Modern Perversions Teach Racism

brandplucked

Member
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2004
769
17
✟4,973.00
Faith
Christian
Modern Perversions Teach Racism


We hear a lot today about the different races of people on this planet. Race is defined as “people who are believed to belong to the same genetic stock”, and as, “subspecies, race, in biology, a taxonomic division of a species, usually as a consequence of geographical isolation within a species.”

However, with the recent advancements in the human genome project, scientists are coming out with some alarming declarations. This quote from an article by Charles Petit, Chronicle Science writer, “Surely, one may suppose, the American melting pot is brimming with different races and racial mixtures. Wrong, say a broad coalition of experts.” “The concept of race is a social and cultural construction. . .RACE SIMPLY CANNOT BE TESTED OR PROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY,” according to a policy statement by the American Anthropological Association. “It is clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. THE CONCEPT OF 'RACE' HAD NO VALIDITY...IN THE HUMAN SPECIES."

The Elder Web.com Newsletter of June 28, 2000 states concerning the human genome project: “Celera Genomics was responsible for the research done in the private sector. Celera CEO and lead researcher J. Craig Ventor states, “THE CONCEPT OF RACE HAS NO GENETIC BASIS."

Local newspapers have recently come out with articles showing that all human beings are genetically 99.9% the same. The differences are truly only skin deep. So we see that scientists today are coming around to the view that people should not be classified as belonging to different “ races.”

This idea of races smacks of evolution, and the idea that some races are superior to others was very popular with Darwin and Adolf Hitler.In fact, it is still popular today. Many people are unaware of the full, original title of Darwin's book. It's original title was "ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY MEANS OF NATURAL SELECTION, OR THE PRESERVATION OF THE FAVORED RACES IN THE STRUGGLE FOR LIFE."

Evolutionism is RACIST!

"It may be quite true that some negroes are better than some white men, but no rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the average white man ...The highest places in the hierarchy of civilization will assuredly not be within the reach of our dusky cousins ..." T. H. Huxley

“No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man” - Thomas Huxley, Lectures and Lay Sermons, 1871, p. 115.

"The standard of intelligence of the average adult Negro is similar to that of the eleven-year-old youth of the species Homo sapiens." Henry Osborne, professor of biology and zoology at Columbia University, discoverer of "Nebraska man", which turned out to be a peccary tooth.

"Every consideration should lead those who believe in the superiority of THE WHITE RACE to strive to preserve its purity and to establish and maintain the segregation of THE RACES, for the longer this is maintained, the greater the preponderance of THE WHITE RACE will be." Edwin Conklin, professor of biology at Princeton University and president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the CIVILIZED RACES will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the SAVAGE RACES throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man. New York: A.L. Burt Co., 1874. p. 178.


Does the Bible ever speak of people belonging to different races, or even of some races being inferior to others? The answer may surprise you.

The King James Version NEVER speaks of people as being of a certain race. It speaks of running the race that is set before us, but never uses this word when referring to people.

This is not the case with the new Bible versions that are so popular today. In their efforts to be “modern and up to date” they have actually proven themselves to be foolish and unscientific.

The NKJV uses the word “race” when referring to people once, the NIV 1984 edition twice, but the NIV 2011 now uses the word "race" eight times, the ESV uses the word “race” four times when referring to people. Ezra 9:2 - “For they have taken some of their daughters to be wives for themselves and for their sons, so that THE HOLY RACE has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands.”, Acts 7:19 - “He dealt shrewdly with OUR RACE”, Romans 9:5 - “To them belong the patriarchs, and from THEIR RACE, according to the flesh, is the Christ” and 1 Peter 2:9 “But you are A CHOSEN RACE” and the NASB six times.

The Holman Standard uses the word "race" to describe "the human race", "our race", "a chosen race" and "Abraham's race" some nineteen (19) times. See Dt. 32:8; Psalm 12:1,8; 14:2; 21:10; 53:2; 107:8,15,21,31; Ps. 115:16; Proverbs 8:31; Isaiah 57:4; "our race" Acts 7:19; "Abraham's race" Acts 13:26; 1 Peter 2:9; Rev. 9:15,18 and Rev. 14:4.

Dan Wallace and company's NET version uses the word "race" to refer to men some twelve (12) times. See Dt. 5:26; Ezra 9:2; Job 12:10; Psalm 8:4; 14:2; 21:10; 36:7; 53:2; 144:3; Proverbs 30:14; Acts 17:26 and 1 Peter 2:9.



In Ezra 9:2, the sins of the people of Israel are recounted. Among them is listed the fact that they had mingled themselves with the idolators of the land of Canaan and had done according to their abominations: “For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons; so that the holy SEED have mingled themselves with the people of those lands.”

The word [zera] here, is clearly “seed”, yet the NIV, ESV, NET and the NASB say “the holy RACE”. Are there unholy races? Are the Israelites a separate race or genetic aberration from the rest of mankind? Only one time have they rendered this Hebrew word 'zera' as 'RACE'.

Again, in Romans 9:3 the apostle Paul testifies “For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my KINSMEN according to the flesh”.

Here the NIV and ESV say, “for the sake of my brothers, those of my own RACE.”

I didn’t know the Jews were a separate race - I thought we all came from Adam and Eve, and after that from Noah and his family.

The 2011 NIV now uses the word "race" as in "the human race", the "holy race" and "my own race" 8 times. See Genesis 6:5,7; Ezra 9:2; Job 28:28; Psalm 12:1,8; Ecclesiastes 3:10 and Romans 9:3.

In Mark 7:26 we are told, “The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by NATION”; yet the NASB says, “a Syrophenician by RACE”.

In Acts 7:19, “The same dealt subtilly with our KINDRED”, is replaced in the NASB, Holman and ESV with, “he who took shrewd advantage of our RACE.”

