The KJVO myth...

[Bob_1000]

A person can be saved without reading the Bible, but it's very likely they will have heard someone preaching/teaching the Gospel which is found in the Bible.
If it wasn't for the Bible we wouldn't know anything about God or Jesus - and you'd have nothing to use for your maths and word games.

The Bible is of huge importance, it’s how we are born again.

 

[trophy33]

That’s like saying if I use one road map to get somewhere then I’m in danger of inventing errors and fantasies in the road map. You guys logic is unbelievable. It’s like you’re intelligent until it comes to the Bible and then all logic and reason goes out the window.

You demonstrated it quite frequently in this thread. You invented numbers symbolism and various wrong interpretations of the KJV, working just with the KJV and your own individuality.

So you proved its as possible to make errors with just one translation as with many translations. If one does not know how to work with maps, having just one map will not help him.

 

[Davy]

There is not even one manuscript that has the Textus Receptus text. Because its a compilation from several manuscripts.

These several manuscripts were of the "majority text" family, but were not 2,000 and were not a good ones. If you desire a good majority text edition, then it would be Robinson-Pierpoint, not Textus Receptus.

I guess you missed the plural 's' on the end of Majority Texts. Very observant.

And yes, there are OVER 2,000 manuscripts making up the Text.

See the Bridge To Babylon documentary which gives documented evidence of the 'different' Greek texts that Wescott and Hort used for their New Testament translation.


BRETHREN IN CHRIST...

Here's a good read about the Wescott and Hort controversy. Since they have been proven to have produced a 'corrupt' Greek version of the New Testament text, their followers of modern Bible versions try to separate themselves from Wescott and Hort, when all along those modern New Testament versions are based... on Wescott and Hort's corrupt Greek text.

Are the Modern Versions Based on Westcott-Hort?

 

[Bob_1000]

You demonstrated it quite frequently in this thread. You invented numbers symbolism and various wrong interpretations of the KJV, working just with the KJV and your own individuality.

So you proved its as possible to make errors with just one translation as with many translations. If one does not know how to work with maps, having just one map will not help him.

I didn’t invent anything lol. God uses numbers in the Bible period. Apparently some people have written books on it.

 

[Strong in Him]

That’s not what happens though. People who don’t believe in the inspired inerrant word of God bounce around from one version to another or go to Greek and Hebrew dictionaries and pick and choose what they want to be true and that builds a belief system in them.

No.
People look at the Greek and Hebrew to find out what words were originally used. In some cases English cannot accurately translate words from the Greek and so extra words get added.

A person who believes in an inerrant inspired word of God can’t do that.

As I said to BibleHighlighter, if you DID compare the KJV and the Greek/Hebrew and found that the KJV agreed with them in every case, we'd never hear the end of it. That would be the absolute proof, in black and white, that the KJV was the most accurate. You would shout it from the rooftops.

But you don't won't or can't do that.
Why not? Because then everyone would be able to see that sometimes there are words in the KJV that were not originally written - which could only mean that the KJV added them. This would then destroy your claim that the KJV was perfect.
BibleHighlighter refused to consider, or accept, this challenge - every single time.

Besides which, I believe in the inerrant, inspired word of God - and I don't read the KJV.

You can say whatever you want about that method but that method leads to a completely different belief system than those who pick and chose their own version of the truth.

In what way?
You tell me what you believe the Gospel is, and I'll tell you if I agree, or where we differ.

ALL Bibles preach the Gospels and teach about God and Jesus.
But if you believe the Bible has nothing to do with salvation, you have greater problems than just a fixation on the number 13.

 

[Strong in Him]

The Bible is of huge importance, it’s how we are born again.

Well actually we're born again through the Holy Spirit, but he is written about in the Bible; yes.
So why say it has nothing to do with salvation.

 

[Bob_1000]

No.
People look at the Greek and Hebrew to find out what words were originally used. In some cases English cannot accurately translate words from the Greek and so extra words get added.



