Is the KJV more than a translation

[Bible Highlighter]

Also, it is silly to assume that the devil is not trying to corrupt God's Word today. So if the Modern Translations are not a corruption upon God's Word by the devil, then which bibles or words of God are being attacked?

 

[kiwimac]

Obviously a pro-website in favor of Westcott and Hort is going to try to defend their claims. But so far I am not buying it. For if what you say is true, then you would be able to do what I said (i.e. underline the words in context and add a commentary in brackets so as to exonerate their other faulty claims).

You also did not answer my posts back on their wrong claims in what they said, too.
I mentioned before their clear reference to Mary worship and their favoritism towards Catholicism. Are you saying that I am taking even those quotes out of context? I kind of find that hard to believe. It is clear in what they said.

But why would people defend them erroneously?

It's a thing called "money."
Copyrights on Bibles are big money these days.

I am not going to educate you that is your responsibility. The mere fact that you do not comprehend that writing a book to engage with those who say that the "faith and the bible is mere compromise" is NOT the same as believing that yourself does not bode well. For myself I have argued and fought with KJV Onlyists for coming on 20 years now and I am heartily sick and tired of it. Your preference for an archaic and dated translation is not the same as a command from on high to use the same.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I am not going to educate you that is your responsibility. The mere fact that you do not comprehend that writing a book to engage with those who say that the "faith and the bible is mere compromise" is NOT the same as believing that yourself does not bode well.

Okay. I looked at it again. Yes, you are right. It is true, that others did say that their Bible and faith is a compromise. I added brackets of commentary.

"...However imperfectly this design has been carried out, I cannot but hope that such a method of inquiry will convey both the truest notion of the connexion of the written Word with the living body of Christ, and the surest conviction of its divine authority.[i.e. Westcott here does sound like he is saying that what he is writing is closest to the Written Word] Hitherto the co-existence of several types of Apostolic doctrine in the first age and of various parties in Christendom for several generations afterwards has been quoted to prove that our Bible as well as our Faith is a mere compromise..."[i.e. Yes, it appears here that Westcott and Hort are saying that others are saying that their Bible and their faith is a mere compromise] (Westcott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, p. vii)." ​

Are the claims of other Christians saying that their Bible and their faith is a compromise true?

I showed you another quote that you ignored before on how Westcott Denied That The Lord Jesus Christ and God The Father Could Be “EQUAL IN POWER”; Hence he thereby denied The DEITY Of Christ. For he wrote:

(John 10:30) (I and my Father are one): It seems clear that the unity here spoken of cannot fall short of unity of essence. The thought springs from the EQUALITY OF POWER (my hand, the Father’s hand); but infinite power is an essential ATTRIBUTE OF GOD; and it is IMPOSSIBLE TO SUPPOSE THAT TWO BEINGS DISTINCT IN ESSENCE COULD BE EQUAL IN POWER. (W-John, op. cit., p. 159).

For myself I have argued and fought with KJV Onlyists for coming on 20 years now and I am heartily sick and tired of it.

You should then be still and know God's peace and that everything has a place and timing and that we cannot change people. It is only God that can change heart's if a person is open to hearing the truth. Look, I just seen your one quote in what it was saying in regards to Westcott and Hort. So thank you for pushing me to re-read it. But you also are not looking at what I am writing, too. My recent quote and my quote on their favoritism towards Mary worship does not bode well for them to create a Greek Translation.

Your preference for an archaic and dated translation is not the same as a command from on high to use the same.

But what if. What if I am right and you are wrong? What if the KJV really is the Word of God and you have been attacking it this whole time? Would God be pleased with your efforts if such were the case? The evidences are there if you are willing to see it. My suggestiion is forget what you know for a moment and seek the truth on this matter. Maybe we KJV-only folks might be pig headed get things wrong sometimes, but that does not mean we are completely wrong about the KJV. For are you always right on everything? Surely not. We all make mistakes. My encouragment for both of us is always to: Seek out the truth (Which is always into the arms of Jesus Christ).

Anyways, may God bless you;
And may you please be well.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Again, Scripture shows how the devil likes to pervert or change the Word of God.
We see this in Genesis 3 with the devil trying to tempt Eve, and with the devil trying to tempt our Lord Jesus Christ. The devil misquotes God's command in Genesis and He misquotes Scripture (out of context) to tempt our Lord Jesus Christ.