In I Peter 2:9, “But ye are a chosen GENERATION, a royal priesthood, an holy nation”, has become “you are a chosen RACE”, in the NASB, ESV and Holman.

The passage in James 3:7, “For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of MANKIND” now reads in the NASB as, “been tamed by the human race”.

The worst example of a bad translation and bad theology is found in Zechariah 9:6. Here the KJB reads, “And a BASTARD shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines.”

This Hebrew word ‘mamzer’ is found only twice in the entire Old Testament. The other time is in Deut. 23:2 where it says, “A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD” .

This word is not archaic, and means an illegitimate son, born out of wedlock. In fact here the NASB and NKJV have translated it as, “one of illegitimate birth” but the NIV has messed it up by rendering this single word as “one born of a forbidden marriage.”

So also does the highly touted 2001-2011 English Standard Version, “No one born of a forbidden union”. None of these words occur in the Hebrew text, and if the child were born of any kind of a marriage, it would not be a bastard or of illegitimate birth.

The word is correctly translated as bastard in Deuteronomy 23:2 by the Geneva Bible, the Revised Version of 1881, ASV of 1901, Darby, Young’s, RSV, Hebrew Names Bible, Judaica Press Tanach, Webster’s 1833, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, Third Millenium Bible, World English Bible, Lamsa’s translation from the Peshitta, the Italian Diodati 1649, New Diodati 1991 and La Nueva Riveduta 2006 - "Un BASTARDO non entrerà nell'assemblea", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1549, Spanish Reina Valera 1960, 1995 as ‘BASTARDO’ and the Portuguese Almeida Actualizada - "Nenhum BASTARDO entrará na assembléia do Senhor", the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 - "Le bâtard n'entrera" and the Africaans Bible 1953 - "baster"

However, when we get to Zechariah 9:6 the KJB phrase, “a bastard shall dwell in Ashdod” (1917 Jewish Publication Society translation, Revised Version, ASV, Darby, Updated Bible Version 2004) has now been replaced in the NIV 1984 edition as, “a foreigner”, which is totally wrong, and in the NIV 2011 edition changed once again to now read "A MONGREL PEOPLE".

Also reading "A MONGREL PEOPLE" is Dan Wallace's NET version, the RSV, NRSV, the Holman Standard, the Amplified bible 1987 and the Lexham English bible 2012.

The ISV (International Standard Version) says "A strange people will inhabit Ashdod" but then it footnotes: "Literally, a bastard."

The NKJV has “a MIXED RACE”. The English Standard Version of 2001-2011 says: “A mixed people” but then has this footnote: Hebrew - a bastard.

If there is such a thing as a mixed race, or even worse "a MONGREL people", then is there also such a thing as a pure race? This is what Hitler thought. The New English Bible and the Catholic New Jerusalem 1985 say “A HALF BREED."

But the NASB is the worst of them all here. It actually says “a MONGREL RACE”. Mongrel usually refers to dogs of mixed breeds and has a negative connotation, especially when applied to people.

Remember, this is supposed to be God’s word and His perspective. Is there such a thing as a mongrel race that He has created? I don’t think so. Relations among people of different skin color are difficult enough because of our pride and our fallen, sinful nature, without having the “word of God” actually referring to some people as of a "MONGREL RACE."

It’s really a very simple equation. The King James Bible does not teach that there is such a thing as different “races” of men. It teaches that all are equal, in respect to our creation, before the God Who made us. The NKJV, NIV, ESV, Holman, NET and NASB all teach there are different races and that some are inferior to others.

Which one presents the truth? Clearly it is the “old fashioned” King James Bible.

I would rather have the Truth that is harder to read and understand, than error which is in modern updated English. How about you?

Will Kinney

Return to Articles - KJB Articles - Another King James Bible Believer
 

Harbingr

Newbie
Sep 10, 2014
214
3
✟382.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Ah, more KJV only idiocy <sigh>

You'll notice that nobody hates on Jesus, save extremist Jews- even Mohammad couldn't deny his beauty.

But therein lies irony.
I've seen atheists and Jews and Muslims and every other say Jesus was great, but is not God.
And I say to them: Jesus did not leave that option. He said he is the Son and is the Shepherd of men.
Therefore, you either see Jesus as deranged and insane, or you bow and worship Him as our Savior- there is no in between.
 
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟115,462.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The only perversion here is the KJVO myth.

Scripture refers to virtually all black people as "Ethiopians", as these were the black people most-familiar to the Israelis. now, this is not either a diss nor an exaltation of those people; it's merely a name, same as is "Indian" for the people Columbus found in North America when he believed he'd reached India.

As for the people inhabiting Ashdod..."bastard" means different from standard, as well as a child born outta wedlock. Ask any plumber ot fireman what 'bastard' threads on pipes are.

Ashdod was originally a city of the Philistines, one of their five main ones. It's now firmly in possession of the Jews, and the palestinians(Philistines) have no hope of recovering it, although there are Pals living in it. Now, to the Philistines, the Israelis were the different, or non-standard people,(or "mongrels") so the prophecy has been fulfilled.

The KJV's simply saying 'bastard' in Zech. 9:6 is a poor rendering, as it completely loses the meaning of the prophecy. Once again, Brandplucked's KJVO fantasy has been proven to be in error.
 
Upvote 0
N

NannaNae

Guest
The only perversion here is the KJVO myth.

Scripture refers to virtually all black people as "Ethiopians", as these were the black people most-familiar to the Israelis. now, this is not either a diss nor an exaltation of those people; it's merely a name, same as is "Indian" for the people Columbus found in North America when he believed he'd reached India.

As for the people inhabiting Ashdod..."bastard" means different from standard, as well as a child born outta wedlock. Ask any plumber ot fireman what 'bastard' threads on pipes are.

Ashdod was originally a city of the Philistines, one of their five main ones. It's now firmly in possession of the Jews, and the palestinians(Philistines) have no hope of recovering it, although there are Pals living in it. Now, to the Philistines, the Israelis were the different, or non-standard people,(or "mongrels") so the prophecy has been fulfilled.

