Why the King James Bible is Still the Best and Most Accurate

[BeingThere]

We are not talking about a race of people but the one and only true Word of God. I have shown you multiple errors in Modern Bibles and it is obvious you don’t want to see it, my friend.

You didn't address BNR32FAN's good point, that judging all modern translations by one of the worst is fallacious to the core.

I read about the errors you say are in all modern translations. It appears the KJV is not exempt, however. Does this make all Bibles false? Of course not. There are thousands of manuscripts and humans have done our best to compile the most complete, coherent Bible possible.

Forgeries are replete in all Bibles. Does this make all Bibles erroneous? Of course not!

Scribes were prone to error, as well as altering text. The fact is, the texts we have today together give a thorough account and testimony of the truth. Saying the KJV texts were and are the best denies the fact that the different books of the New Testament were written at different times, and filtered through numbers of hands. The "best" text may not even exist! There wasn't even a Bible as we know it--a collection of books thought essential by a group of theilogians--until centuries after Christ.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_bibl.htm

 

[BeingThere]

Prove to me your traditions are divine in origin like the Bible is divine in origin.

That's a straw man argument. He never said traditions are divine in origin. Traditions are human in origin, as is the English language. What he said was that there are more ways to speak the truth than by quoting the Bible. In fact, the best way to speak the Truth is by living it!

It is the Son of God that is divine in origin. Your worshipping of the King James Bible is plain idolatry.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That's a straw man argument. He never said traditions are divine in origin. Traditions are human in origin, as is the English language. What he said was that there are more ways to speak the truth than by quoting the Bible. In fact, the best way to speak the Truth is by living it!

It is the Son of God that is divine in origin. Your worshipping of the King James Bible is plain idolatry.

It’s not a straw man argument because the Bible does not teach human traditions in religious practices as being approved of by God. If you were even remotely familiar with the Bible, you would know that. Jesus condemned human traditions. The word “traditions” in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 in the King James Bible is in reference to simply teachings of the Word of God (Which at the time of the early church could be oral or written, but eventually phased out to simply being the written Word of God). For they spoke teachings of God that was to be written down (i.e. Scripture). There is no such thing as what churches today call traditions that exist in the Holy Bible that are church traditions or human traditions. Even traditions by men today are written down. There were no extra biblical traditions. This is all a part of the problem with many cults we see today. They add another holy book or special writings to God’s Word. For example: The Book of Mormon, or the Koran, etc.

Mark 7:7-8
7 “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.”​

But the point here is that if the traditions are not divine in origin, they clearly they are not of God. It’s the only logical deduction. But many folks like to ignore logic and reason today in favor of something they want to be true.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You didn't address BNR32FAN's good point, that judging all modern translations by one of the worst is fallacious to the core.

I am not like your average KJB Only Christian. I actually use Modern Translations to update the 1600’s English in the KJB Cambridge Edition (circa. 1900) (of which I believe to be the pure Word of God or at the very least the most purest Word we can have in the English language). Actually, I like the NLT sometimes in that it clarifies the King James Bible at certain points and it makes the Old Testament easier to read. But the NLT is simply not my final Word of authority. If the NLT disagrees with the KJB, I simply side with the KJB. I look at Modern Translations as panning through the dirt to get to the gold that is in the King James Bible. For I may even quote a Modern Translation at times (with trying to include the KJB translation, as well). Many Christians today love the ESV, but I find that one to be off many times and it does not sit right with my spirit whenever I see an actual physical ESV Bible.

But the point here is that at the end of the day, we have to choose one Word of God and not many because not all bibles agree with each other. This is evident in the fact that you appear to agree with BNR32FAN in that the NLT is fallacious to the core. Well, I agree that it is fallacious in that it changes the Word of God or the King James Bible. I believe it’s origins or core is from the Vatican because that is what the Nestle and Aland’s 27th edition says for the New Testament Greek Critical Text (Which is where all Modern Bibles come from). This is simply a fact. It is a fact that some Christians have either agreed with and do not think it is a big deal, and or they think it is a lie or something (even though I shown proof of this by way of a snapshot of the actual page that shows the Vatican’s influence in Modern Bibles). If you are Catholic or do not have a problem with Catholicism, then there is no point to read any further. For I find the Catholic practices of praying to dead people and bowing down to statues, calling men their father, etc. to be unbiblical.

Also, in post #360, you did no appear to have a problem with the “Word on the Street” Bible Translation. If you are even remotely familiar with reading the Bible, you would know that this translation is far more fallacious than the NLT (or New Living Translation). You simply did not seem to recognize the problem and said as long as the story was intact. So now it appears like you are changing your tune? I am not buying it. The Bible simply does not seem that important to you if you think the Word on the Street Translation is okay. It actually insults the Word of God by it’s very own words that are used. There is no respect in the language itself.

I read about the errors you say are in all modern translations. It appears the KJV is not exempt, however. Does this make all Bibles false? Of course not. There are thousands of manuscripts and humans have done our best to compile the most complete, coherent Bible possible.

No offense, my friend, but it sounds like you are a new believer or you have never truly studied the Bible because you were not even aware of 2 Timothy 3:16-17 in what it says. So I don’t believe you are qualified to make the kind of decision to decide whether or not the King James Bible has errors in it or not. You simply have not done the study and compared the KJB next to Modern Bibles. For if you were to compare the KJB vs. Modern Bibles, you would see that many things are changed for the worse and not for the better. Doctrines have been changed (See here). Commands have been changed (See here). The devil’s name is placed in Modern Bibles where they do not belong (See here).

Forgeries are replete in all Bibles. Does this make all Bibles erroneous? Of course not!

If there is one mistake in God’s Word then it is not His Holy Word. Modern Translations clearly show a lack of their own inerrancy.

See, the problem with your line of thinking that all Bibles have forgeries or mistakes in them is…

“Who gets to decide what is true or false?”

Do you have a truth detector machine?
Do you just trust the scholars blindly in what they say?
With no perfect Bible, then one can sit in the seat of God and determine what they like or don’t like.
But the Bible says, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9).
So if a person is trusting their heart in what they want to be true, then that is no way to establish the truth. There has to be one standard of truth that we can test and know it is the true and pure Word of God. I believe that to clearly be the King James Bible because there are many evidences that points to that fact. But many simply do not like to be under a final Word of authority because they want to determine the truth. They want to sit in the seat of God and determine what He actually said. For it gives them a sense of power or control. But we must be humble and submit to the true and pure Word of God. That’s what this issue is really about.

