bible Highlighter here is horse feathers. First, the thrice-married Riplinger is a quack. Her work has been mostly discredited, even by other KJVOs.

Next, the KJV is wrong in Daniel 3. The Aramaic reads "son of the gods". And Nebuchadnezzar could not have known who Jesus is; not even Daniel knew then.

And, of course, the KJV has many other goofs & booboos. "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is a glaring one. there are many more mistranslations , such as 1 Tim. 6:10, whSHOULD read "the love of silver (money) is A root of ALL SORTS of evil." And the KJV's Ex. 20:13 reads "Thou shalt not KILL", when it SHOULD be "murder".

And the KJV's language is outdated & archaic. It was written for the British of 400 years ago, in THEIR English. Since then, God has caused updated English Bible translations to be made, just as He caused the KJV to be made to replace then-archaic versions such as the "Great Bible" of 1539. (Named for its physical size)

And there's absolutely NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for the KJVO myth. Without Scriptural support, no doctrine of faith/worship can be true.

Call it an attack if you wish, Sir. For all I care, you can call call it a yellow bluebell. But, whatever ya choose to call it, it's the **TRUTH** !

I cannot force you to see what you don't want to see, brother. The evidences in my OP stand on their own.

Blessings to you in the Lord today.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The Bible contains the words of God, reveals God, his will and his salvation to us and is inspired and true.
Its books were written in Hebrew and Greek, translated into Greek and Latin and then English. The KJV was not the first Bible to be translated into English. Many people became Christians and had, believed, taught, and lived by, God's word long before the KJV came along - like the Apostles, for example.
There were a number of discoveries made after the KJV was written, and language has changed a lot since then.

Jesus is THE Word of God.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
This means that all of the words of Scripture are from God.
They are literally God breathed words to us.

Jesus says jots and tittles will not pass away from the Law (the Torah or the five books of Moses) until all be fulfilled. This means that the most smallest things like the crossing of a "T" or the dotting of an "I" will not pass away until all of the things within the Torah will be fulfilled. The Law of Moses (the 613) are fulfilled, and Jesus brought us a New Covenant with New Commands (with a certain portion of His commands being similar to the Old Covenant).

God's Word claims that it is perfect (Psalms 12:6) (Psalms 119:140) (Proverbs 30:5) and that it will be preserved for all generations (Psalms 12:7) and it will stand forever (Isaiah 40:8) (1 Peter 1:25).

If I did not have the luxury of hindsight knowledge, the one of two ways I see this happening is if:

(a) God preserved the language of Biblical Hebrew, and Biblical Greek within our Modern Day world by groups of people still speaking and writing these languages with no real break or interruption of time in them being dead languages. There would be no major changes in the language over time.

(b) God preserved His Word (Scripture) in a Global Language or the World Language of today.​

Now, with hindsight knowledge, for me: It seems like "Option (b)" is what took place. Psalms 12:7 says that God's Word would be preserved for all generations. This generation no longer speaks and writes Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Greek (as a part a living culture), so it technically would not be preserved specifically for this generation unless it was translated into the world language of our day (Which is English).

World language - Wikipedia


Side Note:

Oh, and yes; A person needs to know the "Living Word" and know that the Scriptures are all about the "Living Word," but Jesus also taught us many things and principles as a part of knowing Him and or having a relationship with Him (See: 1 John 2:3-4, and John 15:10). Jesus said to the Pharisees that they sought to kill him because His word had no place within them (John 8:37).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,424
11,977
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,232.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
This means that all of the words of Scripture are from God.
They are literally God breathed words to us.

Jesus says jots and tittles will not pass away from the Law (the Torah or the five books of Moses) until all be fulfilled. This means that the most smallest things like the crossing of a "T" or the dotting of an "I" will not pass away until all of the things within the Torah will be fulfilled. The Law of Moses (the 613) are fulfilled, and Jesus brought us a New Covenant with New Commands (with a certain portion of His commands being similar to the Old Covenant).

God's Word claims that it is perfect (Psalms 12:6) (Psalms 119:140) (Proverbs 30:5) and that it will be preserved for all generations (Psalms 12:7) and it will stand forever (Isaiah 40:8) (1 Peter 1:25).

