Do you believe the KJV is the one and only perfect and divine Word of God?


  • Total voters
    44
Status
Not open for further replies.

Sam81

Jesus is everything
Sep 12, 2016
393
288
42
Texas
✟27,676.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I will say this for the OP, he is respectful and kind, and I do appreciate that. I don't hold any ill feelings towards him at all.

But I do hope he comes to see that casting doubt on people's bibles is not of God... it's a tool of the enemy. A lot of people cannot understand the KJV. And they need a Bible that they can read and understand and apply to their life. Trying to scare/force them to use a Bible that they can't read is robbing them of the most precious thing on earth. It's a tactic straight out of hell.
 
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟107,962.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Yep, Ruckman was in error. He has a disciple on YouTube called Robert Breaker who also teaches that only the KJV is the word of God along with easy believism.

Seems to me a lot of the KJV only people are Independent Baptist, and it seems a lot of them believe that repentance is not necessary to be saved.

I wonder if Dr. Ruckman was rational. In his book, [/i] Mark Of The Beast[/i], he wrote that the antichrist will be a 10-foot-tall alien with huge black lips who will land a spaceship in St. Peter's Square & impart his mark with a kiss from those huge black lips.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sam81
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟107,962.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I will say this for the OP, he is respectful and kind, and I do appreciate that. I don't hold any ill feelings towards him at all.

But I do hope he comes to see that casting doubt on people's bibles is not of God... it's a tool of the enemy. A lot of people cannot understand the KJV. And they need a Bible that they can read and understand and apply to their life. Trying to scare/force them to use a Bible that they can't read is robbing them of the most precious thing on earth. It's a tactic straight out of hell.


I have no ill feelings for him, either. He's not the first smart person to be deceived by some demagogue or false preacher. I hope he realizes from the FACTS posted here that the KJVO myth is false, & prays to Jesus to remove him from its thralldom over him.
 
Upvote 0

Sam81

Jesus is everything
Sep 12, 2016
393
288
42
Texas
✟27,676.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
KJV removes the only place where Paul explicitly calls Jesus "God"!

KJV: "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" - Titus 2:13

ESV: "waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,"

lol
 
Upvote 0

ChetSinger

Well-Known Member
Apr 18, 2006
3,518
650
✟124,958.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
KJV removes the only place where Paul explicitly calls Jesus "God"!

KJV: "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" - Titus 2:13

ESV: "waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,"

lol
Bingo. When the KJV was translated they were unaware of the Granville Sharp rule. It's one of the clearest verses of all regarding the deity of Christ, and the KJV translators were unaware of it.

Btw, the NET gets it right, too. And here's the NET footnote regarding it:
The terms “God and Savior” both refer to the same person, Jesus Christ. This is one of the clearest statements in the NT concerning the deity of Christ. The construction in Greek is known as the Granville Sharp rule, named after the English philanthropist-linguist who first clearly articulated the rule in 1798. Sharp pointed out that in the construction article-noun-καί-noun (where καί [kai] = “and”), when two nouns are singular, personal, and common (i.e., not proper names), they always had the same referent. Illustrations such as “the friend and brother,” “the God and Father,” etc. abound in the NT to prove Sharp’s point. The only issue is whether terms such as “God” and “Savior” could be considered common nouns as opposed to proper names. Sharp and others who followed (such as T. F. Middleton in his masterful The Doctrine of the Greek Article) demonstrated that a proper name in Greek was one that could not be pluralized. Since both “God” (θεός, qeos) and “savior” (σωτήρ, swthr) were occasionally found in the plural, they did not constitute proper names, and hence, do fit Sharp’s rule. Although there have been 200 years of attempts to dislodge Sharp’s rule, all attempts have been futile. Sharp’s rule stands vindicated after all the dust has settled. For more information on Sharp’s rule see ExSyn 270-78, esp. 276. See also 2 Pet 1:1 and Jude 4.

As the footnote describes, the KJV translators missed the deity of Christ again in 2 Peter 1:1:
KJV: Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

NET: From Simeon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ

And again in Jude 4:
KJV: For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

NET: For certain men have secretly slipped in among you – men who long ago were marked out for the condemnation I am about to describe – ungodly men who have turned the grace of our God into a license for evil and who deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.
BH, I see nothing but pointless and even damaging factionalism in insisting on KJV-only beliefs among the brethren.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

Sam81

Jesus is everything
Sep 12, 2016
393
288
42
Texas
✟27,676.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
One would think that if the KJV was truly perfect and inerrant, how it could make such translation mistakes. The uninspired texts call Jesus God. The "perfect" KJV blunders away Christ's deity.