Scribes were prone to error, as well as altering text.

Jesus said to beware of the scribes and not to implicitly trust them.

Luke 20:46
“Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;”

The fact is, the texts we have today together give a thorough account and testimony of the truth. Saying the KJV texts were and are the best denies the fact that the different books of the New Testament were written at different times, and filtered through numbers of hands. The "best" text may not even exist! There wasn't even a Bible as we know it--a collection of books thought essential by a group of theilogians--until centuries after Christ.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_bibl.htm

Then you really don’t know if you have the Word of God correctly. You could be trusting in something that is in error of faulty. So your faith is on shaky ground if you don’t have a pure Word of God that you can 100% trust. In fact, Modern Bibles are always under construction and they are ever changing sands on a beach. What one Bibles says that year in a Modern Bible can be changed to say something else in a few years. Your faith is constantly changing. It is never settled. For faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). My faith is settled because it is in one pure Word of God.

In fact, while I don’t believe the Modern Bible issue is a salvation issue, I believe it can be and or one day may be so. For I believe there will be a great falling away from the faith as the Bible talks about. I believe Modern scholarship way of thinking of having no perfect Bible will play into that. For if one’s faith is not 100% sure in a pure Word, then one is standing on uncertain ground that constantly moves or changes.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You didn't address BNR32FAN's good point, that judging all modern translations by one of the worst is fallacious to the core.

I read about the errors you say are in all modern translations. It appears the KJV is not exempt, however. Does this make all Bibles false? Of course not. There are thousands of manuscripts and humans have done our best to compile the most complete, coherent Bible possible.

Forgeries are replete in all Bibles. Does this make all Bibles erroneous? Of course not!

Scribes were prone to error, as well as altering text. The fact is, the texts we have today together give a thorough account and testimony of the truth. Saying the KJV texts were and are the best denies the fact that the different books of the New Testament were written at different times, and filtered through numbers of hands. The "best" text may not even exist! There wasn't even a Bible as we know it--a collection of books thought essential by a group of theilogians--until centuries after Christ.

Translation errors and forgeries in the Bible

I did not address his point right away because I have a life outside of the forums. I work at a job and I am married. Sometimes I also do not feel all points need to be addressed because it would not help them by my replying. I don’t think folks addressed all my points I brought up here. Why? Because you cannot refute the truth. I would love for people to seriously address each and every point I brought up on the 30 reasons for the King James Bible with substantial replies. If a person does address one of my points: What I get is merely opinion or disagreement and not any substantial evidence, or biblical proof in that they are correct in any way. It’s all just about their shaking one’s head and or in hitting the disagree button.

For example: I pointed out an error 2 Samuel 21:19 in Modern Bibles like the NASB in that it says Elhanan killed Goliath when in reality it was actually David who killed Goliath. They say the words “the brother” are not in the text in 2 Samuel 21:19 (of which we can see at BlueLetterBible in the Strong’s Concordance). The KJB gets this fact right, though. Many folks tried to come up with hair brained theories to try to defend the error in the NASB. But folks did not appear to be aware of 1 Chronicles 20:5 (that states the same thing in 2 Samuel 21:19) that has the actual textual manuscript evidence that says “brother.” When presented with this fact, they told me that 1 Chronicles 20:5 is not referring to the same event in 2 Samuel 21:19. That to me is unbelievable. Anyone can clearly see they are talking about the same event. Read the chapter and compare the verses and it is clear. Not even Modern scholarship would agree with them. But see… that is the depths people will go to deny a perfect Bible. They go beyond all logic, rhyme, or reason. They will take anything except the idea of a perfect Bible.

 

[BeingThere]

It’s not a straw man argument because the Bible does not teach human traditions in religious practices as being approved of by God. If you were even remotely familiar with the Bible, you would know that. Jesus condemned human traditions. The word “traditions” in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 in the King James Bible is in reference to simply teachings of the Word of God (Which at the time of the early church could be oral or written, but eventually phased out to simply being the written Word of God). For they spoke teachings of God that was to be written down (i.e. Scripture). There is no such thing as what churches today call traditions that exist in the Holy Bible that are church traditions or human traditions. Even traditions by men today are written down. There were no extra biblical traditions. This is all a part of the problem with many cults we see today. They add another holy book or special writings to God’s Word. For example: The Book of Mormon, or the Koran, etc.

Mark 7:7-8
7 “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.”​

But the point here is that if the traditions are not divine in origin, they clearly they are not of God. It’s the only logical deduction. But many folks like to ignore logic and reason today in favor of something they want to be true.

Going back to the original post: "the Bible is "not all there is." Again, no one said traditions are handed to us by God. What he said was that we can express our understanding of what we learn in the Bible, and more importantly what the spirit teaches us, so long as does not contradict Biblical teachings, in more ways than simple Bible exposition. I repeat, and agree, that traditions are no more divine than the wheat used to make communion wafers. The tradition of story-telling is human, yet the truth behind the Bible is divine. If someone writes a book of Christian parables, that truth behind the story is divine because the parables explain spiritual reality, so long as they agree with the Bible, and more importantly with what the spirit teaches us. Because we often grow dull of things repeated, when the same story is put into a different disguise, we have greater interest. Write a story in your own words, and you will understand it better. If the Bible is the core of our religion, the root of it, then everything else is expression, the flowering. This is what the OP meant by, "the Bible is not all there is."

Take a communion service: the Bible never says that humans today are to pretend that the last supper happens every Sunday. People do it in order to reinforce their belief in God and the atoning sacrifice he gave. Hopefully, nothing more, but often much less--that's the problem with ritual, that the pretending can trick people into thinking they're actually communing with God, however this can happen with or without overt rituals--my ritual of reading the Bible everyday could just be part of my own pretentiousness and false piety. But that is for me to discover, not anyone else.

Can one say this tradition is superfluous? Sure, and if we worship the ritual more than what the ritual signifies, then we are breaking Rule #1. I am of the mind that people don't need these traditions in order to be saved, and that is actually, in my opinion, what the Bible teaches. But time and history tell us again and again that this is what people need or want. I guess what I am saying is that it is not for me to judge people based on their cultural practices. Not for you to, either, perhaps.

 

[BeingThere]

Commands have been changed (See here). The devil’s name is placed in Modern Bibles where they do not belong (See here).