If I did not have the luxury of hindsight knowledge, the one of two ways I see this happening is if:

(a) God preserved the language of Biblical Hebrew, and Biblical Greek within our Modern Day world by groups of people still speaking and writing these languages with no real break or interruption of time in them being dead languages. There would be no major changes in the language over time.

(b) God preserved His Word (Scripture) in a Global Language or the World Language of today.​

Now, with hindsight knowledge, for me: It seems like "Option (b)" is what took place. Psalms 12:7 says that God's Word would be preserved for all generations. This generation no longer speaks and writes Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Greek (as a part a living culture), so it technically would not be preserved specifically for this generation unless it was translated into the world language of our day (Which is English).

World language - Wikipedia


Side Note:

Oh, and yes; A person needs to know the "Living Word" and know that the Scriptures are all about the "Living Word," but Jesus also taught us many things and principles as a part of knowing Him and or having a relationship with Him (See: 1 John 2:3-4, and John 15:10). Jesus said to the Pharisees that they sought to kill him because His word had no place within them (John 8:37).
Nobody speaks KJV English anywhere in the world.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Strong in Him
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,767
7,910
NW England
✟1,041,208.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
This means that all of the words of Scripture are from God.
They are literally God breathed words to us.

ALL?
God inspired Paul to write that false teachers should castrate themselves, and this somehow edifies us?
Paul's advice to Timothy to stop drinking water and drink wine instead because of his illnesses, is advice to us as well?
Paul's request that Timothy bring him the cloak and scrolls that he left behind, is for us .... how?
Paul told people to treat their slaves well. We do not have slaves as they did then - so how do we keep those words?

Yes, the Bible is true; true in what it reveals about God, his character, his will and his salvation, and that can never be changed nor added to. But the Bible also contains poetry, personal letters and advice from Paul for the problems that the churches wrote to him about. Today we have different issues - and the words of Paul to a first century church do not necessarily apply to us also in the 21st century.

Jesus says jots and tittles will not pass away from the Law (the Torah or the five books of Moses) until all be fulfilled.

No, it probably won't.
But I'm a Gentile; I was not given the Jewish law and have never been under it.

This means that the most smallest things like the crossing of a "T" or the dotting of an "I" will not pass away until all of the things within the Torah will be fulfilled. The Law of Moses (the 613) are fulfilled, and Jesus brought us a New Covenant with New Commands (with a certain portion of His commands being similar to the Old Covenant).

Jesus said he came to fulfil the law.
I do not have the law - I am in Jesus, who has fulfilled it.

God's Word claims that it is perfect (Psalms 12:6) (Psalms 119:140) (Proverbs 30:5) and that it will be preserved for all generations (Psalms 12:7) and it will stand forever (Isaiah 40:8) (1 Peter 1:25).

I never said it wasn't, and it has been preserved for all generations.
Clearly this is not a reference to the KJV, which was produced only 400 years ago. Scripture was around long before King James was even born.

If I did not have the luxury of hindsight knowledge, the one of two ways I see this happening is if:

(a) God preserved the language of Biblical Hebrew, and Biblical Greek within our Modern Day world by groups of people still speaking and writing these languages with no real break or interruption of time in them being dead languages. There would be no major changes in the language over time.

(b) God preserved His Word (Scripture) in a Global Language or the World Language of today.​

Now, with hindsight knowledge, for me: It seems like "Option (b)" is what took place. Psalms 12:7 says that God's Word would be preserved for all generations. This generation no longer speaks and writes Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Greek (as a part a living culture), so it technically would not be preserved specifically for this generation unless it was translated into the world language of our day (Which is English).

Greek was, for years, the common language of that generation; then it was Latin.
English is a common language in the generation, and part of the world, in which we live; but the English language itself is constantly changing. It was only about 40 years, or so, ago that "Gay" meant "happy" - at school, we all wrote stories about people feeling gay. What does that word mean today; or what do most people immediately think of when they hear it?
Teenagers today use the words "wicked" and "sick" to mean something amazing, or great. What do you think they will think if they read a Bible which says that all men are wicked? Or if anyone is sick they should pray?
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Nobody speaks KJV English anywhere in the world.