The KJV's simply saying 'bastard' in Zech. 9:6 is a poor rendering, as it completely loses the meaning of the prophecy. Once again, Brandplucked's KJVO fantasy has been proven to be in error.

yes they are not pure Philistines that is for sure..... so 'part blooded' in the imposed quantum constructs of stupid people who have not one clue how any kind of the original peoples clan rights passed down .
and so if I can be called a wannabe by way too many mockers and such of the scientism's "Logical" / thus imposing beliefs systems .. because I/mine have not been with a tribe or part of a recognized tribe for about 110 years due to the politics of the stupid and worse...
by those same laws imposed on my family..
the Philistines would really be wannabes because they haven't been part of their tribe or their clan for at least 3200 years at least if any of them were here ever . I suggest that really makes them mutts or if they were here clearly they would be called wannabes with no clans and no rights in a clan or tribe. if they could even find a female clan in themselves there that match with one here...... now the Druze have some that match...but not the Palestinians (that I know of )after 3200 years of mixing there may not have ever been any female clans that were ever there and it was only a place where warriors were dumped after their war with Egypt .. nand so there was never a female clan there... I don't know .. I just know that Druze match here . and that no female lines/clan of the palestinians match any one they recognize now as native americans.. :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_X_(mtDNA)

so the druze match some clan here .

. which very very few of them would have any right to any part of any city states God would have granted to the Philistines and or allowed them to retain from Israel as good faithful trading partners . that land which was his land since Melchizedec , Malki Tzedek. HE was clearly there and holding God's land for Abraham and he had endless days no one could count in that land..

so except maybe the Druze and any other clans that can be found in that area that would match female clans here.. male clans don't count here for tribal rights we may use them in our names but they have no right to the land without a clan . only female clans count.. so the Druze are the only the ones with any proven right to be called 'Philistines" or to be called some kind of the 'SEA people' left behind at the events which happened at the bronze age collapse . because they are not SEA people unless they match some groups here on the westerner side of the seas.

so it seems nutty people with political ambitions are giving rights to arab tribes and other Caananites and or africans and such who have no proven legal right to that land( really just a city state in Israel ) at all and never did and have no right by clans to claim to be Philistines either . they have to match clan lines and male native people here to do that . but still the rights to the city property is through the females .. and leadership of a clans space( city state or tribe or nation) go only through males in the right clans.. so like man it is all messed up..
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟115,462.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
"Palestinian" is the Roman name for "Philistine", plain-n-simple. In 135-136 AD, the Roman Caesar Hadrian expelled the Jews from the Roman empire for their continued rebellions & gave their land to the Philistines, who'd remained loyal to Rome. Thus, today's arguments were founded.

The Palestinians claim the land from the time of Hadrian, while the Jews claim it upon God's promise. Thus, they are implacable foes.

As for Brandplucked's argument...the use of the word 'race' to denote a people with commpn characteristics of physical appearance didn't happen until C. 1774, so that's why it's not in the KJV. When the KJV was made, its use included "kinsmen". King James himself wrote that he was of "the noble Fergus race".

So we see BP's "argument" here is just another attempt to try to justify his KJVO myth.
 
Upvote 0

Zeek

Follower of Messiah, Israel advocate and Zionist
Nov 8, 2010
2,888
217
England
✟11,664.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
"Palestinian" is the Roman name for "Philistine", plain-n-simple. In 135-136 AD, the Roman Caesar Hadrian expelled the Jews from the Roman empire for their continued rebellions & gave their land to the Philistines, who'd remained loyal to Rome. Thus, today's arguments were founded.

The Jews were never expelled from the Roman empire, they were expelled from Jerusalem for a season...but the Romans and others made things difficult for them and many left anyway.

Hadrian never gave Israel to the Philistines, they had already disappeared as a people group hundreds of years earlier....the only connection Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians have to the Philistines is that they both hated Israel.
 
Upvote 0
N

NannaNae

Guest
X2a mtDNA - Ojibwe Origins in North America: January 2013

here is a site with the latest in maps of dna issues and pictures even.


here is what a Philistines is recorded to look like 3200 years ago in Egypt.
The Philistines | Dr. Claude Mariottini &#8211; Professor of Old Testament


they can also looks like these also

this which is caananite and Philistines crossed with other sea tribes .

the Tamahu = carthage = berber / fulani-Woda-abe are all part of the same stock with Minoans , Cyprus and Tyrus and many more sea tribes.
but they all kind of got changed being in new locations because of the bronze age collapse and mixing with local and or migrant and or invading genetics. though their genetics are starting to match up.. especially mtdna / clans lines.
 
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
N

NannaNae

Guest
X2a mtDNA - Ojibwe Origins in North America: January 2013

here is a site with the latest in maps of dna issues and pictures even.


here is what a Philistines is recorded to look like 3200 years ago in Egypt.
The Philistines | Dr. Claude Mariottini &#8211; Professor of Old Testament


they can also looks like these also

this which is caananite and Philistines crossed with other sea tribes .

the Tamahu = carthage = berber / fulani-Woda-abe are all part of the same stock with Minoans , Cyprus and Tyrus and many more sea tribes. and native americans of the BIG kind .. red paint clan.. or Ani wodi( this is the same root as Wodaabe.. and they all had the same customs with Minoans and Cyprus and some caananites / Egyptians -greeks and other sea people )
but they all kind of got changed in color or whatever being in new locations because of the bronze age collapse and mixing with local and or migrant and or invading genetics. though their genetics are starting to match up.. especially mtdna / clans lines.

but I see nothing in the Palestinians which reminds me at all of the cultures they claim to be.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
N

