KJV Only?

[tall73]

The Geneva Bible.

The great Isaiah Scroll.

I would agree with you.

However, if you believe that then you cannot hold to the view that SaintJoe does. Because there is not a word for word correspondence with the text underlying the KJV, which is what he insists on.

 

[tall73]

So often we lose sight of what matters in others lives, in prayer for your Wife and you in this time of trouble.

God's blessing be upon all your life.

Amen.

 

[now faith]

I would agree with you.

However, if you believe that then you cannot hold to the view that SaintJoe does. Because there is not a word for word correspondence with the text underlying the KJV, which is what he insists on.

As tremendous a Man Wycliffe was, his was a daunting task to undergo.

As well with his notes you can see a dislike of the Catholic doctrines.
His work was done while looking around for someone trying to kil him you,so I would expect a few different verses.

With the Great Isaiah Scroll,it was as I mentioned before about translation, Lexical Gaps.

The Scroll is a great example of the King James keeping the contextual integrity of translation when some words are not translatable.

To me when we speak of error,it is not grammar that concerns me it is the contextual meaning.

 

[Avid]

The Geneva Bible...

Anyone doing the straight-up comparison of the 200 verses would find that the Geneva says the same as the KJV, with a few different words chosen. Are there ANY others that meet that standard? Has anyone here done this comparison (takes a couple of hours out of your life) to determine the status of their favorite translation?

http://aChristianSpirit.com/200VERSES.HTML

Make the straight-up comparison for yourself. How many of these verses are changed, omitted or deemed not to be authentic by the translators of your favorite version?

 

[LostMarbels]

1) Just about everybody knows the word "Lucifer" as another name for Satan. The word "Lucifer" is found one time in the King James Bible.

Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

(2) But what about the NIV? The word "Lucifer" is clean, bald-headed gone and now this creature is identified as the "morning star". Lucifer is the "morning star" in the NIV.

How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

(3) So we know that in the NIV the "morning star" is a negative, evil figure. Right? He was fallen from heaven. He was cast down to the earth. Can we find the "morning star" anywhere else in the NIV? Yes! The following passages in the NIV show the "morning star" as Jesus Christ! But the NIV just called the fallen creature of Isaiah 14:12 "morning star". Lucifer AND Jesus are ONE in the NIV! Lord have mercy, Jesus! Help me, Lord.

NIV: Revelation 22:16,
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you [1] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

NIV: 2 Peter 1:19,
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

NIV: Revelation 2:28--
I will also give him the morning star.

See any contradictions here?

 

[PrincetonGuy]

1) Just about everybody knows the word "Lucifer" as another name for Satan. The word "Lucifer" is found one time in the King James Bible.

Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

(2) But what about the NIV? The word "Lucifer" is clean, bald-headed gone and now this creature is identified as the "morning star". Lucifer is the "morning star" in the NIV.

How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

(3) So we know that in the NIV the "morning star" is a negative, evil figure. Right? He was fallen from heaven. He was cast down to the earth. Can we find the "morning star" anywhere else in the NIV? Yes! The following passages in the NIV show the "morning star" as Jesus Christ! But the NIV just called the fallen creature of Isaiah 14:12 "morning star". Lucifer AND Jesus are ONE in the NIV! Lord have mercy, Jesus! Help me, Lord.

NIV: Revelation 22:16,
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you [1] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

NIV: 2 Peter 1:19,
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

NIV: Revelation 2:28--
I will also give him the morning star.

See any contradictions here?

The KJV translates the Hebrew word הילל using the proper noun ‘Lucifer,’ but הילל is not a proper noun. Fortunately, both of the 1611 editions of the KJV give the literal translation in the margin, “day-starre.”

 

[SaintJoeNow]

As tremendous a Man Wycliffe was, his was a daunting task to undergo.

As well with his notes you can see a dislike of the Catholic doctrines.
His work was done while looking around for someone trying to kil him you,so I would expect a few different verses.

With the Great Isaiah Scroll,it was as I mentioned before about translation, Lexical Gaps.

The Scroll is a great example of the King James keeping the contextual integrity of translation when some words are not translatable.

To me when we speak of error,it is not grammar that concerns me it is the contextual meaning.