I have reviewed Revelation 13:1 in 10 different translations, 9 of which are modern translations. Your concern is that the dragon, in some modern translations, is said to be standing on the shore of the sea, whereas the King James does not say that. This is what the King James says:

1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
(Revelation 13:1)

Here is what the others say:

This is from Young's Literal Translation, which says exactly what the King James says, although Young vociferously denounced the King James as unreliable (I don't agree or disagree):
View attachment 310263

And this is from Andy Gaus's The Unvarnished New Testament:

Out of the 10 translations I just mentioned, 4, including the King James, say nothing of the dragon standing on the seashore, but implying the dragon's presence before the beast rises from the sea. The other 6 translations above (including the last one which was poorly cropped) all say this, essentially:

"And the dragon took his position on the sands of the sea."

This sentence does not say that the dragon "owns" the land, you said that. This sentence does not replace John, the witness, with the dragon, you said that. In fact, how can John not be on the seashore if he is witnessing the dragon, who is on the seashore? This is a superfluous statement, and one that the King James translators probably omitted for that reason.

If you want to make your own translation, feel free. Learn Greek and read whichever text you want for your own understanding. I guarantee you will think at some point to use different language, or phrasing, than the King James translators used. That is part of the art and science of translation. There is no 100% accurate translation of any book into a different language. In fact, there is no 100% accurate translation of a story from one person to another; we all "translate," or filter stories based on our own knowledge and experience. There is no perfect translation. If there were, everyone who has ever read the Bible would be saved.

That brings me to my main point:

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
(II Corinthians 3:6)

One can read the Bible diligently, memorize it verse for verse, quote from it freely, and yet understand nothing of its simple and perfect truth. The Gospel is simple and perfect, not the letter, but the Gospel... of Christ. Attachment to the letter, as if salvation were some secret formula, implies that intellect is responsible for our salvation. We both know, at least intellectually, this is not true. Now, can we know it spiritually? When we know something spiritually, there is no need to defend it, because it simply is.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Going back to the original post: "the Bible is "not all there is." Again, no one said traditions are handed to us by God. What he said was that we can express our understanding of what we learn in the Bible, and more importantly what the spirit teaches us, so long as does not contradict Biblical teachings, in more ways than simple Bible exposition. I repeat, and agree, that traditions are no more divine than the wheat used to make communion wafers. The tradition of story-telling is human, yet the truth behind the Bible is divine. If someone writes a book of Christian parables, that truth behind the story is divine because the parables explain spiritual reality, so long as they agree with the Bible, and more importantly with what the spirit teaches us. Because we often grow dull of things repeated, when the same story is put into a different disguise, we have greater interest. Write a story in your own words, and you will understand it better. If the Bible is the core of our religion, the root of it, then everything else is expression, the flowering. This is what the OP meant by, "the Bible is not all there is."

Take a communion service: the Bible never says that humans today are to pretend that the last supper happens every Sunday. People do it in order to reinforce their belief in God and the atoning sacrifice he gave. Hopefully, nothing more, but often much less--that's the problem with ritual, that the pretending can trick people into thinking they're actually communing with God, however this can happen with or without overt rituals--my ritual of reading the Bible everyday could just be part of my own pretentiousness and false piety. But that is for me to discover, not anyone else.

Can one say this tradition is superfluous? Sure, and if we worship the ritual more than what the ritual signifies, then we are breaking Rule #1. I am of the mind that people don't need these traditions in order to be saved, and that is actually, in my opinion, what the Bible teaches. But time and history tell us again and again that this is what people need or want. I guess what I am saying is that it is not for me to judge people based on their cultural practices. Not for you to, either, perhaps.

What you offer here is merely opinion and not any actual hard core fact. Jesus condemned human traditions (Mark 7:1-8), and He never showed once that He was in favor of them. So we have to conclude that the word “traditions” mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 is in reference to simply the teachings of God’s Word. In fact, Paul said that these traditions (or teachings) are by either the audible word or epistle (a written form of communication). So this was not some kind of oral tradition of Jesus that was passed down alone as many such churches like the Catholic Church or Orthodox Church teach. But hey, if you want to run off and do something outside of the Bible when it comes to religious practices… go knock yourself out. My soul is too important to play games with. For if you knew your Bible, you would know God does not favor going outside of His Word when it comes to worshiping Him and following His will.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I have reviewed Revelation 13:1 in 10 different translations, 9 of which are modern translations. Your concern is that the dragon, in some modern translations, is said to be standing on the shore of the sea, whereas the King James does not say that. This is what the King James says:

1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
(Revelation 13:1)

Here is what the others say:
View attachment 310256


This is from Young's Literal Translation, which says exactly what the King James says, although Young vociferously denounced the King James as unreliable (I don't agree or disagree):
View attachment 310263

And this is from Andy Gaus's The Unvarnished New Testament:
View attachment 310262

Out of the 10 translations I just mentioned, 4, including the King James, say nothing of the dragon standing on the seashore, but implying the dragon's presence before the beast rises from the sea. The other 6 translations above (including the last one which was poorly cropped) all say this, essentially:

"And the dragon took his position on the sands of the sea."

This sentence does not say that the dragon "owns" the land, you said that. This sentence does not replace John, the witness, with the dragon, you said that. In fact, how can John not be on the seashore if he is witnessing the dragon, who is on the seashore? This is a superfluous statement, and one that the King James translators probably omitted for that reason.

If you want to make your own translation, feel free. Learn Greek and read whichever text you want for your own understanding. I guarantee you will think at some point to use different language, or phrasing, than the King James translators used. That is part of the art and science of translation. There is no 100% accurate translation of any book into a different language. In fact, there is no 100% accurate translation of a story from one person to another; we all "translate," or filter stories based on our own knowledge and experience. There is no perfect translation. If there were, everyone who has ever read the Bible would be saved.

That brings me to my main point:

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
(II Corinthians 3:6)

One can read the Bible diligently, memorize it verse for verse, quote from it freely, and yet understand nothing of its simple and perfect truth. The Gospel is simple and perfect, not the letter, but the Gospel... of Christ. Attachment to the letter, as if salvation were some secret formula, implies that intellect is responsible for our salvation. We both know, at least intellectually, this is not true. Now, can we know it spiritually? When we know something spiritually, there is no need to defend it, because it simply is.