NannaNae

Guest
Haplogroup T Among the Cherokee

be sure to take note of Tathtoe the Tall Cherokee indian youth( of about 18 years old) in the "Trustee of GA" painting by .
File:Tomo-chi-chi and other Yamacraws Native Americans.jpg - Wikimedia Commons and his cousin
Oconostota Chief Oconostota Home

as far as
Caphtor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
follow link there
Caphutkia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and then
Cofitachiqui

Caphtor where the giants and " little people" came from "

Philistines real war was with Egypt. but if those are really the same people as the Philistines they got hoodwinked.. and are used now by and subjected to the Egyptians yet again..
here is why

you can see it on the Narmer stele.
Kamrin, Exercise 20, Object 3: Slate Palette | TakeNote.it
Now Namer AKA Menes= MN his people known as MENEGEWI (spelled different ways )
killed the 10 kings of the SEA People... and took over .. these were the great kings ?lords / ancestors . they were Later worshipped as the Baals / lords / owners as god's maybe because Egyptians who conquered them thought themselves as a god for doing it . or somethnglike that

These are what I think this Stele is proof of that North Americans called the Allegewi and Mengewi wars of the blond headed and black headed giants.

Allegewi is I think the 10 tribes of Attalus AKA Atlas / then became known as Atlantis in the old world.. but there is lots of sea people including greeks and many more .
but is EL's
city /states of names like Aleshyia and Alleger and Algeria and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ala&#351;ehir is Biblical Elishah. his clans were all over the world. dna is showing up in India and in Polynesia ... and everyone has the real stories all screwed up beyond recognition.. . what a mess! and scientism will never acknowledge the worlds true history and
" all my relatives " is what established society as we know it now..

scientism wants to make up it's monkey tales and create time where there is none.
ALLAH was a Baal and an ancestor.. who was probably Good and lawful. but God chose Abraham because he was so merciful not just lawful. but I believe God gave Elishah ( means 'God's saves' so I do believe God gave them promises ........ then all hell breaks out trying to stop the real God's plan.. and the enemies of God will never stop his plan.

the Atlantic as we know it was created in one day.. but they have stole the Atlantic's true history and all it's stories to create the billions of years they need to
" prove" evolution . what a lie! scientism hasn't earned the right to tell people what happened yesterday. they are all ignorant or down right liars.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟115,462.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The Jews were never expelled from the Roman empire, they were expelled from Jerusalem for a season...but the Romans and others made things difficult for them and many left anyway.

Hadrian never gave Israel to the Philistines, they had already disappeared as a people group hundreds of years earlier....the only connection Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians have to the Philistines is that they both hated Israel.

I did a little more research on the events during Hadrian's Caesarship, and found the following: Hadrian became a great admirer of the Greek culture, and hellenized many things thruout the empire. he planned to make Jerusalem the capital of a new province, bringing in gentile inhabitants besides the Romans themselves, and establishing several pagan shrines within the city. This infuriated the Jews, and touched off a revolt, which Hadrian ruthlessly crushed. He renamed Judea "Syria Palestaena" & gave it over to a people called Philistines, or "Palestaenians" in Latin. Now, whether or not these were descendants of Israel's old enemies or not remains to be seen, but they still used the name.

Now, many Jews had established towns & cities thruout the Roman empire, and, while crushing the main revolt, the Romans sacked over 50 of them. Moreover, hadrian then forbade many of the practices of the Jewish religion, such as circumcision & animal sacrifice, with anyone caught practicing the forbidden rites to be killed on the spot. Thus, almost all Jews left the empire. Thus began their being unwelcome wherever they roamed.

I erred in believing Hadrian specifically expelled them, but he, in effect, drove them outts the empire by forbidding many practices of the Jewish religion.

And Brandplucked's desperate attempt to bolster the KJVO myth remains horse feathers.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,457
26,887
Pacific Northwest
✟732,164.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Given the OP's inability to deal with rudimentary facts even as they pertain to basic textual analysis and how translation works; I'm going to go ahead and say that the OP's comprehension of any sort of basic biological science is going to be at least as good.

But by all means, let's now talk about how the heliocentric model of the solar system is actually misogynist.

Because reason and facts are scary and must be evil.

-CryptoLutheran
 
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

Zeek

Follower of Messiah, Israel advocate and Zionist
Nov 8, 2010
2,888
217
England
✟11,664.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
This infuriated the Jews, and touched off a revolt, which Hadrian ruthlessly crushed. He renamed Judea "Syria Palestaena" & gave it over to a people called Philistines, or "Palestaenians" in Latin. Now, whether or not these were descendants of Israel's old enemies or not remains to be seen, but they still used the name.


The Philistines ultimately settled on and dominated some of the choicest land in Canaan - the agriculturally rich coastal strip from Gaza in the south to Tell Qasile, near modern Tel Aviv, in the north - through which passed one of the world's most important international trade routes. Soon the Philistines began exerting pressure on the Israelite tribes farther inland. This conflict prompted the Israelites to form a monarchy in the mid-11th century in order to meet the Philistine threat more effectively. After about 150 years of dominance in the area, the Philistines faded from the scene - overpowered by the Israelites under King David - and thereafter played only a minor role in events until, in about 600 B.C., they disappeared altogether.

The Philistines Enter Canaan: Were They Egyptian Lackeys or Invading Conquerors?
 
Upvote 0

OtherSheep

Active Member
Nov 1, 2020
81
23
wi
✟1,154.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Modern Perversions Teach Racism


... RACE SIMPLY CANNOT BE TESTED OR PROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY,”

... THE CONCEPT OF RACE HAS NO GENETIC BASIS."

... It’s really a very simple equation. The King James Bible does not teach that there is such a thing as different “races” of men. It teaches that all are equal, in respect to our creation, before the God Who made us.

What we call races, God called tongues and tribes. KJV says there is one tribe which is more equal than others. And one tribe which is cursed to be servants.