Tall is misrepresenting me. I am speaking of preservation of scripture and deliverance of God's Word by God to us in our own language under the authority of the King of England who commissioned the translation. The thing people like Tall want to deny is God's active hand in preserving His Word after He gave it in the original writings of the prophets of the old testament and the gospel accounts and the apostles of the new testament. People like Tall are setting themselves up as the authority of God for translating His Word from the original languages. It's nothing but intellectual pride, and in reality is a lazy stance because a person puts themselves on a pedestal rather than in a point of submission to God.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

Inspiration is when God takes a blank piece of paper (papyrus, vellum, etc.) and uses men to write His words.

Preservation is when God takes those words already written and uses men to preserve them to today.

Both of these actions are DIVINE and are assured by God as recorded in Psalm 12:6, 7.

6 "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

7 Thou shalt keep them, 0 LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

In Psalm 12:6 God assures us that His originals are perfect. Even though penned by fallible men with the heinous sins of; murder (Moses and David), adultery (David), idolatry (Solomon), and denial of the lord (Peter), God's words are untainted by the sins of the penmen.

That the originals were inspired perfect in their entirety is an undisputed belief among fundamentalists today.

But most fundamentalists argue that only the "originals” were perfect. They say that today we have nothing but copies and translations of those copies. They seem indignant at the thought that any "mere translation" should be considered a perfect copy of the originals. They claim that copies and translations are products of uninspired men and therefore must all contain mistakes.

Fundamentalists clinging to this tenet are mislead. Their folly in accepting this erroneous teaching is fourfold.

1. It is somewhat confusing and unexplainable that a person could claim that God could not use, sinful men to preserve His words when all fundamentalists believe that he used sinful men to write His inspired words. Certainly a God who had enough power to inspire His words would also have enough power to preserve them. I highly doubt that He has lost such ability over the years.

2. Why would God inspire the originals and then lose them? Why give a perfect Bible to men like Peter, John, James, Andrew and company and not us? They had seen, heard, and touched the Lord (I John 1:1). We haven't! If anyone ever needed a perfect Bible it is us, nearly two thousand years separated from a Saviour we have never seen!

Why did God inspire a perfect original if He didn't plan on preserving it? Couldn't He have afforded some error, in His originals just as some believe He has allowed some errors in today's Bible! Or do critics of God's perfect Bible believe that God was unable to prevent errors in the copies. It would seem like only half of a God who had the power to do one but not the other.

3. It is a "convenient" faith which cannot be tested. In other words, it is rather safe to believe in a perfect set of originals which have been LOST. Since they are lost, no one can ever practically challenge such a belief. Adherents to such a shallow persuasion can rest safely in the fact that they will never be proven wrong since the evidence needed to prove them wrong (the "originals") is lost.

But if they dare put the same faith in a Bible available today, they know that they will definitely be bloodied defending their faith.

Thus, to believe in a perfect set of originals, but not to believe in a perfect English Bible, is to believe nothing at all.

4. Regardless of their arguments against the doctrine of a preserved perfect Bible, such a fact as much guaranteed by Scripture as the bodily return of Jesus Christ (Acts 1:8).

Psalm 12:7 plainly states, thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

Thus we have God promising to preserve the same words that He inspired. Not too much of a feat to overwhelm such an omnipotent Being.

The fearful fundamentalist launches two attacks on the Scriptural teaching found in Psalm 12:7.

1. They claim, "Verse 7 is talking about the Jews, not the Bible." Then to add credence to their claim they rush out and publish a translation that says just that in Psalm 12:7. Let's look at this verse in the New International Version.

"O LORD, you will keep us safe and protect us from such people forever."

This is an irresponsible and dishonest translation. The Hebrew word "shamar" meaning "to keep" which the New International Version translators render "you will keep us" is found in the future second person singular "thou shalt keep" and is directed to the THIRD person plural "them" and NOT the first person plural "us" as the New International Version translators rendered it. Thus we see it is the King James, God’s perfect, preserved Bible which has accurately preserved the reading of the originals, not the unreliable New International Version.

Psalm 12:7 is not God's promise to preserve the Jews, a promise which flourishes elsewhere in Scripture. It is God’s promise to preserve His words, and is a direct reference to those words as described in Psalm 12:6.

2. Oftimes a Christian, whose faith is too weak to accept the literal truth of Psalm 12:6, 7, will piously quote Psalm 119:89.

“For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.” Then they will state that God actually meant that He preserved His perfect Bible in Heaven, not on Earth. And they say this with a straight face! This escape to a house of straw is embarrassingly humorous.