The thing is that I cannot learn Koine Greek as it was once taught in Bible times because it is a dead language that nobody speaks anymore. I have no way of knowing if my interpretation is correct unless I had an apostle Paul around. So I would only be guessing as to what Koine Greek says. But even in the Modern Scholarship Crowd, there is no perfect Bible that exists. You basically said so yourself. So you are forever on a quest to piece together what God said vs. just reading and believing His Word. You can end up wasting your whole life trying to figure out what God said vs. getting busy in loving God and others according to what His Word says (because you would have a perfect Word or Bible if you believed the KJB was the one and only pure Word of God). But you don’t want that. The idea most likely is not appealing to you.

As for Revelation 13:1: There is no Greek manuscript that actually says “dragon.” So they made it up. They put that into the translation. There is nowhere in the context of the Bible that would support this, either. That’s the problem with Modern Bibles.

Psalms 8:6 says, “Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:”. So yes. Standing upon something means you have some kind of dominion over it. Joshua said to stand upon the necks of his enemies (Joshua 10:24). This was to show that they had conquered them and they had dominion over them.

Genesis 22:17 says, “That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;”

The idea is that the descendants of Abraham will possess (own) the gate of their enemies (i.e. the entry way of the fenced in fortress wall around the city) in the fact that they conquered them. Seeing the apostle John is a part of Abraham’s descendants, John would be among the sand, but if it is the dragon standing on the seashore, it is as if the dragon is having dominion or in the fact that he conquered the descendants of Abraham (who is like the sand of the sea).

“The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” (Psalms 110:1).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I have reviewed Revelation 13:1 in 10 different translations, 9 of which are modern translations. Your concern is that the dragon, in some modern translations, is said to be standing on the shore of the sea, whereas the King James does not say that. This is what the King James says:

1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
(Revelation 13:1)

Here is what the others say:
View attachment 310256


This is from Young's Literal Translation, which says exactly what the King James says, although Young vociferously denounced the King James as unreliable (I don't agree or disagree):
View attachment 310263

And this is from Andy Gaus's The Unvarnished New Testament:
View attachment 310262

Out of the 10 translations I just mentioned, 4, including the King James, say nothing of the dragon standing on the seashore, but implying the dragon's presence before the beast rises from the sea. The other 6 translations above (including the last one which was poorly cropped) all say this, essentially:

"And the dragon took his position on the sands of the sea."

This sentence does not say that the dragon "owns" the land, you said that. This sentence does not replace John, the witness, with the dragon, you said that. In fact, how can John not be on the seashore if he is witnessing the dragon, who is on the seashore? This is a superfluous statement, and one that the King James translators probably omitted for that reason.

If you want to make your own translation, feel free. Learn Greek and read whichever text you want for your own understanding. I guarantee you will think at some point to use different language, or phrasing, than the King James translators used. That is part of the art and science of translation. There is no 100% accurate translation of any book into a different language. In fact, there is no 100% accurate translation of a story from one person to another; we all "translate," or filter stories based on our own knowledge and experience. There is no perfect translation. If there were, everyone who has ever read the Bible would be saved.

That brings me to my main point:

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
(II Corinthians 3:6)

One can read the Bible diligently, memorize it verse for verse, quote from it freely, and yet understand nothing of its simple and perfect truth. The Gospel is simple and perfect, not the letter, but the Gospel... of Christ. Attachment to the letter, as if salvation were some secret formula, implies that intellect is responsible for our salvation. We both know, at least intellectually, this is not true. Now, can we know it spiritually? When we know something spiritually, there is no need to defend it, because it simply is.

What if I am correct? What if indeed this is a corruption by the devil in that he is trying to place his name in the place of the apostle John and make it look like he is standing upon the saints or Abraham’s descendants? That would not be good if such were the case.

I mean, if this was the only verse corruption of the devil wrongfully placing his name where it does not belong in the Bible, you might be on to something, but this is not the only case. There are other verses you have to bury your hand in the sand over, as well. My guess is that it will not be a problem for you to continue to keep burying your head in the sand despite what truth I bring up to defend the King James Bible as God’s pure Word (or at the very least, the most purest Word we can have in the English language).

 

[BeingThere]

What you offer here is merely opinion and not any actual hard core fact. Jesus condemned human traditions (Mark 7:1-8), and He never showed once that He was in favor of them. So we have to conclude that the word “traditions” mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 is in reference to simply the teachings of God’s Word. In fact, Paul said that these traditions (or teachings) are by either the audible word or epistle (a written form of communication). So this was not some kind of oral tradition of Jesus that was passed down alone as many such churches like the Catholic Church or Orthodox Church teach. But hey, if you want to run off and do something outside of the Bible when it comes to religious practices… go knock yourself out. My soul is too important to play games with. For if you knew your Bible, you would know God does not favor going outside of His Word when it comes to worshiping Him and following His will.

Have you ever taken communion? That is a tradition that was created by the Catholic Church and practiced throughout the world. We both know that the bread itself is not the flesh of Jesus, nor the wine blood, but the significance behind the act is what is important. Jesus never said for his spiritual descendants to eat bread or drink wine in remembrance of him, yet we "pretend" the last supper occurs every Sunday. Is anyone's soul condemned for doing so? If they eat and drink without communing in Spirit, then yes, but it is not the tradition that makes it so.

Yet I completely agree with you that human traditions centered around Jesus are meaningless, but I do not think they are damning, lest they be done in pretense and insincerity, in which case those practitioners are condemned already.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Have you ever taken communion? That is a tradition that was created by the Catholic Church and practiced throughout the world. We both know that the bread itself is not the flesh of Jesus, nor the wine blood, but the significance behind the act is what is important. Jesus never said for his spiritual descendants to eat bread or drink wine in remembrance of him, yet we "pretend" the last supper occurs every Sunday. Is anyone's soul condemned for doing so? If they eat and drink without communing in Spirit, then yes, but it is not the tradition that makes it so.

Yet I completely agree with you that human traditions centered around Jesus are meaningless, but I do not think they are damning, lest they be done in pretense and insincerity, in which case those practitioners are condemned already.