Race is a term that was made legal in America when it became unlawful to discriminate because of race, and made legal again last year. In addition, the BLM movement depends upon the concept of race. Antisemitism laws hinge upon what you call racism. Have you thought your theory through since you posted it here? I'm new here and haven't done much digging yet, so I appologize if I'm dragging a dead thread to the top or stepping on what's been already said.
 
Upvote 0

OtherSheep

Active Member
Nov 1, 2020
81
23
wi
✟1,154.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The Philistines ultimately settled on and dominated some of the choicest land in Canaan - the agriculturally rich coastal strip from Gaza in the south to Tell Qasile, near modern Tel Aviv, in the north - through which passed one of the world's most important international trade routes. Soon the Philistines began exerting pressure on the Israelite tribes farther inland. This conflict prompted the Israelites to form a monarchy in the mid-11th century in order to meet the Philistine threat more effectively. After about 150 years of dominance in the area, the Philistines faded from the scene - overpowered by the Israelites under King David - and thereafter played only a minor role in events until, in about 600 B.C., they disappeared altogether.

The Philistines Enter Canaan: Were They Egyptian Lackeys or Invading Conquerors?

The Philistines were one of the Sea Peoples, aka Pelasgians [Pelag-skoi], who had lost their lands and set out with all their worldly possessions to find new homes... similar to the Cimbri who were flooded out and asked politely the first time. The man who wrote the book on Philistines last century says they had an afinity with the Phoenicians of their day. Godbey says the Achaeans [Akkiva in Latin?] were one of the tribes Joshua attempted to conquest to death, and that several other Trojan Pelasgian types had made it to Palestine, and carried their Mycenaean pottery-making skills with them to become the providers for the Mediterranean. Gertithites lived by Troy, for example. (My spelling may be wrong... sorry for not doing the legwork... this is all by memory.)

These are the reasons why they've found Greek shards in Gaza digs and even in the places of Egypt where Israel was supposed to live... unless of course, Israel really spoke Greek. Greek was the language the Druids used, which is understandable since, primarily, Minoan YDNA is R and mtDNA is H... the two man components of the West-European race.
"The Nonsense of White Genes"!

In fact, the OP seeks to turn back the clock to the time when the disproved mantra Out-Of-Africa was coined... sometime in the '70s by people with the same race-denial. Science however, has proven that it was actually an Into-Africa migration by the Europeans who left their DNA and differentiated the Africans into their widely divergent types.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟115,462.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Modern Perversions Teach Racism


We hear a lot today about the different races of people on this planet. Race is defined as “people who are believed to belong to the same genetic stock”, and as, “subspecies, race, in biology, a taxonomic division of a species, usually as a consequence of geographical isolation within a species.”

However, with the recent advancements in the human genome project, scientists are coming out with some alarming declarations. This quote from an article by Charles Petit, Chronicle Science writer, “Surely, one may suppose, the American melting pot is brimming with different races and racial mixtures. Wrong, say a broad coalition of experts.” “The concept of race is a social and cultural construction. . .RACE SIMPLY CANNOT BE TESTED OR PROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY,” according to a policy statement by the American Anthropological Association. “It is clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. THE CONCEPT OF 'RACE' HAD NO VALIDITY...IN THE HUMAN SPECIES."

The Elder Web.com Newsletter of June 28, 2000 states concerning the human genome project: “Celera Genomics was responsible for the research done in the private sector. Celera CEO and lead researcher J. Craig Ventor states, “THE CONCEPT OF RACE HAS NO GENETIC BASIS."

Local newspapers have recently come out with articles showing that all human beings are genetically 99.9% the same. The differences are truly only skin deep. So we see that scientists today are coming around to the view that people should not be classified as belonging to different “ races.”

This idea of races smacks of evolution, and the idea that some races are superior to others was very popular with Darwin and Adolf Hitler.In fact, it is still popular today. Many people are unaware of the full, original title of Darwin's book. It's original title was "ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY MEANS OF NATURAL SELECTION, OR THE PRESERVATION OF THE FAVORED RACES IN THE STRUGGLE FOR LIFE."

Evolutionism is RACIST!

"It may be quite true that some negroes are better than some white men, but no rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the average white man ...The highest places in the hierarchy of civilization will assuredly not be within the reach of our dusky cousins ..." T. H. Huxley

“No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man” - Thomas Huxley, Lectures and Lay Sermons, 1871, p. 115.

"The standard of intelligence of the average adult Negro is similar to that of the eleven-year-old youth of the species Homo sapiens." Henry Osborne, professor of biology and zoology at Columbia University, discoverer of "Nebraska man", which turned out to be a peccary tooth.

"Every consideration should lead those who believe in the superiority of THE WHITE RACE to strive to preserve its purity and to establish and maintain the segregation of THE RACES, for the longer this is maintained, the greater the preponderance of THE WHITE RACE will be." Edwin Conklin, professor of biology at Princeton University and president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the CIVILIZED RACES will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the SAVAGE RACES throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man. New York: A.L. Burt Co., 1874. p. 178.


Does the Bible ever speak of people belonging to different races, or even of some races being inferior to others? The answer may surprise you.

The King James Version NEVER speaks of people as being of a certain race. It speaks of running the race that is set before us, but never uses this word when referring to people.

This is not the case with the new Bible versions that are so popular today. In their efforts to be “modern and up to date” they have actually proven themselves to be foolish and unscientific.

The NKJV uses the word “race” when referring to people once, the NIV 1984 edition twice, but the NIV 2011 now uses the word "race" eight times, the ESV uses the word “race” four times when referring to people. Ezra 9:2 - “For they have taken some of their daughters to be wives for themselves and for their sons, so that THE HOLY RACE has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands.”, Acts 7:19 - “He dealt shrewdly with OUR RACE”, Romans 9:5 - “To them belong the patriarchs, and from THEIR RACE, according to the flesh, is the Christ” and 1 Peter 2:9 “But you are A CHOSEN RACE” and the NASB six times.