First, it is foolish for anyone to believe that God inspired a perfect original on earth so that He could have it brought to Heaven. Is that supposed to be the reason that He wrote the originals? The answer is embarrassingly simple. The Bible is addressed to man, not God. God did not write a perfect book directed to man and then put it in a library in Heaven where man cannot benefit from its existence. Again we ask, "What good to us, here and now, is a perfect book locked up out of reach in Heaven?"

Secondly, Psalm 12:6 makes reference to His words being on earth. To preserve them somewhere other than on earth is not to preserve them at all. So we see then that God inspired the originals perfectly. Then over the centuries He has preserved those same word today. They are found in the Authorized Version.

ADDITIONAL NOTE:

In the area of "inspired translations" it might be noted that the double truth of Genesis 22:8 which in a King James Bible is plainly revealed as a prophetic reference to Jesus Christ, is lost in such weak translations as the New King James, the New International Version, and the New American Standard Version.

 

[Boidae]

ADDITIONAL NOTE:

In the area of "inspired translations" it might be noted that the double truth of Genesis 22:8 which in a King James Bible is plainly revealed as a prophetic reference to Jesus Christ, is lost in such weak translations as the New King James, the New International Version, and the New American Standard Version.

No, no it isn't. I knew exactly who it was referring to having never read the KJV when I became a Christian. It's not lost at all, especially when you know that Christ is the lamb of God.

I was saved in part by reading of Christ in the NIV and His sacrifice for us.

edit: in re-reading my post it sounds as though the Niv had a part in saving me. I meant to say that reading the Niv was part of what lead me to Christ and my salvation.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

Well it's time to look at the facts. You got saved by the Savior, not by the NIV. He reached you in spite of the NIV. The NIV had on it's board of editors a known lesbian. It is not the Word of God, it's a fake imposter. I could list dozens of the changes and deletions showing the NIV rejects the Word of God and changes doctrines in key passages.
If you really are saved, and you really know Jesus is the Truth, when you compare the NIV to the KJV and see how it degrades the fundamentals of the faith by attacking the deity of Christ and the trinity and much more, I really don't see how any real Christian can not throw the NIV in a garbage can if not a bonfire.

If you won't listen, you won't listen. The NIV is from Hell, it's not God's Word. The devil twists and changes God's Word, and that's all the NIV is...a twisted and changed imposter designed to divide and weaken the church and give fuel to false religions and false doctrines.

 

[Boidae]

Well it's time to look at the facts. You got saved by the Savior, not by the NIV. He reached you in spite of the NIV. The NIV had on it's board of editors a known lesbian. It is not the Word of God, it's a fake imposter. I could list dozens of the changes and deletions showing the NIV rejects the Word of God and changes doctrines in key passages.
If you really are saved, and you really know Jesus is the Truth, when you compare the NIV to the KJV and see how it degrades the fundamentals of the faith by attacking the deity of Christ and the trinity and much more, I really don't see how any real Christian can not throw the NIV in a garbage can if not a bonfire.

If you won't listen, you won't listen. The NIV is from Hell, it's not God's Word. The devil twists and changes God's Word, and that's all the NIV is...a twisted and changed imposter designed to divide and weaken the church and give fuel to false religions and false doctrines.

Your opinion of course that it is from hell.

Yes it s the Savior who saved me, but the Niv is part of what lead me to Him. Had I only had the KJV, I would have probably never become a Christian as I would have thrown it down in frustration.

I will continue to read God's word in the Esv, the Niv and Nkjv as God speaks to me through this versions, no matter what the KJVO crowd believes.

I will see you in Paradise Joe.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

No, no it isn't. I knew exactly who it was referring to having never read the KJV when I became a Christian. It's not lost at all, especially when you know that Christ is the lamb of God.

I was saved in part by reading of Christ in the NIV and His sacrifice for us.

edit: in re-reading my post it sounds as though the Niv had a part in saving me. I meant to say that reading the Niv was part of what lead me to Christ and my salvation.

Special for you, Biidae, I have done this little research work on the NIV . Take your time and read it. If you fear God, you should be afraid to promote the NIV for the following reasons. This is a brief study, there are many more reasons to burn the NIV.