I don’t believe in the Catholic Church’s version of communion. In fact, I do not even like the word “communion” because it associated with the Catholic Church. I believe in the Lord’s supper as practiced in the New Testament. Do this in remembrance of Him. Not that we are to do this because Jesus is actually in the elements of the bread and wine (grape juice). Jesus already lives inside believers and so the idea that He has to be in the elements of the bread and wine is kind of pointless. Also, Catholics believe the Lord’s supper is done as a part of salvation. However, nowhere does Scripture say it is for salvation. For when Jesus said that we must drink of his blood and eat of his flesh, he was referring to John chapter 4 in how His meat (flesh) is to do the will of the Father. The blood is obviously trusting in the blood of Christ for salvation according to Romans 3:25.

 

[BeingThere]

The thing is that I cannot learn Koine Greek as it was once taught in Bible times because it is a dead language that nobody speaks anymore. I have no way of knowing if my interpretation is correct unless I had an apostle Paul around. So I would only be guessing as to what Koine Greek says. But even in the Modern Scholarship Crowd, there is no perfect Bible that exists. You basically said so yourself. So you are forever on a quest to piece together what God said vs. just reading and believing His Word. You can end up wasting your whole life trying to figure out what God said vs. getting busy in loving God and others according to what His Word says (because you would have a perfect Word or Bible if you believed the KJB was the one and only pure Word of God). But you don’t want that. The idea most likely is not appealing to you.
.

I said there is no perfect Bible. There is a perfect Word of God, and the two are different. The Bible leads us to water, and Christ converts our soul to God. We must drink ourselves. I am not forever on a quest to piece together what God said. In fact, I am perfectly content if there were no more translations henceforth. The ones we have are enough. Even the KJB is enough, yet reading it carries prerequisites. It is like one needs to translate the translation in order to understand what it says sometimes.

I fully respect the KJB, but I recognize the need for contemporary translations, and am not convinced that the devil has his hand in them. In fact, if anything the devil wants the Bible to remain in obscure, antiquated phraseology. The KJB is not "the one and only pure word of God." The one and only Word is Christ, and the tools we have to spread his teachings are multifarious, adaptive because those tools are human. They are language and story. His teachings are not ours, but our methods of communicating them are.

 

[BeingThere]

As for Revelation 13:1: There is no Greek manuscript that actually says “dragon.” So they made it up. They put that into the translation. There is nowhere in the context of the Bible that would support this, either. That’s the problem with Modern Bibles. .

I appreciate your posts, and it is not my intention to get into a shooting match. I try to respond in pieces to make it easier to follow.

This is what the KJB says:

16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
(Revelation 12:16, 17; 13:1, 2)

Notice how the dragon is present before during and after the beast's arrival. In some modern translations, the dragon is said to be standing on the seashore. This is likely for continuity, as the dragon is still present at the time of the beast's surfacing from the ocean. This is not the translators "inventing" the dragon. This is a nuance of translation: in order to make it more clear, some translators include words or sentences that they think clarifies the text. The King James translators did exactly the same thing. The devil had no part in it.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I said there is no perfect Bible. There is a perfect Word of God, and the two are different. The Bible leads us to water, and Christ converts our soul to God. We must drink ourselves. I am not forever on a quest to piece together what God said. In fact, I am perfectly content if there were no more translations henceforth. The ones we have are enough. Even the KJB is enough, yet reading it carries prerequisites. It is like one needs to translate the translation in order to understand what it says sometimes.

I fully respect the KJB, but I recognize the need for contemporary translations, and am not convinced that the devil has his hand in them. In fact, if anything the devil wants the Bible to remain in obscure, antiquated phraseology. The KJB is not "the one and only pure word of God." The one and only Word is Christ, and the tools we have to spread his teachings are multifarious, adaptive because those tools are human. They are language and story. His teachings are not ours, but our methods of communicating them are.

I disagree. There is a…

Symbiotic Relationship Between
The Living Word, & the Communicated Word:

1. Christ is good (John 10:11, John 10:14), and the word is good (1 Kings 2:42).
   
   
2. Christ is the truth (John 14:6), and the word is the truth (John 17:17).
   
   
3. Christ is called Faithful and True (Revelation 19:11), and the word is called faithful and true (Revelation 22:6).
   
   
4. Christ is pure (1 John 3:3), and the word is pure (Proverbs 30:5).
   
   
5. Christ is incorruptible (Acts of the Apostles 2:27), and the word is incorruptible (1 Peter 1:23).
   
   
6. Christ abides forever (John 12:34), and the word abides forever (1 Peter 1:23).
   
   
7. Christ’s name: “Jesus” is above all names (Which would include God’s name) (Philippians 2:9-10), and the word is above God’s name (Psalms 138:2).
   
   
8. Christ has flaming eyes of fire (Revelation 19:12), and the Word is like a fire (Jeremiah 23:29).
   
   
9. Christ can burn things like a fire (Matthew 3:12), and the word can burn things like a fire (Luke 24:32).
   
   
10. Christ can be eaten (John 6:57), and the word can be eaten (Jeremiah 15:16).
    
    
11. Christ is like the discovery of treasure (Matthew 13:44-46, cf. 2 Corinthians 4:7-10), and the word is like the discovery of treasure (Psalms 119:162).
    
    
12. Christ is the light (John 8:12), and the word is light (Psalms 119:105).
    
    
13. Christ is life (John 14:6, 1 John 5:12), and the word is life (John 6:63).
    
    
14. Christ is the living bread (John 6:51), and the word is the living bread (Matthew 4:4).
    
    
15. Christ is eternal life (Romans 6:23, 1 Timothy 6:16, 1 John 5:20) and the word is eternal life (John 6:68) (cf. Matthew 24:35, John 6:63).
    
    
16. Christ quickens (makes alive) (John 5:21), and the word quickens (makes alive) (Psalms 119:50).
    
    
17. It is by Christ which makes the gospel possible (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), and it is by the word which makes the gospel possible (1 Peter 1:25).
    
    
18. Christ is near to men (Acts of the Apostles 17:27) (Revelation 3:20) (Psalms 145:18), and the word is near to men (Romans 10:8).
    
    
19. Christ discerns the heart (Matthew 9:4, Luke 9:47), and the word discerns the heart (Hebrews 4:12).
    
    
20. Christ can get men through a storm (Mark 4:35-41), and the word can get men through a storm (Matthew 7:24-25).
    
    
21. Christ sanctifies (John 17:19), and the word sanctifies (John 17:17).
    
    
22. A person can stumble over Christ (Romans 9:33, 1 Peter 2:5-8), and a person can stumble over the word (1 Peter 2:8).
    
    
23. Christ will judge men (John 5:22), and the word will judge men (John 12:48).
    
    
24. Christ’s bones were never broken (John 19:36 cf. Psalms 34:20), and the word is never broken (John 10:35).
    
    
25. Believers are told to seek after Christ (Matthew 28:5, Mark 16:6), and believers are told to seek after the word (Isaiah 34:16).
    
