Authorised King James Version

[edjones]

You only get a 'room' with a NIV.

John 14
2In my Father's house are many rooms ; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. © Copyright 1973, 1987, 1984 by International Bible Society All rights reserved.

John 14
2 In my Father's house are many : if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. AV Holy Bible

ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE reveals that Christian educators and Greek scholars pervert the Truth as they "HOLD IT IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS" (Rom. 1:18). All other versions cover the sin.

 

[Thunderchild]

John 14:2 (NAS)

[SHADOW=coral]In my Father's house there are many dwelling places[/SHADOW]

Given that a mansion in this time is a rather opulent house, you have a house (in the AV) containing houses. Not exactly an expected condition.

The word translated as "mansion" in this verse is used only twice - the second occurrence being in John 14:23, translated in the AV as "abode."

Yet another straw man from Ed Jones.

 

[edjones]

[SHADOW=silver]ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE points out clearly that a man who is counting on the law to justify him in this age is NOT saved, nor ever was (Gal. 5:4). All of the other versions do something with the verse to intimate that he may have once known Christ. [/SHADOW]

 

[Thunderchild]

"Ye are fallen from grace" Galatians 5:4 AV - can't fall from something if you were never in it.

 

[Thunderchild]

"Christ is become of none effect unto you" Galatians 5:4 AV - Must needs be pointed out that Christ was at one time of some effect - else he cannot have become of none effect.

 

[edjones]

[SHADOW=skyblue]ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE preserves the deity of Christ in His incarnation in Philippians 2:7. All others follow the modernistic readings of the National Council of Churches of Christ. [/SHADOW]

 

[Thunderchild]

ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE reveals that Christian educators and Greek scholars pervert the Truth as they "HOLD IT IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS" (Rom. 1:18). All other versions cover the sin.

1/ The King James does not nominate Christian Educators and scholars as those who hold the truth in unrighteousness.

2/ "holding fast the truth in unrighteousness" (Literal) ... "retaining the truth in injustice" (Concordant) ... So much for ALL other versions.

3/ NAS and RSV both refer to suppressing the truth in unrighteousness - there IS a slight difference in the versions, but when all versions are taken into account, it becomes easier to understand fully what is intended by the Greek. For example, one could not understand that the people referred to pervert the truth using only the King James.

We have in this verse a reference to persons who consider the truth to be unclean, which would include those who declare the truth, when it is presented in a form they don't like, to be unclean.

We have in this verse a reference to persons who suppress the truth by unrighteous means. Which would of course include slander and libel.

 

[Thunderchild]

Reading the AV for Philippians 2:7 shows that the verse referred to (in the AV that is) does not "preserve" the deity of Christ in his fleshly incarnation either.

The "preserving" of deity is purely in the imagination of the reader. It states (in the AV) "and was made in the likeness of men" .... Of course, it may SEEM to one who has even less knowledge than I of 17th century English (which would in itself be a difficult thing to achieve) ... it may seem to such a one that it is possible that "made in the likeness" (by 17th century grammar) and "made to resemble" would be the same thing - but that is a false assumption.

 

[edjones]

[GLOW=skyblue]ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE warns you about the "appearance of evil" (1 Thess. 5:22). [/GLOW]

 

[Thunderchild]

"Abstain from all appearance of evil" (AV) The occurrence of "abstain" in this verse, in this version, quite clearly shows that the word "appearance" here means "perceive."

That being the case "abstain from every form of evil" (NIV) is just as valid as a translation - so too, "from everything wicked to the perception, abstain. (Concordant)

 

[edjones]

[SHADOW=silver]ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE dares tell you what the main sin of modern Christian scholarship is, after it rejected the Book. It is "SUPPOSING THAT GAIN IS GODLINESS." But this reading cannot be found in ANY BIBLE on this earth but an AUTHORIZED VERSION (I Tim. 6:5). [/SHADOW]

 

[LouisBooth]

ed, the KJV isn't the ONLY bible out there. That's just a fact. Nor is it the "right" bible.

 

[filosofer]

Originally posted by edjones
ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE preserves the deity of Christ in His incarnation in Philippians 2:7. All others follow the modernistic readings of the National Council of Churches of Christ.

Okay, ed. Sit down. If you are sitting, lie down. You haven't the foggiest idea what you are writing.

Now that you have relaxed, read Phil. 2:7. What do you read?

Okay, what is the difference between these statements? Which one of these denies the deity of Christ?

EDIT: I think I needed to get a good night's sleep. I didn't put the whole verse in. Sorry.

 

[Didaskomenos]

ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE dares tell you what the main sin of modern Christian scholarship is, after it rejected the Book. It is "SUPPOSING THAT GAIN IS GODLINESS." But this reading cannot be found in ANY BIBLE on this earth but an AUTHORIZED VERSION (I Tim. 6:5).

Ed, that's simply because it's a SPURIOUS phrase added by SATAN, since the earliest and most faithful manuscripts don't have it. That should diminish your confidence in the KJV, not bolster it!

(Just kidding about Satan, but it's false nonetheless, and besides, how else am I supposed to compete with your melodrama?)

 

[Dave Ulchers]

"and mutual friction among people with corrupted minds, who are deprived of the truth, supposing religion to be a means of gain." -- NAB. Slightly different shade of meaning, but of course gain isn't Godliness. But Paul is talking about those who disagree with the holiness which Christ taught, and thus desire money, etc. and would therefore view those who do not desire money as using religion as an excuse for a free ride -- hence the envy and insults of verse 4. I think Paul's explanation to Tim here makes just fine sense in my Bible.

 

[edjones]

ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE commands you to STUDY the "word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). And if that were not enough it is the ONLY Bible on earth that tells you HOW to study the word of truth. You must RIGHTLY DIVIDE the word of truth. You will find it in the AUTHORIZED VERSION or you will MISS IT in all the others.










Proverbs 13:10
Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.

 

[Dave Ulchers]

Divide the word of truth? Well, OK, let me go find my wood axe....

 

[Thunderchild]

ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE commands you to STUDY the "word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15).

In the 17th Century - that is, in 1611, study did not mean to examine... it meant be diligent, ... "[GLOW=orangered]study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman unashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth[/GLOW] " "studiously show yourself to be approved of God" - it does not mean examine the scriptures.

One who is in the flesh could easily be misled into thinking that "study to show yourself approved" means "study the scriptures," but such a one cannot understand the things of God anyway - he has nothing to teach a Christian about God - he has no authority to teach, and no knowledge to impart.

 

[Thunderchild]

2 Timothy 2:15 "... a workman unashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" Literal Version, not the AV. So much for only in the AV.

 

[Thunderchild]

"...deprived of the truth, supposing gain to be godliness" (Literal Version) Only in the AV? Hardly.

"deprived of the truth, inferring that devoutness is a means of gain." (Concordant) Is someone going to pretend that godliness and devoutness are somehow different?

"...deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means for gain" Which says precisely the same thing that the AV says, the only difference being that it uses the 20-21st centuries' syntax, so to the reader unfamiliar with the 17th Century grammar has no difficulty in determining the message.