So if the devil's tactic is to corrupt God's Word, logic dictates that it is still happening today; Unless of course you don't believe in a devil and or something (Which would be contrary to what the Bible clearly teaches).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Westcott Denied That The Lord Jesus Christ And God The Father Could Be “EQUAL IN POWER,” Hence Denied Thereby The DEITY Of Christ. He wrote:

(John 10:30)(I and my Father are one) It seems clear that the unity here spoken of cannot fall short of unity of essence. The thought springs from the EQUALITY OF POWER (my hand, the Father’s hand); but infinite power is an essential ATTRIBUTE OF GOD; and it is IMPOSSIBLE TO SUPPOSE THAT TWO BEINGS DISTINCT IN ESSENCE COULD BE EQUAL IN POWER. (W-John, op. cit., p. 159).

By the way, here is the context of what Westcott said here on John 10:30:

This does not bode well for Westcott here.

Please take note that while Westcott may appear to be in favor of Christ being of God and man, word play can be a tricky thing that does not always display what a person actually believes.

It is possible that Westcott could believe in the Trinity later on or something (Whereby later writings confirm his belief in it). Then again it is also possible he used to believe in the Trinity and he did not believe in it later. It's also possible he believed that Jesus was a demi-god who was created sometime in the beginning (Which would be a denial of the true God). We need more clearer evidence on the matter to truly know what he is saying about the Trinity.

Also, what is stopping people from creating false evidence of Westcott and Hort in saying that they believed certain things? Nothing.

What I can trust is what does the KJV say vs. Modern Translations say. That is what I can trust. It is something that exists in the here and now. For I prefer Observantional Science vs. Historical Science.

 

[Almost there]

The KJV (TR) has been translated into the following languages:

But those are not KJV any more than the KJV is Greek and Hebrew. They are translations and, by definition, interpretations, as are all translations from one language to another.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

But those are not KJV any more than the KJV is Greek and Hebrew. They are translations and, by definition, interpretations, as are all translations from one language to another.

Then God's Word has failed to exist for us today and we are without a Word of God that we can truly know with 100% certainty because nobody speaks Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Greek. People are only guessing as to what those languages are saying. We do not have a Paul giving us a commentary from the Greek to the English. I choose to believe God's Word in that it says that it is perfect and that it will be preserved for all generations (Including this one).

 

[Almost there]

It's not wrong to consult Modern Versions. I do so all the time. It helps update the 1600's English. But just because the 1769 needs to be updated for our today's English does not mean that it is not the pure Word of God for our day. There are many things that the Lord Jesus said that were not always clear at first glance.

Then you are not KJVO.

Also, the things Jesus said were NEVER clear. Everything he said was in a parable, specifically so that they would not understand. This is where I get my tagline from.

Not if they study to show themselves approved unto God as 2 Timothy 2:15 says. Oh, and by the way, that verse is distorted in your fancy Modern Translation.

Which one? In this age I have MANY translations to choose from and use many. And if I'm really stuck I go to the original Greek or Hebrew.

Right, because not having 1 John 5:7 really helps you as a Christian. So the next time you are up against an Arian, you can forget it. You cannot use 1 John 5:7. Also, why on Earth would you remove believing on the Lord Jesus Christ in Acts? That is evil and wrong to do that. To say that this was added is wrong on many levels. It is just non-sense because without this verse, it emphasizes baptism over believing in Jesus. It sets up the reason for why he was to be baptized. The Ethiopian Enuch said that he believed Jesus is the Son of God so as to be baptized. This is important. You take that out and you nueter your Bible! It's wrong. God says that those who take away from God's Word, He will take their name out of the book of life. So this is very serious here in what Modern Translations have done with the Word of God.

You seem to be arguing that the very fact that a translation is "modern", that its truth and authority are, by that very virtue alone, impeached. The KJV used to be a "modern" translation. Do they just sort of age like a good bourbon?

I don't need 1 John 5:7 for any point I've ever made regarding the personality of God. I don't get into discussing the "trinity". It's not in the bible. I speak of God as the bible speaks of Him in his various incarnations. (be it physical or spiritual). Remember, Revelation speaks of the "seven spirits" of God.

Again, I refer you to my tag line...

Oh, and the devil places his name in replace of the Lord's name in Modern Translations, as well.
Then there is Westcott and Hort (Who were occultists and who denied many basic things of the faith); All your Modern Translations are based upon their Greek text.

Now I see where this is going.

The only real response I have to all of your post is, who told you that and why did you believe them?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Then you are not KJVO.

I am pretty sure I know what I believe.
Yes, I am KJV Only because I treat the Modern Translations as if they were dirt and I was panning through them to get to the gold that is in the King James. In other words, my final word of authority is still the King James Bible and that is why I am still KJV Only (or KJVO). If I was not KJVO, then I would favor the Modern Translation in what they say OVER the KJV. But that is simply not true. The KJV is still the one and ONLY perfect and pure Word of God.