If I asked a person to read a page of Biblical Hebrew and Greek, they are not going to understand it. If I asked them to read 1600's English, they will be able to read it, and they could understand it in many places. Granted, in certain instances, they may have to look at a Modern Translation and updated those words (But they can see that the KJV says the same thing as the Modern Translation). They are not taking it by blind faith that *$%# means a particular thing based on some scholar. For folks can read 1600's English and understand it in many places in the Scripture (without a dictionary or Modern Translation), but this is not the case if they were to do so with Biblical Hebrew and Greek. So while nobody today does not speak 1600's English, it is understandable based on the fact that we know Modern Day English. They are close enough to each other so that we can understand 1600's English. It is still technically English. We can see the correlation between the two and connect the dots.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,575
6,063
EST
✟991,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The Scriptures can be misinterpreted in the KJV just as easily as in any other English version or any other language for that matter.
The KJV more so than some others. There are more than 800 words in the KJV which have changed in meaning or dropped out of use altogether.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,424
11,977
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,232.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
If I asked a person to read a page of Biblical Hebrew and Greek, they are not going to understand it. If I asked them to read 1600's English, they will be able to read it, and they could understand it in many places. Granted, in certain instances, they may have to look at a Modern Translation and updated those words (But they can see that the KJV says the same thing as the Modern Translation). They are not taking it by blind faith that *$%# means a particular thing based on some scholar. For folks can read 1600's English and understand it in many places in the Scripture (without a dictionary or Modern Translation), but this is not the case if they were to do so with Biblical Hebrew and Greek. So while nobody today does not speak 1600's English, it is understandable based on the fact that we know Modern Day English. They are close enough to each other so that we can understand 1600's English. It is still technically English. We can see the correlation between the two and connect the dots.
This is not true at all. Most people who have English as a second language would have great difficulty with KJV English. I'm a native speaker of English and I have difficulty with it.
Despite what you claim is missing or not faithfully translated in other English versions, those differences only affect a tiny percentage of the Scriptures, and what you claim is missing in those parts is found in other parts of the Scriptures, so the Gospel message is found unchanged in the whole of the Scriptures.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The Scriptures can be misinterpreted in the KJV just as easily as in any other English version or any other language for that matter.

True, but that is because is a spiritual message. The real problem is that other translations actually give us the wrong translation time and again in many places (like with Romans 8:1, 1 John 5:7, etc.). They even place the devil's name within them where they do not belong. Basically the argument folks have is that the devil does not have an agenda to destroy or slightly distort God's Word. Such an idea is ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
This is not true at all. Most people who have English as a second language would have great difficulty with KJV English. I'm a native speaker of English and I have difficulty with it.
Despite what you claim is missing or not faithfully translated in other English versions, those differences only affect a tiny percentage of the Scriptures, and what you claim is missing in those parts is found in other parts of the Scriptures, so the Gospel message is found unchanged in the whole of the Scriptures.

The point is that you can read and understand John 3:16 and a ton of other verses just fine without a dictionary in the KJV, but this is not the case if you were to read Hebrew or Greek on John 3:16, and or other verses. You would have no clue what they were saying.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
ALL?
God inspired Paul to write that false teachers should castrate themselves, and this somehow edifies us?
Paul's advice to Timothy to stop drinking water and drink wine instead because of his illnesses, is advice to us as well?
Paul's request that Timothy bring him the cloak and scrolls that he left behind, is for us .... how?
Paul told people to treat their slaves well. We do not have slaves as they did then - so how do we keep those words?

Yes, the Bible is true; true in what it reveals about God, his character, his will and his salvation, and that can never be changed nor added to. But the Bible also contains poetry, personal letters and advice from Paul for the problems that the churches wrote to him about. Today we have different issues - and the words of Paul to a first century church do not necessarily apply to us also in the 21st century.



No, it probably won't.
But I'm a Gentile; I was not given the Jewish law and have never been under it.



Jesus said he came to fulfil the law.
I do not have the law - I am in Jesus, who has fulfilled it.



I never said it wasn't, and it has been preserved for all generations.
Clearly this is not a reference to the KJV, which was produced only 400 years ago. Scripture was around long before King James was even born.