In the King James Bible, it's plainly worded. Why is it not plainly worded in the NIV? This is an example of how modern versions weaken doctrines that are fundamental to the faith.

a thought for all those Jehovah Witness (JW) supporters. The NIV lines right up with the New World Translation (NWT) which the Jehovah Witnesses use and as I found out, the NWT was produced long before the NIV. I believe the JW's are a cult and to follow in their footsteps with a Bible which is being used in countless thousands of churches and colleges around the world is a scary thought indeed.

Let's begin with the verses that have been moved from the original text and put into the footnotes of the NIV. By putting a verse into the footnotes instead of where it should be, it leads credibility to the reader that the verse is not part of the original Bible.


Matthew 12:47
Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.


Matthew 21:44
And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.


Luke 22:43
And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.


Luke 22:44
And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.


John 7:53
And every man went unto his own house.


John 8:11
She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.


Now for the verses that have been completely removed from the Original.

Once again lets start with Matthew.


Matthew 17:21
Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.

Mathew 18:11
For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.


Matthew 23:14
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.


Mark 7:16
If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.


Mark 9:44
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.


Mark 9:46
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.


Mark 11:26
But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.


Mark 15:28
And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.


Luke 17:36
Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.


Luke 23:17
(For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.) .


John 5:4
For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.


Acts 8:37
And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.


Acts 15:34
Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.


Acts 24:7
But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,


Acts 28:29
And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.


Romans 16:24
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. Comment: The NIV seems to dislike calling Jesus, Lord and Christ. This verse calls Him both.


I John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Comment: This would be a Denial of the Trinity.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

I suppose that the reason some of the verses were left in the footnotes was to make light of the verse and not give it credibility. The reason some of the verses were completely deleted was to hide truths from the reader, thereby hoping to mold into the readers mind an errant scripture which fits better into today's society. This is a very dangerous thing to do. I realize that the modern day Bibles are either a translation or interpretation of the original writings but I also believe that the King James Version is the appropriate Bible to use as it is a direct translation word for word from the Original and not an interpretation. When modern man interprets the original or the King James version of the Bible, he puts into the interpretation his own thoughts and beliefs and ways of life along with what he might consider to be morally acceptable according to today's standards. The problem with all of that is this. Today's moral standards are horrible and fall way short of what the Lord taught us in His Word. Nothing seems to be sacred anymore. It seems to be a anything goes society today with sex, greed and selfishness being the main problems as I see it. There is no Holiness anymore in our Worship services. No one wants to give over control of their lives to anyone else let alone a higher power that they cannot even see or control. I hear everyday a remark or two pertaining to the general acceptance of almost anything. People are always saying things like, "I just let by-gones be by-gones", or "I don't get involved in that". or "It's none of my business" or "It's not 1950 anymore you know", or my least liked one, "I just live and let live"! I also hear a lot of "Don't make such an issue of it". Well, if someone doesn't make an issue of something pretty quick, the Lord will return and many souls that could have been reached are going to be lost.

 

[Boidae]

Special for you, Biidae, I have done this little research work on the NIV . Take your time and read it. If you fear God, you should be afraid to promote the NIV for the following reasons. This is a brief study, there are many more reasons to burn the NIV.

In the King James Bible, it's plainly worded. Why is it not plainly worded in the NIV? This is an example of how modern versions weaken doctrines that are fundamental to the faith.

a thought for all those Jehovah Witness (JW) supporters. The NIV lines right up with the New World Translation (NWT) which the Jehovah Witnesses use and as I found out, the NWT was produced long before the NIV. I believe the JW's are a cult and to follow in their footsteps with a Bible which is being used in countless thousands of churches and colleges around the world is a scary thought indeed.

Let's begin with the verses that have been moved from the original text and put into the footnotes of the NIV. By putting a verse into the footnotes instead of where it should be, it leads credibility to the reader that the verse is not part of the original Bible.


Matthew 12:47
Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.


Matthew 21:44
And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.


Luke 22:43
And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.


Luke 22:44
And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.


John 7:53
And every man went unto his own house.


John 8:11
She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.


Now for the verses that have been completely removed from the Original.

Once again lets start with Matthew.


Matthew 17:21
Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.

Mathew 18:11
For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.


Matthew 23:14
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.


Mark 7:16
If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.


Mark 9:44
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.


Mark 9:46
Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.


Mark 11:26
But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.


Mark 15:28
And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.


Luke 17:36
Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.


Luke 23:17
(For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.) .


John 5:4
For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.


Acts 8:37
And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.


