30 Reasons why the KJV is the Divine and Pure Word of God for Today (Update: KJVO Posters Only)

[Strong in Him]

Well, I am not one of those wacky KJV Onlyists who will say crazy things like Jesus was thinking about the future KJV when He was on the cross or anything like that. But you need to choose a perfect Word of God to believe in.

Nonsense.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Nonsense.

I am not surprised you would think this way. But this is why I will not continue to keep debating this with you. If you cannot see the 30 points I made in Scripture at the beginning of this thread it is simply because it is a spiritual issue and you don't want to see the truth on this topic. You have your own reasons for staying in your comfort zone. That is your choice (of course). I can lead a horse to water, but I cannot force it to drink. My job is done. I preached the Word. I cannot force you to accept it.

 

[Strong in Him]

I am not surprised you would think this way. But this is why I will not continue to keep debating this with you. If you cannot see the 30 points I made in Scripture at the beginning of this thread it is simply because it is a spiritual issue and you don't want to see the truth on this topic.

No, it's because;
a) your posts are way too long.
b) you can't answer the simple questions or dispute the facts that have been put to you time and time again.

The bottom line is that you compare all modern versions with the KJV, and if they differ; in your eyes that is proof that they are corrupt, because the KJV is perfect. You've staked your life on the fact that the KJV is perfect, yet you refuse a direct comparison with the Greek/Hebrew which would prove it one way or the other.

You have your own reasons for staying in your comfort zone.

I have a Greek interlinear NT and can SEE whether a verse is there or not.
If it was shown to be there in the Greek, and the KJV, but missing in the NIV, then of course, that means that on that occasion the KJV is more accurate than the NIV - no question.
But you will not consider such a comparison - my feeling is because you are afraid that the KJV may sometimes be found wanting, and we would all be able to SEE for ourselves that it was not a perfect translation.
If I'm wrong; prove it.

I can lead a horse to water, but I cannot force it to drink. My job is done. I preached the Word. I cannot force you to accept it.

You haven't preached the word at all. You've preached the gospel according to Bible Highlighter, which is "the KJV is perfect". Comfort zone? You've staked your life on it, and you're not budging; whatever the evidence shows.

 

[JSRG]

Minor nitpick time:

Normally a book/song goes out of copyright 50 years after the author/composer's death. In the case of the Bible, copyright may run out 50 years after the translation is published, or after the translators have died - the KJV is 400 years old, so I think that covers that one. The NIV, for example, came out in 1979 - so I guess copyright will run out 50 years from 1979. (Unless it's 100 years, in which case it will take a little longer.)
I expect there are a number of Bible translations that are no longer in Copyright; means nothing.

In the United States, work by an individual lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. For cases where the time of death of the author is inapplicable (e.g. something copyrighted by a company or group), then it instead lasts for 95 years after its publication date. Well, okay, that's the simplified version, but it applies to most situations.

Since the KJV was never under the copyright of individuals, the question turns to the 95 years. Obviously, as the KJV was published more than 95 years ago, so it is public domain in the United States. It is still copyrighted in the UK, though, because the Crown has it under perpetual copyright.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

No, it's because;
a) your posts are way too long.
b) you can't answer the simple questions or dispute the facts that have been put to you time and time again.

The bottom line is that you compare all modern versions with the KJV, and if they differ; in your eyes that is proof that they are corrupt, because the KJV is perfect. You've staked your life on the fact that the KJV is perfect, yet you refuse a direct comparison with the Greek/Hebrew which would prove it one way or the other.



I have a Greek interlinear NT and can SEE whether a verse is there or not.
If it was shown to be there in the Greek, and the KJV, but missing in the NIV, then of course, that means that on that occasion the KJV is more accurate than the NIV - no question.
But you will not consider such a comparison - my feeling is because you are afraid that the KJV may sometimes be found wanting, and we would all be able to SEE for ourselves that it was not a perfect translation.
If I'm wrong; prove it.



You haven't preached the word at all. You've preached the gospel according to Bible Highlighter, which is "the KJV is perfect". Comfort zone? You've staked your life on it, and you're not budging; whatever the evidence shows.

If you did not read what I had written, then why should I read your posts?
Do we not read the Bible because it is too long?
Do we not read other resourceful Christian books because they are too long?
I have no trouble reading a person's post that are long if I feel they have something worthwhile to truly offer. Your reason for not reading my written defense on the KJV is because you do not agree with my position. That's the real reason.
It's like reading a book on how to get the Coronavirus. Who wants to do that? Maybe some inmates. But the point here is it has nothing to do with the length of the post, but the content. For if my post was about your favorite thing to study, it would be a breeze to read (no matter the length).

In any event, I think it is best that we agree to disagree in love and respect and move on.

Blessings be unto you in the Lord.

 

[Strong in Him]

Minor nitpick time:

In the United States, work by an individual lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. For cases where the time of death of the author is inapplicable (e.g. something copyrighted by a company or group), then it instead lasts for 95 years after its publication date. Well, okay, that's the simplified version, but it applies to most situations.