Greek was, for years, the common language of that generation; then it was Latin.
English is a common language in the generation, and part of the world, in which we live; but the English language itself is constantly changing. It was only about 40 years, or so, ago that "Gay" meant "happy" - at school, we all wrote stories about people feeling gay. What does that word mean today; or what do most people immediately think of when they hear it?
Teenagers today use the words "wicked" and "sick" to mean something amazing, or great. What do you think they will think if they read a Bible which says that all men are wicked? Or if anyone is sick they should pray?

I don't have time today to reply to all this here. Maybe tomorrow (Lord willing).
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,424
11,977
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,232.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
The point is that you can read and understand John 3:16 and a ton of other verses just fine without a dictionary in the KJV, but this is not the case if you were to read Hebrew or Greek on John 3:16, and or other verses. You would have no clue what they were saying.
Unfortunately, many people have built their theology on these verses without taking into consideration the multitude of Scriptures which detail what it means to believe in Him, and arrive at a false gospel.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Unfortunately, many people have built their theology on these verses without taking into consideration the multitude of Scriptures which detail what it means to believe in Him, and arrive at a false gospel.

Yes, I agree. I believe the Bible has parts of it that are hidden from certain believers because they do not accept all of what the Bible plainly says. Some just flat out ignore the Word in certain places, and others attempt to wrongfully re-write God's Word in certain parts by saying it means something else in the Hebrew or Greek. The English does not say anything different than the original languages because that is how it was translated in the first place.
 
Upvote 0

fwGod

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2005
1,404
532
✟65,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
If I asked a person to read a page of Biblical Hebrew and Greek, they are not going to understand it. If I asked them to read 1600's English, they will be able to read it, and they could understand it in many places.
I've looked at the English of that century.. their f's are actually s'. their j was the letter i.. the letter v is u instead. And so on.

http://ww.swapmeetdave.com/Bible/Bibles/1635 Douay-Job-26-13-28-25-a.jpg

..a little help.. Job 25:5 "iuft" is "just". I would've had a difficult time figuring that out if the word iuftification had not been close by. Or Vs.7, what is "aduerfarie".. This one took me awhile, at first I stumbled over the letters and came up with "adversity".. but after another try I finally got it.. "adversary".

I'd really be interested in seeing you read a passage from a Bible like that.. without cheating to check what each sentence reads in modern English.
Bible Highlighter said:
Granted, in certain instances, they may have to look at a Modern Translation and updated those words (But they can see that the KJV says the same thing as the Modern Translation).
Not always so. For instance, "ague". Now I'd just as soon not have to look up what an archaic English word is because it is unnecessary when reading a modern English Bible.
This archaic old English word means “fever.” It is used in the King James Version only once (Leviticus 26:16). Modern English translations use the word “fever.”

Or "amerce" which means 'to impose a fine'. It's used once in the King James Bible, Deuteronomy 22:19.
Then there's this really difficult one to figure out.. 'bewray'.. it means, to reveal or disclose. The old English word is equivalent to “betray” (Proverbs 27:16; 29:24, Revised King James Version, “uttereth;” Isaiah 16:3; Matthew 26:73).


The list goes on.
Bible Highlighter said:
They are not taking it by blind faith that *$%# means a particular thing based on some scholar. For folks can read 1600's English and understand it in many places in the Scripture (without a dictionary or Modern Translation),
I've just proven with examples that the 1600 Bible would not be easy for the average reader. It seems that you're reaching too far in the effort to defend the KJV.
Bible Highlighter said:
..but this is not the case if they were to do so with Biblical Hebrew and Greek. So while nobody today does not speak 1600's English, it is understandable based on the fact that we know Modern Day English.
For some English people, the 1600 Bible might as well be Greek or Hebrew.
Bible Highlighter said:
They are close enough to each other so that we can understand 1600's English. It is still technically English. We can see the correlation between the two and connect the dots.
Maybe. But why go through those extra hoops, or jump over those hurdles.. when all the while, there are the modern Bibles that don't give the reader such a mystery to figure out on top of all of the metaphorical verses to have to be figured out?

It's entirely different when it's Hebrew or Greek. It's reasonable not to know what those languages are saying. But, it shouldn't be the case for English speaking people to struggle with archaic English.