    
26. Christ is our hope (1 Thessalonians 1:3, Colossians 1:27, 1 Timothy 1:1), and the word is our hope (Psalms 130:5).
    
    
27. Believers are to have the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:16), and believers are to meditate (use their mind) upon the word (Psalms 119:148, 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV).
    
    
28. Christ is to be heard and obeyed (Matthew 7:24), and the word is to be heard and obeyed (James 1:22).
    
    
29. The love of God is within Christ (Romans 8:39), and keeping the word places the love of God within us (1 John 2:5) (Also see John 14:23).
    
    
30. Christ is the way to the living waters, which is the Holy Spirit (John 7:37-39), and the washing of the water of the word (Ephesians 5:25-27) (which is obedience to God) is the way to having the Spirit (Acts of the Apostles 5:32).
    
    
31. Christ is like the foundation that is a part of a house (1 Corinthians 3:9, 1 Corinthians 3:11), and He is like a rock (1 Corinthians 10:4), and the obeying the word is like a house built upon the rock (Matthew 7:24).
    
    
32. Believers are to follow after the steps of Christ (1 Peter 2:21), and believers are to order their steps in the word (Psalms 119:133).
    
    
33. Christ breathed the Spirit upon his faithful chosen (John 20:22), and the word is “inspired by God” (i.e. God breathed) for the benefit of his faithful chosen (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
    
    
34. Christ is the way to having the fruits of righteousness (Philippians 1:11), and the word is the way to being instructed in righteousness so to be perfect unto all good works (fruits) (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
    
    
35. Christ can abide in us (John 15:4-7) (Ephesians 3:17) (Philippians 4:13), and the word can abide in us (John 15:7, Psalms 119:11).
    
    
36. Christ dwells in our hearts (Ephesians 3:17), and the word dwells in our hearts (Colossians 3:16).
    
    
37. Believers can be hidden in Christ (Colossians 3:3), and the word can be hidden in believers (Psalms 119:11).
    
    
38. Christ is always with us (Matthew 28:20), and the word is always with us (Psalms 119:98).
    
    
39. Christ can make our joy full (John 15:11), and the word can make our joy full (1 John 1:4).
    
    
40. Believers’ hearts rejoice with Christ (John 16:22), and believers’ hearts rejoice with the word (Jeremiah 15:16).

..41. Christ is called a seed (Galatians 3:16), and the word is called a seed (1 Peter 1:23, Luke 8:11) (Note: See my post below here for further details).


The communicated word of God that we have today is the Bible.

“So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” (Isaiah 55:11).​

Jesus (the Living Word) was sent by the commandment (mouth) of the Father. Jesus said and did everything the Father told Him to do (John 12:49) (John 14:31).

What is interesting is that the Living Word accomplished that which the Father commanded Him to do and to prosper (accomplish) that thing He sent to do (i.e. Jesus suffered on the cross, and said, “It is finished” and died for man’s sins). Jesus was risen three days later, and ascended to the Father. God’s Word (the living Word) did not return void by whom the Father sent.

The communicated Word can also be sent out and not return void, as well. For many have believed and have stayed faithful to what God’s Word says.

In the creation: The Word made flesh (John 1:1, John 1:14) (i.e. Christ) created everything. In the beginning God spoke words to bring forth the creation in six days (Genesis 1:1-31).

So in the beginning was the Living Word, and the communicated Word.

In the end of this sinful world: Christ will return (Revelation 19:11-21) and a sharp sword will proceed from His mouth. This sword could be the “sword of the Spirit,” (Which is the Word of God) or it could be symbolic of such (Ephesians 6:17).

So in the end there will be the Living Word, and the communicated Word.

For at Christ’s return: His name is called The “Word of God.” (Revelation 19:13) (Living Word).

On His thigh, and vesture is a name written (words) “KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.” (Communicated Word).

Jesus was beaten to a pulp and crucified on a tree.

The Word we have today (the Bible) is a result of pulp made from a tree.

Jesus was the Word made flesh (covered in skin).

The Word we have today (the Bible) is popular to be available covered in skin (leather).

Words on the page hang on this tree (paper) (the Bible),
just like the Living Word hung on a tree (the cross).

 

[BeingThere]

The idea is that the descendants of Abraham will possess (own) the gate of their enemies (i.e. the entry way of the fenced in fortress wall around the city) in the fact that they conquered them. Seeing the apostle John is a part of Abraham’s descendants, John would be among the sand, but if it is the dragon standing on the seashore, it is as if the dragon is having dominion or in the fact that he conquered the descendants of Abraham (who is like the sand of the sea).

“The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” (Psalms 110:1).

I fully understand the argument you are trying to make. However, I don't think it is valid here. I have two points:

1] Though the Bible contains imagery and metaphor that is repeated (part of its vocabulary, if you will), one cannot read it as formulaic, as if every instance of standing in a certain place signified dominion or ownership. You are reading far too into the Bible by connecting the dots, saying John is the sand of the sea and the dragon, having waited on the beach is owning Abraham's descendants. Maybe I'm wrong, but point 2 renders that moot.

2] The dragon, according to the Living Bible, "stood waiting on an ocean beach." In the NIV, the dragon "stood on the shore of the sea." We all know what happened to the dragon in the end, as we know what happened to Pharaoh's Egypt:

17 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, In my dream, behold, I stood upon the bank of the river:
18 And, behold, there came up out of the river seven kine, fatfleshed and well favoured; and they fed in a meadow:
(Genesis 41:17, 18)

Even if the Bible author explicitly meant "standing upon" to mean dominion, the dragon was slain, the Jews escaped Egypt, and the devil certainly hasn't claimed dominion over the Bible. The moral of the story? don't read into the Bible so much that you lose the meaning, and don't defend other people's intellectual strongholds for them regarding translations which are not meant for you to read. Read the KJB, and the NIV, but let everyone choose what speaks to them.

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
(II Corinthians 3:6)

 

[BeingThere]

What if I am correct? What if indeed this is a corruption by the devil in that he is trying to place his name in the place of the apostle John and make it look like he is standing upon the saints or Abraham’s descendants? That would not be good if such were the case.