The Holman Standard uses the word "race" to describe "the human race", "our race", "a chosen race" and "Abraham's race" some nineteen (19) times. See Dt. 32:8; Psalm 12:1,8; 14:2; 21:10; 53:2; 107:8,15,21,31; Ps. 115:16; Proverbs 8:31; Isaiah 57:4; "our race" Acts 7:19; "Abraham's race" Acts 13:26; 1 Peter 2:9; Rev. 9:15,18 and Rev. 14:4.

Dan Wallace and company's NET version uses the word "race" to refer to men some twelve (12) times. See Dt. 5:26; Ezra 9:2; Job 12:10; Psalm 8:4; 14:2; 21:10; 36:7; 53:2; 144:3; Proverbs 30:14; Acts 17:26 and 1 Peter 2:9.



In Ezra 9:2, the sins of the people of Israel are recounted. Among them is listed the fact that they had mingled themselves with the idolators of the land of Canaan and had done according to their abominations: “For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons; so that the holy SEED have mingled themselves with the people of those lands.”

The word [zera] here, is clearly “seed”, yet the NIV, ESV, NET and the NASB say “the holy RACE”. Are there unholy races? Are the Israelites a separate race or genetic aberration from the rest of mankind? Only one time have they rendered this Hebrew word 'zera' as 'RACE'.

Again, in Romans 9:3 the apostle Paul testifies “For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my KINSMEN according to the flesh”.

Here the NIV and ESV say, “for the sake of my brothers, those of my own RACE.”

I didn’t know the Jews were a separate race - I thought we all came from Adam and Eve, and after that from Noah and his family.

The 2011 NIV now uses the word "race" as in "the human race", the "holy race" and "my own race" 8 times. See Genesis 6:5,7; Ezra 9:2; Job 28:28; Psalm 12:1,8; Ecclesiastes 3:10 and Romans 9:3.

In Mark 7:26 we are told, “The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by NATION”; yet the NASB says, “a Syrophenician by RACE”.

In Acts 7:19, “The same dealt subtilly with our KINDRED”, is replaced in the NASB, Holman and ESV with, “he who took shrewd advantage of our RACE.”

In I Peter 2:9, “But ye are a chosen GENERATION, a royal priesthood, an holy nation”, has become “you are a chosen RACE”, in the NASB, ESV and Holman.

The passage in James 3:7, “For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of MANKIND” now reads in the NASB as, “been tamed by the human race”.

The worst example of a bad translation and bad theology is found in Zechariah 9:6. Here the KJB reads, “And a BASTARD shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines.”

This Hebrew word ‘mamzer’ is found only twice in the entire Old Testament. The other time is in Deut. 23:2 where it says, “A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD” .

This word is not archaic, and means an illegitimate son, born out of wedlock. In fact here the NASB and NKJV have translated it as, “one of illegitimate birth” but the NIV has messed it up by rendering this single word as “one born of a forbidden marriage.”

So also does the highly touted 2001-2011 English Standard Version, “No one born of a forbidden union”. None of these words occur in the Hebrew text, and if the child were born of any kind of a marriage, it would not be a bastard or of illegitimate birth.

The word is correctly translated as bastard in Deuteronomy 23:2 by the Geneva Bible, the Revised Version of 1881, ASV of 1901, Darby, Young’s, RSV, Hebrew Names Bible, Judaica Press Tanach, Webster’s 1833, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, Third Millenium Bible, World English Bible, Lamsa’s translation from the Peshitta, the Italian Diodati 1649, New Diodati 1991 and La Nueva Riveduta 2006 - "Un BASTARDO non entrerà nell'assemblea", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1549, Spanish Reina Valera 1960, 1995 as ‘BASTARDO’ and the Portuguese Almeida Actualizada - "Nenhum BASTARDO entrará na assembléia do Senhor", the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 - "Le bâtard n'entrera" and the Africaans Bible 1953 - "baster"

However, when we get to Zechariah 9:6 the KJB phrase, “a bastard shall dwell in Ashdod” (1917 Jewish Publication Society translation, Revised Version, ASV, Darby, Updated Bible Version 2004) has now been replaced in the NIV 1984 edition as, “a foreigner”, which is totally wrong, and in the NIV 2011 edition changed once again to now read "A MONGREL PEOPLE".

Also reading "A MONGREL PEOPLE" is Dan Wallace's NET version, the RSV, NRSV, the Holman Standard, the Amplified bible 1987 and the Lexham English bible 2012.

The ISV (International Standard Version) says "A strange people will inhabit Ashdod" but then it footnotes: "Literally, a bastard."

The NKJV has “a MIXED RACE”. The English Standard Version of 2001-2011 says: “A mixed people” but then has this footnote: Hebrew - a bastard.

If there is such a thing as a mixed race, or even worse "a MONGREL people", then is there also such a thing as a pure race? This is what Hitler thought. The New English Bible and the Catholic New Jerusalem 1985 say “A HALF BREED."

But the NASB is the worst of them all here. It actually says “a MONGREL RACE”. Mongrel usually refers to dogs of mixed breeds and has a negative connotation, especially when applied to people.

Remember, this is supposed to be God’s word and His perspective. Is there such a thing as a mongrel race that He has created? I don’t think so. Relations among people of different skin color are difficult enough because of our pride and our fallen, sinful nature, without having the “word of God” actually referring to some people as of a "MONGREL RACE."

It’s really a very simple equation. The King James Bible does not teach that there is such a thing as different “races” of men. It teaches that all are equal, in respect to our creation, before the God Who made us. The NKJV, NIV, ESV, Holman, NET and NASB all teach there are different races and that some are inferior to others.

Which one presents the truth? Clearly it is the “old fashioned” King James Bible.

I would rather have the Truth that is harder to read and understand, than error which is in modern updated English. How about you?

Will Kinney

Return to Articles - KJB Articles - Another King James Bible Believer

The only perversion here is the false, man-made KJVO myth, which is proven false by the fact it has NO Scriptural support, even in the KJV itself.