Also, the things Jesus said were NEVER clear. Everything he said was in a parable, specifically so that they would not understand. This is where I get my tagline from.

Yes, which helps to prove my case and not your case. So the idea of the KJV being hard to understand SOMETIMES is not an issue of whether or not it is not the pure Word of God because Jesus said things that were not always clear to everyone.

Which one? In this age I have MANY translations to choose from and use many.

Take your pick. Most of them do not say "study to show yourself approved unto God"

This is important because God's people are destroyed for lack of knowledge (Hosea 4:6).

And if I'm really stuck I go to the original Greek or Hebrew.

But you don't speak and write Hebrew and Greek. Nobody does. Not even creators of the Hebrew and Greek dictionaries ever did. They did not grow up during Biblical times and they are only guessing.

You seem to be arguing that the very fact that a translation is "modern", that its truth and authority are, by that very virtue alone, impeached. The KJV used to be a "modern" translation. Do they just sort of age like a good bourbon?

I am going off the lingo of standard Christiandom. Most Christians refer to KJV and then they refer to the rest of the bibles as Modern Translations. This also fits in the fact that the explosion of Modern Translations from a different text source came onto the scene hundreds of years after the KJV (TR).

I don't need 1 John 5:7 for any point I've ever made regarding the personality of God. I don't get into discussing the "trinity". It's not in the bible. I speak of God as the bible speaks of Him in his various incarnations. (be it physical or spiritual). Remember, Revelation speaks of the "seven spirits" of God.

So you don't believe in the Trinity? If you favor the Modern Translations, this is not surprising.

As for the seven spirits of God: This is in reference to either the seven difference aspects of God's attributes or to seven angels. It is not talking about seven distinct persons within the Godhead.

Again, I refer you to my tag line...

Now I see where this is going.

The only real response I have to all of your post is, who told you that and why did you believe them?

Do you not believe in a devil?
Do you believe that the devil has stopped corrupting God's Word?
Think man.

 

[Almost there]

Then God's Word has failed to exist for us today and we are without a Word of God that we can truly know with 100% certainty because nobody speaks Biblical Hebrew and Biblical Greek. People are only guessing as to what those languages are saying. We do not have a Paul giving us a commentary from the Greek to the English. I choose to believe God's Word in that it says that it is perfect and that it will be preserved for all generations (Including this one).

Exactly! I don't believe the bible is the word of God. Rather, I believe it CONTAINS the word of God. In the new testament, it can usually be spotted by red text. ;(

It is why we pray. The bible has its function and tells us what that function is. It never claims to be "the" word of God. The personal word of God for me is in prayer. The scripture below clarifies, but remember, it was written before we had our bibles. i.e. it is talking about something else. And even then, it does not claim it is THE word of God. Rather, it is the words of men, who's words are inspired by God. And what scripture is this letter referring to? Remember, there is a LOT of scripture out there that is not in our bible, and our bible did not exist when this letter was penned.

And are our pastors inspired by God? If so, should we not staple all of their sermons to the end of our bible?

But I will say that for me, I believe my bible is really profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness

2 Timothy 3:16-17King James Version (KJV)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

BTW, here is the lexicon for 16:

2 Timothy 3:16 Lexicon: All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

The bible is an excellent source of information regarding how to live a Godly life and for getting a glimpse of the personality of God as he relates to mankind. But without prayer it is useless, other than in a humanistic way. i.e. proverbes is great teaching even for atheists, and many modern motivational speakers are basically regurgitating bible wisdom for a modern audience, and in a, truth be told, more entertaining way.

The way to God is the blood of Christ. The way to understanding of God is through prayer, coupled with instruction in the bible. But if you can only have one of those two, it's best to have prayer.

 

[he-man]

The KJV-Only fits option (d). Men trusted one Word of God and did not see God's Holy Word as flawed and they trusted faithfully to even the point of death.

Try these on for size: Is 7:14 Therefore theLord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold a virgin shall conceive , and bear a son, and shall call his name "appointed by God", Immanuel.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Exactly! I don't believe the bible is the word of God. Rather, I believe it CONTAINS the word of God. .

Then we are done talking. The rest of the conversation will be each other talking past each other; And you will see whatever you want to see. For I believe that is foundation to the faith to believe that the Bible is the Written Word of God (In addition to Jesus also being the Living Word of God).

 

[Almost there]

Then we are done talking. The rest of the conversation will be each other talking past each other; And you will see whatever you want to see. For I believe that is foundation to the faith to believe that the Bible is the Written Word of God (In addition to Jesus also being the Living Word of God).