And that's just one of many translation errors that the KJV makes. But that one is probably the worst as far as biblical truth is concerned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lazarus Short
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
Yep, Ruckman was in error. He has a disciple on YouTube called Robert Breaker who also teaches that only the KJV is the word of God along with easy believism.

Seems to me a lot of the KJV only people are Independent Baptist, and it seems a lot of them believe that repentance is not necessary to be saved.

Well, I do realize that a lot of KJV Only folk are into Easy Believism (and I do realize this is really wrong). But not all KJV advocates are that way (including myself); For...

When I read the Scriptures, I see 4 different aspects of salvation described.

#1. Provisional Atonement (not "Limited Atonement").
(A 100% Work of God alone that can only be applied personally to an individual's life via by Justification and Sanctification).
This is Jesus paying the price for the sins of the entire world so as to offer mankind the free gift of salvation (if they so choose to accept it); Note: Christ's resurrection (to give us a new body not tainted by sin one day), and the ascension to the Father (after Christ telling Mary not to touch Him), and his entering the holy temple by his blood (to be our Heavenly High Priest) is also included in the Provisional Atonement, too. (For Provisional Atonement verses, see: John 1:29, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:6, 2 Corinthians 5:19, Romans 5:6-8.).

#2. Justification (Initial Salvation, and or Foundational Salvation).
(The 1st synergistic work of GOD done in a believer).
Justification is the entrance gate to salvation, and it is the foundation of our salvation (by faith) upon which we stand. Justification is believing that Jesus Christ died for your sins, was buried, and had risen again three days later on your behalf, and accepting Jesus as your Savior, and seeking forgiveness of your sins with Him by way of prayer. This process of salvation is without the deeds of the Law or works because it is based upon God’s mercy and grace. As a result: One is born again spiritually (Note: Born again by the Spirit, and born again by water (i.e. the Scriptures - Romans 10:17, 1 Peter 1:23)). (For Justification verses, see: Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 4:1-6, Titus 3:4-7, 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Luke 18:9-14, Romans 5:1-2).

#3. Sanctification (The Next Step or Phase in the Salvation Process).
(The 2nd synergistic work of God done in a believer).
Sanctification is the next step or phase in Salvation for a believer who lives out their faith; This is the work of God moving in a believer's life so as to help them to live holy, and to do good works and to put away the lusts of the flesh. These good works are the works of God done through the believer, and so all boasting or praise is given to the Lord. Therefore, there is no boasting in one's own work (because they are ultimately the works of God done through the believer. (For Sanctification verses, see: James 2:24, James 2:17-18, Titus 1:16, Hebrews 5:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, Hebrews 12:14, Romans 8:1 (KJV), 1 Corinthians 16:22, Romans 8:13, etc.).

#4. Glorification (The Future Salvation of the Truly Faithful Believer).
(A 100% Work of God alone that can only be applied personally to an individual's life via by Justification and Sanctification).
Glorification is when God takes the believer home to be with Him in His kingdom and He gives Him a new resurrected body that is not tainted by sin. This process of salvation (in being taken home) is a by product automatically for those believers who properly applied Justification and Sanctification to their lives (For Glorification verses, see: 1 Peter 5:4, 1 Peter 1:4, 1 Corinthians 15:51-57, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, Romans 13:11, Philippians 3:20-21, Hebrews 9:28).


Conclusion:

Justification, and then Sanctification is what we as believers need to be focused on. For if we are justified, and sanctified (which is only made possible by the Provisional Atonement), then we will be glorified.


My original post or thread source:
The Four Aspects of Salvation.
 
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 was praying to the Lord and I asked him for more on defending the KJV, and He answered. I am reading some more on the KJV topic, and I have actually increased my list to 25 in number (with keeping some points out due to their condemning nature or due to them not being strong enough as a point alone to truly “wow” a person). I have lots to write already with increasing the number to 15 (by adding one more point). You will take note that a lot of my points are backed up by what the Bible actually says, as well. So please. I challenge folks to go back and actually read what I had written. Maybe you will hear something you did not hear before. You may not agree with it, but at least you will know about the truth of what I feel is so important to hear.