As I said to BibleHighlighter, if you DID compare the KJV and the Greek/Hebrew and found that the KJV agreed with them in every case, we'd never hear the end of it. That would be the absolute proof, in black and white, that the KJV was the most accurate. You would shout it from the rooftops.

But you don't won't or can't do that.
Why not? Because then everyone would be able to see that sometimes there are words in the KJV that were not originally written - which could only mean that the KJV added them. This would then destroy your claim that the KJV was perfect.
BibleHighlighter refused to consider, or accept, this challenge - every single time.

Besides which, I believe in the inerrant, inspired word of God - and I don't read the KJV.



In what way?
You tell me what you believe the Gospel is, and I'll tell you if I agree, or where we differ.

ALL Bibles preach the Gospels and teach about God and Jesus.
But if you believe the Bible has nothing to do with salvation, you have greater problems than just a fixation on the number 13.

Ok this should be fun. What gets raised in the resurrection according to your bibles?

 

[Bob_1000]

Well actually we're born again through the Holy Spirit, but he is written about in the Bible; yes.
So why say it has nothing to do with salvation.

Post the Bible verse that contradicts the verse that says we are born again by the incorruptible word of God.


1Pe 1:23 (KJV) Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

 

[Davy]

That’s like saying if I use one road map to get somewhere then I’m in danger of inventing errors and fantasies in the road map. You guys logic is unbelievable. It’s like you’re intelligent until it comes to the Bible and then all logic and reason goes out the window.

There is a concerted effort to destroy the Textus Receptus text that was mostly used for the KJV New Testament. Their movement is to try and change God's Word more into a social religion instead of direct revelation from God's Own Mouth.

Take for example a paraphrase Bible. What a paraphrase means is like, you read something, and then you put it into your 'own' words to explain it. God's Word in the Textus Receptus and Massoretic texts has a certain order about them that reveals Holy Spirit structures in perfect alternations based on subject and object. A paraphrase translation will change those Holy Spirit markings. The translations based on the Massorretic and Textus Receptus are still the best English translations to date that keep those HS structures, and the 1611 King James Version is still the only Bible version that does it best. The later Bible versions, especially like the NIV, adds a lot of socialist mumbo-jumbo, and leaves out a lot of NT text that the early Church fathers knew and quoted. So really, with many of the modern Bible versions, you don't even have a complete Bible!

 

[Strong in Him]

Ok this should be fun. What gets raised in the resurrection according to your bibles?

Jesus was raised from the dead, and because of that our human bodies are raised.

But that wasn't the question; I said, what is the Gospel?

 

[Davy]

And then the anti-KJV crowd will whine and say, "Well I can't understand the KJV Bible translation with all its out-dated Old English terms, etc."

The reality is though, ONLY the 1st Edition 1611 King James Bible is in Old English!!! Much of the Old English was removed in later editions, so that today most of that is gone in KJV Bibles! Thus their complaint is just really a lie that they are counting on your... ignorance about the KJV.

You know what else about the 1st Edition KJV Bible? It has a Letter to King James, and a Letter To The Reader, that the translators wrote, and explained difficulties they had with the translation, what sources they used, and even warnings of those who tried to prevent the translation. Those Letters have been REMOVED... from all later KJV Bibles. Do you wonder why??? You should!

 

[Strong in Him]

Post the Bible verse that contradicts the verse that says we are born again by the incorruptible word of God.

I don't know what you're talking about.
Jesus said that no one can enter the Kingdom of God unless they are born again, John 3:3. Spirit gives birth to spirit, John 3:6, so a person cannot have new, spiritual life unless the Spirit gives it.
If it were not for the written word of God, we would not know about God, the Word nor the Holy Spirit.

 

[Davy]

Jesus was raised from the dead, and because of that our human bodies are raised.

But that wasn't the question; I said, what is the Gospel?

Your WHAT is raised?

My Bible teaches that in the resurrection, it is to a "spiritual body", not another one of flesh (1 Corinthians 15:42-54). Lord Jesus also said those of the resurrection are "... as the angels of God in heaven" (Matthew 22:30). So I don't know what Bible you're reading, but it ain't like mine (good ole' King James Bible).