Acts 15:34
Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.


Acts 24:7
But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,


Acts 28:29
And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.


Romans 16:24
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. Comment: The NIV seems to dislike calling Jesus, Lord and Christ. This verse calls Him both.


I John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Comment: This would be a Denial of the Trinity.

I have heard and read all these arguments for the KJVO before. It's nothing new to me.

I'm sorry, but it didn't change my mind then and doesn't now. I will continue to read the versions I mentioned above and it has nothing to do with not fearing God.

Again I say, I will see you in paradise.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

When somebody loves the NIV and you criticize it, that's like criticizing there favorite rock and roll band. They identify with it and won't listen to you trying to reason about the ungodliness and wickedness of the words used in the messaging of the writers, or the ungodliness and wickedness in the lives of the writers, or the evil influences of the things they wrote because they wear blinders which only allow them to see the beautiful side of evil; and evil does have a beautiful side. Satan transforms himself into an angel of light.
Holiness is beautiful, but beautiful can be evil in disguise.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

I have heard and read all these arguments for the KJVO before. It's nothing new to me.

I'm sorry, but it didn't change my mind then and doesn't now. I will continue to read the versions I mentioned above and it has nothing to do with not fearing God.

Again I say, I will see you in paradise.

I'm going to heaven. Jehovah's Witnesses think they are going to paradise but they will wake up in Hell.

Tell me, do you believe Jesus Christ is God? Do you believe He is God the Son, sent by God the Father, and Jesus is the LORD GOD ALMIGHTY, Jehovah God in Person?

 

[Boidae]

When somebody loves the NIV and you criticize it, that's like criticizing there favorite rock and roll band. They identify with it and won't listen to you trying to reason about the ungodliness and wickedness of the words used in the messaging of the writers, or the ungodliness and wickedness in the lives of the writers, or the evil influences of the things they wrote because they wear blinders which only allow them to see the beautiful side of evil; and evil does have a beautiful side. Satan transforms himself into an angel of light.
Holiness is beautiful, but beautiful can be evil in disguise.

I'm not listening to you because it's nothing I haven't heard or read before. I did the research on this subject and looked at both sides.

So I'm not coming at this from not having done the research. I did my homework on the subject.

I will stick to other versions as a result of that homework.

I'm not saying that everyone should dismiss the KJVO, not at all. It is a fine Bible for those that want to read from it. However, it is not the only Bible that contains God's word to us.

 

[Boidae]

I'm going to heaven. Jehovah's Witnesses think they are going to paradise but they will wake up in Hell.

Tell me, do you believe Jesus Christ is God? Do you believe He is God the Son, sent by God the Father, and Jesus is the LORD GOD ALMIGHTY, Jehovah God in Person?

Heaven is paradise. I am not speaking of the JWs version of paradise.

Yes, I believe in the Trinity. After all, before Abraham was I AM .

 

[Avid]

... Yes it s the Savior who saved me, but the Niv is part of what lead me to Him...

It is important to see these versions for what they are. There are many bible verses in there that are not changed, and it is not surprising that God can use that to get someone's attention. God used a donkey to tell the truth to Balaam. (Numbers 22:21-35)

However, here is a test to take. Anyone reading this can take the test. The instructions say to NOT use your memory, or your own understanding, but the actual words in the NIV. If you know better, and could answer from memory, it is good, but that is NOT what this test is about.

Test your NIV. Answer these questions out of your Bible.

http://biblebelievers.com/NIV_Challenge.html

These things are very important. These are the things that make the Bible the word of God, or just another history book or poetry book.

 

[SaintJoeNow]

Your opinion of course that it is from hell.

Yes it s the Savior who saved me, but the Niv is part of what lead me to Him. Had I only had the KJV, I would have probably never become a Christian as I would have thrown it down in frustration.

I will continue to read God's word in the Esv, the Niv and Nkjv as God speaks to me through this versions, no matter what the KJVO crowd believes.

I will see you in Paradise Joe.

God's Word is not in modern versions. Why are you so resistant to reason?

Pardon me for asking, but can you tell me what happened so you became "born again" as Jesus said "ye must be born again"? Or is that passage changed in your favorite modern books so you don't read that Jesus said you "must be born again" ?

I love to hear testimonies of how sinners came to realize they need to be saved and got saved. Can you tell me your testimony please? When did you get saved? What happened to make you see you needed to be saved?