I am going to continue to only add my strongest and unique points in defense of the KJV.

My KJV fellow advocates have added points in defense for the KJV that I disagree with in the past. They would make the “KJV not having a copyright” as a strong point all on it's own. I disagree that it is a point to stand on its own but fits under the category of the point on “the uniqueness of the Bible.” Other KJV advocates will list omitted verses from the gospels, and yet that same truth is expressed in another gospel. This of course is not agreeable to me. I may list a general list of omitted verses to show a watering down of certain truths in the Bible (as a part of backing up a point), but some of my KJV brethren act like the end of the universe happened when a gospel verse was removed and yet that same truth is expressed in another parallel gospel verse. Granted, no word should be eliminated from God's Holy Word. From our perspective, taking away God's words is very serious according to Revelation. But they need to make a good case for the KJV from their opponents perspective. Many do not do this. So it gives KJV advocates a bad name in defending what they love so dearly (i.e. God's Holy Word). Their heart is in the right place, but sometimes we may get ahead of ourselves and do not do our homework always or we don't stop to proofread our work (before we hit “enter”) on what we wrote to make sure it is truly convincing to others. I pray that will change.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Isilwen

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
3,741
2,788
Florida
✟161,599.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
I was praying to the Lord and I asked him for more on defending the KJV, and He answered.

I don't believe that God did what you claim here. Afterall, what was it you said to me?
 
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 don't believe that God did what you claim here. Afterall, what was it you said to me?

The difference is that I believe the truth of God's Word is on my side. For I have points in God's Word backing up why there is one Word of God that is perfect for our world language of today. Feel free to cross examine my points anytime you like. I am still compiling more points and doing more research at this time.

In any event, may God bless you.
 
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
I don't believe that God did what you claim here. Afterall, what was it you said to me?

Did you know that Muslims even use the Modern Bibles issue to try and win back Christians who were once Muslims? They say that God is not the author of confusion to have so many different Bibles that all say something slightly different in all of them. This is not just one story, but there are similar stories that has happened many times. The Muslims use Modern Translations as a weapon against Christians. Only one authority can stop them, though. The King James Bible.

This point alone should be enough of a reason to never again trust the Modern Translation movement, but I know it will not convince most here. All I can do is pray that folks keep an open mind at the biblical and logical case that I make for the KJV that is exhaustive. For what does it hurt you to hear?
 
Upvote 0

Isilwen

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
3,741
2,788
Florida
✟161,599.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
For what does it hurt you to hear?

You act as though we never have heard. It may not be the same exact words, but it is the same old argument that falls flat.

I will continue to use my NIV and my NKJV as God had lead me to them and you do not have to believe it. God and I know the truth.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟50,919.00
Country
Austria
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Bingo. When the KJV was translated they were unaware of the Granville Sharp rule. It's one of the clearest verses of all regarding the deity of Christ, and the KJV translators were unaware of it.

Btw, the NET gets it right, too. And here's the NET footnote regarding it:


As the footnote describes, the KJV translators missed the deity of Christ again in 2 Peter 1:1:


And again in Jude 4:

BH, I see nothing but pointless and even damaging factionalism in insisting on KJV-only beliefs among the brethren.

We can add J 1:18

John 1:18:
No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known. (NIV)

No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (KJV)

The KJV also removed our rightousness:

R 4:24
but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness--for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead (NIV)

But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead (KJV)

---

When we put all such places together, we can see a pattern and agenda of unbelieving people, watering down the deity of Christ etc, as @Bible Highlighter would put it. But in his KJV.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟50,919.00
Country
Austria
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
The Muslims use Modern Translations as a weapon against Christians. Only one authority can stop them, though. The King James Bible.
The KJV is just another, even more different translation. So its even more confusion, not only slight differences between modern translations but even big differences in the KJV. The KJV removes the deity of Christ from many verses as proven in this thread and even tries to insert a trinitarian formula not found in any relevant Greek text.

Only one thing can stop them - explaining to them, that the Bible we have was never word-perfect and never will be. The spiritual truths are hidden behind single words.

Only weak ex-muslims, who were told the "Bible is perfect word for word" nonsense are getting back to islam by such arguments. They were simply presented a wrong Christian belief.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hieronymus
Upvote 0

a-lily-of-peace

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2020
521
310
Australia
✟28,113.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Taking the Lord's name in vain can bleed into the teaching of wrong oath taking, but I see them as two distinct things.