And did you not know that Lord Jesus' flesh body was 'transfigured' to a "quickening spirit" body? (1 Corinthians 15:45-47 KJV)

 

[Strong in Him]

And did you not know that Lord Jesus' flesh body was 'transfigured' to a "quickening spirit" body? (1 Corinthians 15:45-47 KJV)

Are you saying that Jesus was not physically raised, but only spiritually?

 

[Bob_1000]

There is a concerted effort to destroy the Textus Receptus text that was mostly used for the KJV New Testament. Their movement is to try and change God's Word more into a social religion instead of direct revelation from God's Own Mouth.

Take for example a paraphrase Bible. What a paraphrase means is like, you read something, and then you put it into your 'own' words to explain it. God's Word in the Textus Receptus and Massoretic texts has a certain order about them that reveals Holy Spirit structures in perfect alternations based on subject and object. A paraphrase translation will change those Holy Spirit markings. The translations based on the Massorretic and Textus Receptus are still the best English translations to date that keep those HS structures, and the 1611 King James Version is still the only Bible version that does it best. The later Bible versions, especially like the NIV, adds a lot of socialist mumbo-jumbo, and leaves out a lot of NT text that the early Church fathers knew and quoted. So really, with many of the modern Bible versions, you don't even have a complete Bible!

The serpent’s been perverting the word of God since the garden but some how Christianity now calls that “a better translation”.

 

[Bob_1000]

Jesus was raised from the dead, and because of that our human bodies are raised.

But that wasn't the question; I said, what is the Gospel?

Human bodies don’t get raised in the resurrection.

The gospel is the gospel that was preached to Abraham - “In thee shall all the nations be blessed”.

 

[Bob_1000]

I don't know what you're talking about.
Jesus said that no one can enter the Kingdom of God unless they are born again, John 3:3. Spirit gives birth to spirit, John 3:6, so a person cannot have new, spiritual life unless the Spirit gives it.
If it were not for the written word of God, we would not know about God, the Word nor the Holy Spirit.

Jesus did say a person couldn’t enter the kingdom of heaven and he also said you can’t even SEE the kingdom of heaven unless you’re born again and nobody on this side of eternity can see or enter it until they’re born again by the incorruptible words of God.

Those verses have nothing to do with going to heaven AFTER death. Those verses are about entering the kingdom RIGHT NOW, in this world.

 

[Davy]

Are you saying that Jesus was not physically raised, but only spiritually?

His flesh was raised alright, but was then 'transfigured' to a spirit body, just like Apostle Paul SHOWED YOU in 1 Corinthians 15:45-47...

1 Cor 15:44-50
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
KJV


Don't tell me you're on that 'dead in the ground' theory stuff from the Jew's religion. The orthodox Jews don't read The New Testament. So they still believe in flesh and blood inheriting the kingdom of God.

 

[Strong in Him]

Jesus did say a person couldn’t enter the kingdom of heaven and he also said you can’t even SEE the kingdom of heaven unless you’re born again and nobody on this side of eternity can see or enter it until they’re born again by the incorruptible words of God.

Those verses have nothing to do with going to heaven AFTER death. Those verses are about entering the kingdom RIGHT NOW, in this world.

I know.

The Kingdom of heaven is wherever Jesus is honoured and recognised as king. If people don't recognise the king, they won't see the kingdom.
But he said that no one can be born again except by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Strong in Him]

His flesh was raised alright, but was then 'transfigured' to a spirit body, just like Apostle Paul SHOWED YOU in 1 Corinthians 15:45-47...

But his physical body was raised. He told the disciples that "a ghost does not have flesh and bones, like I have" Luke 24:39. He ate a piece of fish in their presence, Luke 24:42 and he invited Thomas to touch his hands and side, John 20:27. We are not told that Thomas actually did so, but he could have - and he would have seen for himself that Jesus had a real, physical body.