I mean, if this was the only verse corruption of the devil wrongfully placing his name where it does not belong in the Bible, you might be on to something, but this is not the only case. There are other verses you have to bury your hand in the sand over, as well. My guess is that it will not be a problem for you to continue to keep burying your head in the sand despite what truth I bring up to defend the King James Bible as God’s pure Word (or at the very least, the most purest Word we can have in the English language).

Show me what you mean when you say, "the devil wrongfully placing his name where it does not belong". I just showed you how translators have some independence over their translations, just as the KJB translators had. In fact, the word Spirit, in the Aramaic is translated as "breath," but the Catholic Church's doctrine was imprinted in the translator's religious background. They were not isolated from doctrinal impositions. My point is not that the KJB is flawed, it is that the other translations are not simply because they don't comport as you wish them to to the KJB.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I appreciate your posts, and it is not my intention to get into a shooting match. I try to respond in pieces to make it easier to follow.

This is what the KJB says:

16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
(Revelation 12:16, 17; 13:1, 2)

Notice how the dragon is present before during and after the beast's arrival. In some modern translations, the dragon is said to be standing on the seashore. This is likely for continuity, as the dragon is still present at the time of the beast's surfacing from the ocean. This is not the translators "inventing" the dragon. This is a nuance of translation: in order to make it more clear, some translators include words or sentences that they think clarifies the text. The King James translators did exactly the same thing. The devil had no part in it.

If Revelation 13:1 was the only concern you might be right. But there are other verses that the devil tries to place his name where it does not belong.

In Isaiah 14:12, the devil's name "Lucifer" is replaced with "Day Star" or the "Morning Star."
Yes, I am aware that "morning stars" are angels in the book of Job.

But Modern Translations also say this is the Shining Star or the Son of the Dawn. Why?

Jesus says,
"I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." (Revelation 22:16).

So Jesus is the BRIGHT and MORNING star!

Yet, the individual in Isaiah 14:12 in Modern Translations is called the shining (bright) and morning star or the Day Star, etc.

So the devil is trying to be like the most high here. He is taking a similar sounding title of Jesus in Isaiah 14:12.

For where is the bright and morning star up in the sky?
It is the sun.
That is why He is called the bright and morning star because the sun is bright and rises in the morning.

Also, Lucifer means "light bearer."
Scripture tells us this is what it means.

"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." (2 Corinthians 11:14).

The word "angel" also means "messenger." So 2 Corinthians 11:14 is saying that Satan is a light messenger or light bearer. In fact, when Satan is described with having all kinds of jewelry on him, it was symbolic of who he was. Certain gemstones refract light. They are not light themselves, but they merely reflect whatever light is in existence. Gemstones are like little light bearers. So how fitting the name "Lucifer" is for the devil. Yet, Modern Translations seek to give the devil a name that is similar to Jesus. This is wrong (of course).

Then there is Daniel 3:25 of which I already discussed already in this thread.

 

[BeingThere]

I disagree. There is a…

Symbiotic Relationship Between
The Living Word, & the Communicated Word:

1. Christ is good (John 10:11, John 10:14), and the word is good (1 Kings 2:42).
   
   
2. Christ is the truth (John 14:6), and the word is the truth (John 17:17).
   
   
3. Christ is called Faithful and True (Revelation 19:11), and the word is called faithful and true (Revelation 22:6).
   
   
4. Christ is pure (1 John 3:3), and the word is pure (Proverbs 30:5).
   
   
5. Christ is incorruptible (Acts of the Apostles 2:27), and the word is incorruptible (1 Peter 1:23).
   
   
6. Christ abides forever (John 12:34), and the word abides forever (1 Peter 1:23).
   
   
7. Christ’s name: “Jesus” is above all names (Which would include God’s name) (Philippians 2:9-10), and the word is above God’s name (Psalms 138:2).
   
   
8. Christ has flaming eyes of fire (Revelation 19:12), and the Word is like a fire (Jeremiah 23:29).
   
   
9. Christ can burn things like a fire (Matthew 3:12), and the word can burn things like a fire (Luke 24:32).
   
   
10. Christ can be eaten (John 6:57), and the word can be eaten (Jeremiah 15:16).
    
    
11. Christ is like the discovery of treasure (Matthew 13:44-46, cf. 2 Corinthians 4:7-10), and the word is like the discovery of treasure (Psalms 119:162).
    
    
12. Christ is the light (John 8:12), and the word is light (Psalms 119:105).
    
    
13. Christ is life (John 14:6, 1 John 5:12), and the word is life (John 6:63).
    
    
14. Christ is the living bread (John 6:51), and the word is the living bread (Matthew 4:4).
    
    
15. Christ is eternal life (Romans 6:23, 1 Timothy 6:16, 1 John 5:20) and the word is eternal life (John 6:68) (cf. Matthew 24:35, John 6:63).
    
    
16. Christ quickens (makes alive) (John 5:21), and the word quickens (makes alive) (Psalms 119:50).
    
    
17. It is by Christ which makes the gospel possible (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), and it is by the word which makes the gospel possible (1 Peter 1:25).
    
    
18. Christ is near to men (Acts of the Apostles 17:27) (Revelation 3:20) (Psalms 145:18), and the word is near to men (Romans 10:8).
    
    
19. Christ discerns the heart (Matthew 9:4, Luke 9:47), and the word discerns the heart (Hebrews 4:12).
    
    
20. Christ can get men through a storm (Mark 4:35-41), and the word can get men through a storm (Matthew 7:24-25).
    
    
21. Christ sanctifies (John 17:19), and the word sanctifies (John 17:17).
    
    
22. A person can stumble over Christ (Romans 9:33, 1 Peter 2:5-8), and a person can stumble over the word (1 Peter 2:8).
    
    
23. Christ will judge men (John 5:22), and the word will judge men (John 12:48).
    
    
24. Christ’s bones were never broken (John 19:36 cf. Psalms 34:20), and the word is never broken (John 10:35).
    
    
25. Believers are told to seek after Christ (Matthew 28:5, Mark 16:6), and believers are told to seek after the word (Isaiah 34:16).
    
    
26. Christ is our hope (1 Thessalonians 1:3, Colossians 1:27, 1 Timothy 1:1), and the word is our hope (Psalms 130:5).
    
    
27. Believers are to have the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:16), and believers are to meditate (use their mind) upon the word (Psalms 119:148, 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV).
    