As for Matthew 5:37: Well, I believe the Jews were carelessly making oaths, and Jesus was offering a new way of teaching by saying do not make any oaths at all, but let your "yes," be "yes," and your "no," be "no." In other words, simply say "yes" to a person and then keep your word to saying "yes" (without any oath taking).



It surely is a beautiful truth from our LORD (whatever the deeper meaning behind it is). Reminds me of the song by Michael Card.
It's a slow moving peaceful song with the word "Adonai" mentioned within it.




You are most welcome. It was my pleasure. God's Word has a powerful way of touching our hearts for sure.



It's quite possible that the Father's name written in their foreheads is indeed could be Adonai. For it is written:

"These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth." (Revelation 14:4).

For Jesus said,
"And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46).

It reminds me of a Christian phrase I heard before.

full


Anyways, I hope stay safe and strong in the name of our LORD Jesus Christ or Yahweh Mashiaẖ.

And above all, keep trusting and believing His Word until the end.

full


full
I do actually use “Jehovah” though with the J as the I/Y sound, not the current English J.

And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them. (Exodus 6:3, KJV)

And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen. (Genesis 22:14, KJV)

Now, seeing those two near each other, it gives me even more questions, of which only one is why put [LORD] even there?

Maybe the difference is in the revealing in light of Exodus 3:14.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lazarus Short
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

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟50,919.00
Country
Austria
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
I do actually use “Jehovah” though with the J as the I/Y sound, not the current English J.

And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them. (Exodus 6:3, KJV)

And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen. (Genesis 22:14, KJV)

Now, seeing those two near each other, it gives me even more questions, of which only one is why put [LORD] even there?
Its not "Jehovah", though. Its Jahve.

Jehova is a medieval mistake, they took letters of YHWH and inserted vowels from "Adonai" between them.

Today, we know its wrong:

 
  • Agree
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

a-lily-of-peace

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2020
521
310
Australia
✟28,113.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Its not "Jehovah", though. Its Jahve.

Jehova is a medieval mistake, they took letters of YHWH and inserted vowels from "Adonai" between them.

Today, we know its wrong:

I’ve heard that. I’ve also heard otherwise.

You don’t need the vowels for Adonai to know that the names Yehoshua, Yehochanan, both pronounce יה as “Yeho”.

Only halfway there, but still halfway.
 
Upvote 0

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟50,919.00
Country
Austria
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
I’ve heard that. I’ve also heard otherwise.

You don’t need the vowels for Adonai to know that the names Yehoshua, Yehochanan, both pronounce יה as “Yeho”.

Only halfway there, but still halfway.
You are right, its not Yehoshua, but Yahshua.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

a-lily-of-peace

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2020
521
310
Australia
✟28,113.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You are right, there is no Yehoshua, its actually Yahshua.

Yahshua - Wikipedia
The name Yehoshua (יהושע) is the name we translate from the Old Testament as Joshua.

That name was given to Joshua by Moses (Numbers 13:16) and I don’t know if you can find a better example in the OT of someone who knew how to pronounce the name.

Now you can say that “Hoshea” already had the הו to pronounce “ho” (“how” with long o) and only the yod was added and that is fair enough but consider the precedent set that continues in names like Yehonatan where “Natan” (Nathan) means he gave and still “Yeho” (יהו) was added where no previous “ho” sound existed.

So this is the way the Hebrews used it.
 
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

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟50,919.00
Country
Austria
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
The name Yehoshua (יהושע) is the name we translate from the Old Testament as Joshua.

That name was given to Joshua by Moses (Numbers 13:16) and I don’t know if you can find a better example in the OT of someone who knew how to pronounce the name.

Now you can say that “Hoshea” already had the הו to pronounce “ho” (“how” with long o) and only the yod was added and that is fair enough but consider the precedent set that continues in names like Yehonatan where “Natan” (Nathan) means he gave and still “Yeho” (יהו) was added where no previous “ho” sound existed.

So this is the way the Hebrews used it.
I do not know who are "we", but its a scholarly consensus that its Yahshua.

The name of the OT "Joshua" is variously and intentionally changed against the name of Yahshua in our translations so that the name of Jesus stays unique.

You are right that both of them should be transliterated as "Jesus" or "Yahshua", if we want to be consistent.

The same goes with Judas and Jude. These are also the same name, but intentionally transliterated differently to differentiate between the traitor and the brother of James.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.