Since the KJV was never under the copyright of individuals, the question turns to the 95 years. Obviously, as the KJV was published more than 95 years ago, so it is public domain in the United States. It is still copyrighted in the UK, though, because the Crown has it under perpetual copyright.

Having copyright for something, or not, doesn't prove anything though.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

To all who doubt the KJV as the pure Word of God:

I am not going to be bothered trying to show something to folks who do not want to honestly see it. If you are open to the truth, fine, I can discuss it with you. If you are close minded as to the KJV being the Word of God, no amount of Scriptural evidence will convince you. No point in logic will convince you.

Side Note:

As for the copyright point: Well, a copyright influences men who create new translations because they have to make it different enough from other translations in order to obtain a copyright. So their motivation is not purely based on making the best translation but it is also based on being influenced by obtaining a copyright. At the time of the translation of the KJV, no such constraints were placed upon the 47 translators of the KJV. But obviously this is not a meaty point that can stand all on it's own. This is a minor point in support of the KJV (of course). But there are waaaay more meatier points that are like a billy club hitting a person over the head about the truth on this matter (if they are willing to see it).

 

[JSRG]

Having copyright for something, or not, doesn't prove anything though.

I agree--I just wanted to give the accurate numbers for length was all.

 

[Strong in Him]

If you did not read what I had written, then why should I read your posts?
Do we not read the Bible because it is too long?
Do we not read other resourceful Christian books because they are too long?

These are public discussion forums, not lectures or drafts of a book.
Some people just can't read things that are that long. If this was a verbal debate, you would have been cut short ages ago - or people would have stopped listening.

And your posts/threads are biased from the start.
Your position is; "the KJV is perfect; end of, no discussion. Here is where all the other translations differ from the KJV, therefore THEY must be at fault, because the KJV is perfect."
If it was an unbiased, proper sensible "let's look at the evidence and compare with the Greek" debate, I'd be more interested.

Besides that, you have already condemned those who use modern translations as "not having the word of God". Yet you won't - can't - show where they differ in doctrine.

 

[robycop3]

It's like panning through the dirt (Modern Translations) to get to the gold found in the KJV. There are many verses that do happen to agree. But in those places that do not agree, I side with the King James (much like you would do with the Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Greek). The difference between us is that I can understand 1600's English in many cases without the aid of a code key. This is not the case with Hebrew and Greek. You have to place your faith entirely in religious scholars who have a religious bias when they interpret certain words. This is less likely the case with a secular every day dictionary. You also are totally clueless as to what that language says or sounds like without any aid of some code key. This is not the case with 1600's English. There is some semblance of basic mechanics of how words in 1600's English were used and how they fit into Modern English used today. This is because our Modern English spawned out of 1600's English. So a person cannot pull the wool over other people's eyes with false doctrine (like with Hebrew and Greek) by quoting some ancient language that nobody knows.



The problem is that you have no perfect Bible that you can read today in a language that is close to your own. This means you are ever on the hunt to create or find the Word of God. The next translation coming into online Christian bookstores could be the one. Hold your breath. It could be the perfect Word this time. Nope. Not gonna happen. Why? Because all your Modern Translations always include the corrupt Alexandrian texts used by Westcott and Hort who were known occultists (Which new age practices is visible or reflective in the Modern translations we see today).



You act like this is the Hebrew and Greek. It is not. God's Word tells us to study to show yourself approved unto God. If I study a passage or verse in the KJV and look at the old dictionaries, and compare it with other verses, pray, and on occasion look to a Modern Translation if needed, etc. I can know what it is saying with no troubles. This is not possible with trusting the Biblical Hebrew and Greek that you did not grow up writing or speaking. Hebrew and Greek requires a backwards free fall of faith. 1600's English does not require that because you can see the connection between that kind of English without our English and it is less likely in many cases to have a religious bias like religious dictionaries. Jesus said beware of the scribe. The scribe are those who "tran-scribed" the Scriptures or the Law. The scribe of our day is the scholar. So the very thing Jesus warned us against, the OAO (Original Autograph Only) proponent runs openly into their arms with complete trust. Then again, this should not be a surprise.

Sir, YOU are trusting in scholars, same as any other Christian, if you can't read ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, & Koine Greek. I don't read them, so I depend upon having God's word in my own English.

I'm no genius, but I could read Chaucer's works in their original language & spellings when I was a teen, and, for a class project, I translated beowulf into our English, as well as read many of the "Round Table" knighthood tales in their original language so the KJV's English was no challenge for me. However, it IS a challenge for many to whom I witness, so I present God's word to them in OUR English.

And YOU have no perfect Bible version, either, as the KJV is FAR-from-perfect, as you've been shown here.

 

[Strong in Him]

I agree--I just wanted to give the accurate numbers for length was all.