    
28. Christ is to be heard and obeyed (Matthew 7:24), and the word is to be heard and obeyed (James 1:22).
    
    
29. The love of God is within Christ (Romans 8:39), and keeping the word places the love of God within us (1 John 2:5) (Also see John 14:23).
    
    
30. Christ is the way to the living waters, which is the Holy Spirit (John 7:37-39), and the washing of the water of the word (Ephesians 5:25-27) (which is obedience to God) is the way to having the Spirit (Acts of the Apostles 5:32).
    
    
31. Christ is like the foundation that is a part of a house (1 Corinthians 3:9, 1 Corinthians 3:11), and He is like a rock (1 Corinthians 10:4), and the obeying the word is like a house built upon the rock (Matthew 7:24).
    
    
32. Believers are to follow after the steps of Christ (1 Peter 2:21), and believers are to order their steps in the word (Psalms 119:133).
    
    
33. Christ breathed the Spirit upon his faithful chosen (John 20:22), and the word is “inspired by God” (i.e. God breathed) for the benefit of his faithful chosen (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
    
    
34. Christ is the way to having the fruits of righteousness (Philippians 1:11), and the word is the way to being instructed in righteousness so to be perfect unto all good works (fruits) (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
    
    
35. Christ can abide in us (John 15:4-7) (Ephesians 3:17) (Philippians 4:13), and the word can abide in us (John 15:7, Psalms 119:11).
    
    
36. Christ dwells in our hearts (Ephesians 3:17), and the word dwells in our hearts (Colossians 3:16).
    
    
37. Believers can be hidden in Christ (Colossians 3:3), and the word can be hidden in believers (Psalms 119:11).
    
    
38. Christ is always with us (Matthew 28:20), and the word is always with us (Psalms 119:98).
    
    
39. Christ can make our joy full (John 15:11), and the word can make our joy full (1 John 1:4).
    
    
40. Believers’ hearts rejoice with Christ (John 16:22), and believers’ hearts rejoice with the word (Jeremiah 15:16).

..41. Christ is called a seed (Galatians 3:16), and the word is called a seed (1 Peter 1:23, Luke 8:11) (Note: See my post below here for further details).


The communicated word of God that we have today is the Bible.

“So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” (Isaiah 55:11).​

Jesus (the Living Word) was sent by the commandment (mouth) of the Father. Jesus said and did everything the Father told Him to do (John 12:49) (John 14:31).

What is interesting is that the Living Word accomplished that which the Father commanded Him to do and to prosper (accomplish) that thing He sent to do (i.e. Jesus suffered on the cross, and said, “It is finished” and died for man’s sins). Jesus was risen three days later, and ascended to the Father. God’s Word (the living Word) did not return void by whom the Father sent.

The communicated Word can also be sent out and not return void, as well. For many have believed and have stayed faithful to what God’s Word says.

In the creation: The Word made flesh (John 1:1, John 1:14) (i.e. Christ) created everything. In the beginning God spoke words to bring forth the creation in six days (Genesis 1:1-31).

So in the beginning was the Living Word, and the communicated Word.

In the end of this sinful world: Christ will return (Revelation 19:11-21) and a sharp sword will proceed from His mouth. This sword could be the “sword of the Spirit,” (Which is the Word of God) or it could be symbolic of such (Ephesians 6:17).

So in the end there will be the Living Word, and the communicated Word.

For at Christ’s return: His name is called The “Word of God.” (Revelation 19:13) (Living Word).

On His thigh, and vesture is a name written (words) “KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.” (Communicated Word).

Jesus was beaten to a pulp and crucified on a tree.

The Word we have today (the Bible) is a result of pulp made from a tree.

Jesus was the Word made flesh (covered in skin).

The Word we have today (the Bible) is popular to be available covered in skin (leather).

Words on the page hang on this tree (paper) (the Bible),
just like the Living Word hung on a tree (the cross).

I understand what you are saying, however I think that you are making a mistake to think that God spoke human language as he made the world. You are taking the Bible far too literally, I think.

A simple idea: The names Adam gave to animals, those names were not the animals themselves. And so, what the Bible talks about, the words themselves are not the teachings. That should put to rest any idea that the KJB is the only pure, inspired Bible. No Bible can be pure because the teachings are beyond words. The words serve to lead us to the Word, which means that we are obligated to reach people using modern translation of the available texts.

6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
(Romans 7:6)

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
(II Corinthians 3:6)

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I fully understand the argument you are trying to make. However, I don't think it is valid here. I have two points:

1] Though the Bible contains imagery and metaphor that is repeated (part of its vocabulary, if you will), one cannot read it as formulaic, as if every instance of standing in a certain place signified dominion or ownership. You are reading far too into the Bible by connecting the dots, saying John is the sand of the sea and the dragon, having waited on the beach is owning Abraham's descendants. Maybe I'm wrong, but point 2 renders that moot.

2] The dragon, according to the Living Bible, "stood waiting on an ocean beach." In the NIV, the dragon "stood on the shore of the sea." We all know what happened to the dragon in the end, as we know what happened to Pharaoh's Egypt:

17 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, In my dream, behold, I stood upon the bank of the river:
18 And, behold, there came up out of the river seven kine, fatfleshed and well favoured; and they fed in a meadow:
(Genesis 41:17, 18)

Even if the Bible author explicitly meant "standing upon" to mean dominion, the dragon was slain, the Jews escaped Egypt, and the devil certainly hasn't claimed dominion over the Bible. The moral of the story? don't read into the Bible so much that you lose the meaning, and don't defend other people's intellectual strongholds for them regarding translations which are not meant for you to read. Read the KJB, and the NIV, but let everyone choose what speaks to them.

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
(II Corinthians 3:6)

You can explain it away all you like… but we see a pattern of this kind of junk going on so you cannot simply write it off. Plus… there is Westcott and Hort. The founders of the Critical Text upon which Nestle and Aland used to create their version of the Critical Text under the supervision of the Vatican. These two men were straight out heretics in regards to the Christian faith (by just looking at their own words). In fact, they hid their beliefs while they were alive in fear that people might reject the Critical Text. You can check that out in the documentary called Bridge to Babylon at Amazon Prime Video. Currently the documentary is free to watch with ads.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B01MSE0F7Q/