As for Ashdod, it was once one of the 5 principal Philistine cities, but now it's occupied by JEWS, & fully under their control. To a Philistine (modern "Palestinian") the Jews are a "mongrel" people.

The word rendered 'bastard' in Hebrew, "mamzer", can mean an illegitimate child or an inferior race. As much of Zech.9 is presented to reflect the Philistine point of view, they thought the Jews were inferior to them. So, as usual, Mr. Kinney must use imagination & guesswork to try to sustain his KJVO myth.
 
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

pescador

Wise old man
Site Supporter
Nov 29, 2011
8,530
4,776
✟498,844.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Modern Perversions Teach Racism


We hear a lot today about the different races of people on this planet. Race is defined as “people who are believed to belong to the same genetic stock”, and as, “subspecies, race, in biology, a taxonomic division of a species, usually as a consequence of geographical isolation within a species.”

However, with the recent advancements in the human genome project, scientists are coming out with some alarming declarations. This quote from an article by Charles Petit, Chronicle Science writer, “Surely, one may suppose, the American melting pot is brimming with different races and racial mixtures. Wrong, say a broad coalition of experts.” “The concept of race is a social and cultural construction. . .RACE SIMPLY CANNOT BE TESTED OR PROVEN SCIENTIFICALLY,” according to a policy statement by the American Anthropological Association. “It is clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. THE CONCEPT OF 'RACE' HAD NO VALIDITY...IN THE HUMAN SPECIES."

The Elder Web.com Newsletter of June 28, 2000 states concerning the human genome project: “Celera Genomics was responsible for the research done in the private sector. Celera CEO and lead researcher J. Craig Ventor states, “THE CONCEPT OF RACE HAS NO GENETIC BASIS."

Local newspapers have recently come out with articles showing that all human beings are genetically 99.9% the same. The differences are truly only skin deep. So we see that scientists today are coming around to the view that people should not be classified as belonging to different “ races.”

This idea of races smacks of evolution, and the idea that some races are superior to others was very popular with Darwin and Adolf Hitler.In fact, it is still popular today. Many people are unaware of the full, original title of Darwin's book. It's original title was "ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY MEANS OF NATURAL SELECTION, OR THE PRESERVATION OF THE FAVORED RACES IN THE STRUGGLE FOR LIFE."

Evolutionism is RACIST!

"It may be quite true that some negroes are better than some white men, but no rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the average white man ...The highest places in the hierarchy of civilization will assuredly not be within the reach of our dusky cousins ..." T. H. Huxley

“No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man” - Thomas Huxley, Lectures and Lay Sermons, 1871, p. 115.

"The standard of intelligence of the average adult Negro is similar to that of the eleven-year-old youth of the species Homo sapiens." Henry Osborne, professor of biology and zoology at Columbia University, discoverer of "Nebraska man", which turned out to be a peccary tooth.

"Every consideration should lead those who believe in the superiority of THE WHITE RACE to strive to preserve its purity and to establish and maintain the segregation of THE RACES, for the longer this is maintained, the greater the preponderance of THE WHITE RACE will be." Edwin Conklin, professor of biology at Princeton University and president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the CIVILIZED RACES will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the SAVAGE RACES throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla." Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man. New York: A.L. Burt Co., 1874. p. 178.


Does the Bible ever speak of people belonging to different races, or even of some races being inferior to others? The answer may surprise you.

The King James Version NEVER speaks of people as being of a certain race. It speaks of running the race that is set before us, but never uses this word when referring to people.

This is not the case with the new Bible versions that are so popular today. In their efforts to be “modern and up to date” they have actually proven themselves to be foolish and unscientific.

The NKJV uses the word “race” when referring to people once, the NIV 1984 edition twice, but the NIV 2011 now uses the word "race" eight times, the ESV uses the word “race” four times when referring to people. Ezra 9:2 - “For they have taken some of their daughters to be wives for themselves and for their sons, so that THE HOLY RACE has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands.”, Acts 7:19 - “He dealt shrewdly with OUR RACE”, Romans 9:5 - “To them belong the patriarchs, and from THEIR RACE, according to the flesh, is the Christ” and 1 Peter 2:9 “But you are A CHOSEN RACE” and the NASB six times.

The Holman Standard uses the word "race" to describe "the human race", "our race", "a chosen race" and "Abraham's race" some nineteen (19) times. See Dt. 32:8; Psalm 12:1,8; 14:2; 21:10; 53:2; 107:8,15,21,31; Ps. 115:16; Proverbs 8:31; Isaiah 57:4; "our race" Acts 7:19; "Abraham's race" Acts 13:26; 1 Peter 2:9; Rev. 9:15,18 and Rev. 14:4.

Dan Wallace and company's NET version uses the word "race" to refer to men some twelve (12) times. See Dt. 5:26; Ezra 9:2; Job 12:10; Psalm 8:4; 14:2; 21:10; 36:7; 53:2; 144:3; Proverbs 30:14; Acts 17:26 and 1 Peter 2:9.



In Ezra 9:2, the sins of the people of Israel are recounted. Among them is listed the fact that they had mingled themselves with the idolators of the land of Canaan and had done according to their abominations: “For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons; so that the holy SEED have mingled themselves with the people of those lands.”

The word [zera] here, is clearly “seed”, yet the NIV, ESV, NET and the NASB say “the holy RACE”. Are there unholy races? Are the Israelites a separate race or genetic aberration from the rest of mankind? Only one time have they rendered this Hebrew word 'zera' as 'RACE'.

Again, in Romans 9:3 the apostle Paul testifies “For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my KINSMEN according to the flesh”.

Here the NIV and ESV say, “for the sake of my brothers, those of my own RACE.”

I didn’t know the Jews were a separate race - I thought we all came from Adam and Eve, and after that from Noah and his family.