Ok. I wasn't too sure of the length of time when I wrote it, and it could be different in other countries.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Sir, YOU are trusting in scholars, same as any other Christian, if you can't read ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, & Koine Greek. I don't read them, so I depend upon having God's word in my own English.

I'm no genius, but I could read Chaucer's works in their original language & spellings when I was a teen, and, for a class project, I translated beowulf into our English, as well as read many of the "Round Table" knighthood tales in their original language so the KJV's English was no challenge for me. However, it IS a challenge for many to whom I witness, so I present God's word to them in OUR English.

And YOU have no perfect Bible version, either, as the KJV is FAR-from-perfect, as you've been shown here.

See post #327.

 

[robycop3]

If there was no perfect Word of God today, I would not be a believer.
If God does not have the power to perfectly keep His Word, then what makes me trust one set of words over another set of words. It's either all true, or all false. One cannot pick and choose what they want to believe in the Bible as if it catered to our own personal belief systems. One either believes in a bible that is full of holes (mistakes) (i.e. a holey bible), or one believes in a Bible that is perfect and divine (a Holy Bible like the cover says). I choose to believe God's words are pure words (Psalms 12:6). You may not believe that. But I do. By faith. For faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). For me: This simply seems like the OAO Proponent is simply not having faith that there are pure words of the Lord that they can possess in their own two hands.

Several modern English Bible versions are quite a bit more-perfect than the KJV is.

But remember, all Bible translations are the products of God's perfect word being handled by imperfect men, so all have human error here-n-there.

 

[robycop3]

See post #327.

Still, you're depending on scholars, same as I. You're just trying to play the game, MAH skoller kin whup YOU skoller", & when the game goes against you, you try to move the goal posts by changing the subject. You have NOT tried to get by the proven goofs in the KJV.

 

[Strong in Him]

To all who doubt the KJV as the pure Word of God:

I am not going to be bothered trying to show something to folks who do not want to honestly see it. If you are open to the truth, fine, I can discuss it with you. If you are close minded as to the KJV being the Word of God, no amount of Scriptural evidence will convince you. No point in logic will convince you.

Which is true of you too.

Evidence 1: where in the KJV does it say that the KJV alone is the perfect word of God? Nowhere - therefore it's not Scriptural.
Evidence 2: Compare certain verses in the Greek with both the KJV, the NIV and others; this will show if the KJV is closest to the original. Challenge not accepted; OP not willing to show that he KJV is identical, or closest, to the Greek.

You can prove me wrong by doing one, or both, of these things, so logic says that it should be easy to prove me wrong - yet you can't.

 

[Strong in Him]

See post #327.

Translation; I have spent a long time writing posts to convince you that the KJV is perfect; if you doubt me, or challenge my position, I'm not going to talk to you.

 

[robycop3]

Which is true of you too.

Evidence 1: where in the KJV does it say that the KJV alone is the perfect word of God? Nowhere - therefore it's not Scriptural.
Evidence 2: Compare certain verses in the Greek with both the KJV, the NIV and others; this will show if the KJV is closest to the original. Challenge not accepted; OP not willing to show that he KJV is identical, or closest, to the Greek.

You can prove me wrong by doing one, or both, of these things, so logic says that it should be easy to prove me wrong - yet you can't.

I presented the well-known "Easter" goof to him - no feasible answer.

I presented him with the fact that the words "and shalt be" in Rev. 16:5 have NO MANUSCRIPT SUPPORT, proving the KJV ADDED to God's word - NO REPLY!

Bible Highlighter, you're as a dry creek bed - Lotsa promise, no water ! You cannot answer the fact of those 2 KJV goofs, but still insist it's perfect ! WHO WILL BELIEVE YOU in face of those uncontested FACTS ??????????????????????????????????

 

[Isilwen]

Translation; I have spent a long time writing posts to convince you that the KJV is perfect; if you doubt me, or challenge my position, I'm not going to talk to you.

This is him in a nutshell!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Translation; I have spent a long time writing posts to convince you that the KJV is perfect; if you doubt me, or challenge my position, I'm not going to talk to you.

Problem is that I have already discussed this topic with you in another thread.
Logic dictates that if somebody is not open after some debate or discussion there and here, it is time to move on.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Still, you're depending on scholars, same as I. You're just trying to play the game, MAH skoller kin whup YOU skoller", & when the game goes against you, you try to move the goal posts by changing the subject. You have NOT tried to get by the proven goofs in the KJV.

If you read the 30 points I made for my defense of the King James Bible, you will see it is more than just about the scholar. But yes, those in the Modern Translation camp are drinking in some small way from a well of two men. Westcott and Hort. They chose the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts that watered down doctrine, changed doctrine, changed commands. The deity of Christ is attacked. The blood atonement is attacked. The Incarnation is attacked. They did this because the Textus Receptus did not agree with their occultic or pagan beliefs. But knock yourself out and trust the Modern Versions or the corrupted Alexandrian texts.