The Bible says that "the entrance of His word gives light and understanding to the simple." But how can God's word be understandable to the simple.. one on the grade school level, if there are outdated puzzling words in it?
The modern Bibles remove any ancient linguistic hurdles so the reader can have a smooth path of learning what God is saying as you walk. Instead of trying to understand what the KJV achaic words are saying.

There have been printed Bibles with even easier English to better understand. The Common English. The Contemporary English. The Easy-to-Read. .. for example.

The argument that the KJV is the best for comprehension, is not accurate.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I've looked at the English of that century.. their f's are actually s'. their j was the letter i.. the letter v is u instead. And so on.

http://ww.swapmeetdave.com/Bible/Bibles/1635 Douay-Job-26-13-28-25-a.jpg

..a little help.. Job 25:5 "iuft" is "just". I would've had a difficult time figuring that out if the word iuftification had not been close by. Maybe someone can figure out Vs.7, what "aduerfarie" means.. could it be "adversity"?

I'd really be interested in seeing you read a passage from a Bible like that.. without cheating to check what each sentence reads in modern English.
Not always so. For instance, "ague". Now I'd just as soon not have to look up what an archaic English word is because it is unnecessary when reading a modern English Bible.
This archaic old English word means “fever.” It is used in the King James Version only once (Leviticus 26:16). Modern English translations use the word “fever.”

Or "amerce" which means 'to impose a fine'. It's used once in the King James Bible, Deuteronomy 22:19.
Then there's this really difficult one to figure out.. 'bewray'.. it means, to reveal or disclose. The old English word is equivalent to “betray” (Proverbs 27:16; 29:24, Revised King James Version, “uttereth;” Isaiah 16:3; Matthew 26:73).


The list goes on.
I've just proven with examples that the 1600 Bible would not be easy for the average reader. It seems that you're reaching too far in the effort to defend the KJV.
For some English people, the 1600 Bible might as well be Greek or Hebrew.
Maybe. But why go through those extra hoops, or jump over those hurdles.. when all the while, there are the modern Bibles that don't give the reader such a mystery to figure out on top of all of the metaphorical verses to have to be figured out?

It's entirely different when it's Hebrew or Greek. It's reasonable not to know what those languages are saying. But, it shouldn't be the case for English speaking people to struggle with archaic English.

The Bible says that "the entrance of His word gives light and understanding to the simple." But how can God's word be understandable to the simple.. one on the grade school level, if there are outdated puzzling words in it?
The modern Bibles remove any ancient linguistic hurdles so the reader can have a smooth path of learning what God is saying as you walk. Instead of trying to understand what the KJV achaic words are saying.

There have been printed Bibles with even easier English to better understand. The Common English. The Contemporary English. The Easy-to-Read. .. for example.

The argument that the KJV is the best for comprehension, is not accurate.

I believe the Cambridge Edition (circa 1900) is the divinely inspired Word. Also, when I refer to 1600’s English, I am referring to the updated English version of the KJV that updated spelling, and perfected the printing process.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fwGod

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2005
1,404
532
✟65,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I believe the Cambridge Edition (circa 1900) is the divinely inspired Word.
You may have a preference of Bible version but that doesn't make it any more 'divinely inspired' than any other printed Bible.
Bible Highlighter said:
Also, when I refer to 1600’s English, I am referring to the updated English version of the KJV that updated spelling, and perfected the printing process.
I take it that you have no interest in responding to my previous post #458?

The following quote is from someone that you most likely are familiar with.

Pastor Reagan rightly says: "We need to establish one thing from the out-set. The authority for our preserved English text is not found in any human work. The authority for our preserved and infallible English text is in God! Printers may foul up at times and humans will still make plenty of errors, but God in His power and mercy will preserve His text despite the weaknesses of fallible man."

There is a website that offers an example of 'keeping God's inspired word intact'. Restoring the printing typo of the 1612.. from Ru.3:15 the 'hee' instead of 'her'. And Gen.10:16 the name 'Emorite' instead of 'Amorite'.

The KJV claim is that the printing process was perfected in 1600, and yet errors in printing happened in 1612. That's evidence that it wasn't perfected 12 years previous.

The case for specialty of the KJV Bible.. and it's infallible printing(s) is not accurate.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.