The 2011 NIV now uses the word "race" as in "the human race", the "holy race" and "my own race" 8 times. See Genesis 6:5,7; Ezra 9:2; Job 28:28; Psalm 12:1,8; Ecclesiastes 3:10 and Romans 9:3.

In Mark 7:26 we are told, “The woman was a Greek, a Syrophenician by NATION”; yet the NASB says, “a Syrophenician by RACE”.

In Acts 7:19, “The same dealt subtilly with our KINDRED”, is replaced in the NASB, Holman and ESV with, “he who took shrewd advantage of our RACE.”

In I Peter 2:9, “But ye are a chosen GENERATION, a royal priesthood, an holy nation”, has become “you are a chosen RACE”, in the NASB, ESV and Holman.

The passage in James 3:7, “For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of MANKIND” now reads in the NASB as, “been tamed by the human race”.

The worst example of a bad translation and bad theology is found in Zechariah 9:6. Here the KJB reads, “And a BASTARD shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines.”

This Hebrew word ‘mamzer’ is found only twice in the entire Old Testament. The other time is in Deut. 23:2 where it says, “A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD” .

This word is not archaic, and means an illegitimate son, born out of wedlock. In fact here the NASB and NKJV have translated it as, “one of illegitimate birth” but the NIV has messed it up by rendering this single word as “one born of a forbidden marriage.”

So also does the highly touted 2001-2011 English Standard Version, “No one born of a forbidden union”. None of these words occur in the Hebrew text, and if the child were born of any kind of a marriage, it would not be a bastard or of illegitimate birth.

The word is correctly translated as bastard in Deuteronomy 23:2 by the Geneva Bible, the Revised Version of 1881, ASV of 1901, Darby, Young’s, RSV, Hebrew Names Bible, Judaica Press Tanach, Webster’s 1833, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, Third Millenium Bible, World English Bible, Lamsa’s translation from the Peshitta, the Italian Diodati 1649, New Diodati 1991 and La Nueva Riveduta 2006 - "Un BASTARDO non entrerà nell'assemblea", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1549, Spanish Reina Valera 1960, 1995 as ‘BASTARDO’ and the Portuguese Almeida Actualizada - "Nenhum BASTARDO entrará na assembléia do Senhor", the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 - "Le bâtard n'entrera" and the Africaans Bible 1953 - "baster"

However, when we get to Zechariah 9:6 the KJB phrase, “a bastard shall dwell in Ashdod” (1917 Jewish Publication Society translation, Revised Version, ASV, Darby, Updated Bible Version 2004) has now been replaced in the NIV 1984 edition as, “a foreigner”, which is totally wrong, and in the NIV 2011 edition changed once again to now read "A MONGREL PEOPLE".

Also reading "A MONGREL PEOPLE" is Dan Wallace's NET version, the RSV, NRSV, the Holman Standard, the Amplified bible 1987 and the Lexham English bible 2012.

The ISV (International Standard Version) says "A strange people will inhabit Ashdod" but then it footnotes: "Literally, a bastard."

The NKJV has “a MIXED RACE”. The English Standard Version of 2001-2011 says: “A mixed people” but then has this footnote: Hebrew - a bastard.

If there is such a thing as a mixed race, or even worse "a MONGREL people", then is there also such a thing as a pure race? This is what Hitler thought. The New English Bible and the Catholic New Jerusalem 1985 say “A HALF BREED."

But the NASB is the worst of them all here. It actually says “a MONGREL RACE”. Mongrel usually refers to dogs of mixed breeds and has a negative connotation, especially when applied to people.

Remember, this is supposed to be God’s word and His perspective. Is there such a thing as a mongrel race that He has created? I don’t think so. Relations among people of different skin color are difficult enough because of our pride and our fallen, sinful nature, without having the “word of God” actually referring to some people as of a "MONGREL RACE."

It’s really a very simple equation. The King James Bible does not teach that there is such a thing as different “races” of men. It teaches that all are equal, in respect to our creation, before the God Who made us. The NKJV, NIV, ESV, Holman, NET and NASB all teach there are different races and that some are inferior to others.

Which one presents the truth? Clearly it is the “old fashioned” King James Bible.

I would rather have the Truth that is harder to read and understand, than error which is in modern updated English. How about you?

Will Kinney

Return to Articles - KJB Articles - Another King James Bible Believer

I trust only Bibles that are written in my native language, the one that I read, speak, and hear every single day. Since it is the 21st Century, those Bibles that I trust and clearly understand are those in modern English. God does not intend us to be confused by re-translating a 400+-year-old translation into the language that we speak, read, and hear every single day.

KJVOs think that somehow if they read something that sounds weird it must somehow be from God, since of course, when He came to Earth, He came as a Pharisee or Sadducee with a pure knowledge of God and Scripture, not a carpenter. As we all know, Jesus was a plain man, a carpenter by trade, who spoke Aramaic, the common language of the people, and read ancient Hebrew. When He spoke to thousands of people, he didn't obfuscate the meaning of His message, couching it in some strange language that the common people couldn't easily understand.

KJVOs seem to think they're somehow superior to the rest of us because they have a Bible that reads such wording as...

"But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when
he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then
shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee"?

Isn't the meaning far clearer to people living today when translated as "But
when you are invited, take the lowest place, so that when your host comes,
he will say to you, ‘Friend, move up to a better place.’ Then you will be
honored in the presence of all the other guests."

and...

"His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and
his horns are like the the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the
people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of
Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh."

This describes such creatures as unicorns (really!) and the firstling of his bullock. Nobody speaks/reads/thinks like this 400+ years later; it must be retranslated, most often by people who aren't qualified to do so. Thankfully, we have experts in the ancient languages, customs, traditions, etc, who have given us excellent translations into our native languages.

God's Word is meant to be understood! Go ahead and make yourself feel holy and superior by using the KJV but those of us who think clearly in our native language have long ago moved on.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0