I believe Prayer is the foundation, and the Bible is good for what it says it's good for. So yeah, we seem to be at an impasse. Iron sharpening iron...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I believe Prayer is the foundation, and the Bible is good for what it says it's good for. So yeah, we seem to be at an impasse. Iron sharpening iron...

I think it is best that we do not converse (and or that you read my posts) if you reject the Bible is the Written Word of God. Again, this to me is foundation to the faith (of which you would not be able to even know about prayer).

 

[Almost there]

I think it is best that we do not converse (and or that you read my posts) if you reject the Bible is the Written Word of God. Again, this to me is foundation to the faith (of which you would not be able to even know about prayer).

Remember that until very recently most people had no access to a bible and even if they did, they could not read it. And word of mouth is a powerful thing. Sometimes far more powerful than the written word.

It is important to not fall into "bible worship" and see it for what it is. It is a collection of history books, law establishment for a theocracy, prayers, college level wisdom teaching (e.g. ecclesiastes) and self help training, prophesies, dreams, biographies and letters. All of it, for me, is good for teaching, reproof, etc.

But to really know God it takes a personal relationship through prayer. The bible helps, but is not enough.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Remember that until very recently most people had no access to a bible and even if they did, they could not read it. And word of mouth is a powerful thing. Sometimes far more powerful than the written word.

It is important to not fall into "bible worship" and see it for what it is. It is a collection of history books, law establishment for a theocracy, prayers, college level wisdom teaching (e.g. ecclesiastes) and self help training, prophesies, dreams, biographies and letters. All of it, for me, is good for teaching, reproof, etc.

But to really know God it takes a personal relationship through prayer. The bible helps, but is not enough.

To whom much is given, much is required. But again, your lack of faith that there is a Written Word of God does not change that fact. Go ahead and believe whatever you like. I am not going to continue this conversation if you reject what I believe to be the foundation of the faith.

 

[Almost there]

To whom much is given, much is required. But again, your lack of faith that there is a Written Word of God does not change that fact. Go ahead and believe whatever you like. I am not going to continue this conversation if you reject what I believe to be the foundation of our faith.

Well, we are given "much" translations and searchable Lexicon's at our disposal.

We are certainly without excuse now!

The invention of the printing press gave us the reformation and the intenet and all it brings is bringing a purification of Christian teachings.

Sometimes newer really IS better. Like Jesus, I've never been a fan of the traditions of men.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Well, we are given "much" translations and searchable Lexicon's at our disposal.

We are certainly without excuse now!

The invention of the printing press gave us the reformation and the intenet and all it brings is bringing a purification of Christian teachings.

Sometimes newer really IS better. Like Jesus, I've never been a fan of the traditions of men.

The tradiions of men can be seen in the scholars who defend Modern Translations. They seek to change God's Word like the Pharisees did. This is evident in the fact that scholars keep coming out with new alterations on God's Word.

 

[Almost there]

The tradiions of men can be seen in the scholars who defend Modern Translations. They seek to change God's Word like the Pharisees did. This is evident in the fact that they keep coming out with new alterations on God's Word.

Why do you hate modern translations so much. Are yo completely blind to the flaws of the KJV? They are ALL flawed in minor ways.

I have a freind that went to Christian college to deep dive into theology and Greek & Hebrew. I asked her one day which is the best version of the bible to trust. Her answer stunned me, and I paraphrase:

"The only way to fully understand the bible is to become fluent in the languages in which it was originally written. And she meant the specific versions of Greek and Hebrew.

Since neither of us is such a scholar, we are left to trust our own choice of authorities and, more importantly, prayer.

I use all versions and really have no favorite. The KJV is my least favorite only because it is not written in my native tongue. It might as well be in Spanish, which I know a little. But I throw none of the versions that I've come across out completely.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Why do you hate modern translations so much. Are yo completely blind to the flaws of the KJV? They are ALL flawed in minor ways.

I have a freind that went to Christian college to deep dive into theology and Greek & Hebrew. I asked her one day which is the best version of the bible to trust. Her answer stunned me, and I paraphrase:

"The only way to fully understand the bible is to become fluent in the languages in which it was originally written. And she meant the specific versions of Greek and Hebrew.

Since neither of us is such a scholar, we are left to trust our own choice of authorities and, more importantly, prayer.

I use all versions and really have no favorite. The KJV is my least favorite only because it is not written in my native tongue. It might as well be in Spanish, which I know a little. But I throw none of the versions that I've come across out completely.

Read this article here:
Bible Versions: Are There Significant Differences? Corruption Exposed!