The King James Bible, it's Translation, it's Preservation and its Inspiration

a reply to: dfnj2015

No one in this age is said to have slaves. Israel was allowed. I as a Christian am not Israel. God does not give account to your or mine sensibilities and sensitivities when it comes to what he commanded Israel in the past. If you read the Bible you would also know they were to free all their slaves every 7 years.

a reply to: Raggedyman

Originally posted by Joecroft
Evidence already exists that the Bible has been edited and added too…
…
…

Originally posted by Raggedyman
Can’t just say that Joe, you have to back it up with evidence otherwise they are just words of air

Originally posted by Joecroft
The evidence Exists

Go find it yourself...

Originally posted by Raggedyman
Feel free to just tell people what you think but in my opinion and many others, you carry no weight to justify anything you say

When I said the “Bible has been edited and added too” that is NOT an opinion, it’s a FACT…

Unless you meant the other part of my post, (which was the main point I was trying to make) in which case everyone is entitled to their own opinion. People agree and disagree on these boards all the time, that doesn’t mean their opinions are any less valid than someone else's…

And at least address the reasons why you disagree with it, instead of appealing to some “imaginary” group (many others) who apparently think my opinions carry no weight.

I’m pretty sure I could gather a reasonable sized group of Ats’ers who think your opinions carry no weight either.

- JC

a reply to: Joecroft

You gave an opinion Jo, that’s all you have done
I don’t believe KJV only is supportable, think it’s worship of the bible, bad
I don’t disagree with your view, even linked another site to show I agreed with your opinion with support
The many others here don’t understand, that’s self evident, most are ignorant of different types of bibles even, and the argument is unknown to them
I expect most people don’t take anything I say seriously and my opinion carries no weight, hence why I offer many other links with evidence supporting what I stated

Even if I do support my argument with evidence, links, references, I know there is going to be another opinion or argument out there that is just as valid to others

Any statement, without reference or support is just your opinion

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Think it’s 50 years
www.breakingisraelnews.com...

“Hallow the Fiftieth Year”: Sanhedrin Declares Year of the Jubilee
By Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz July 11, 2016 , 12:30 pm
“And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a Jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.” Leviticus 25:10 (The Israel Bible™)

It great when you can speak English instead of Hebrew, Greek, or both, to Roman to both again. Nvm if the actual translation was Allah ether. Jesus, Son of Allah...it both wrong an right.

Dont know if it will fare well in other languages or slang

a reply to: Raggedyman

Read the introduction to that version and the new Jerusalem Bible they both credit the King James Bible Translators with preserving the accuracy of the Old Testament.

a reply to: Specimen88

While Islam would have you think allah is the Arabic word for God. What they don't tell you it had not always been in their language as the only god, he was a god of and over others gods in the pantheon that was in Mecca before 600 AD. Nah, if Islam was a continuation of God's work the Koran and the Hadiths would agree with the Bible. However they do not except for the description of the 12th Imam and the anti-christ. Which once again supports the fact that the old god allah is a devil.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Raggedyman

Read the introduction to that version and the new Jerusalem Bible they both credit the King James Bible Translators with preserving the accuracy of the Old Testament.

I am not saying the KJ is a bad book, poor copy or anything, just saying it has issues and in my opinion is NOT perfect

And completely irrelevant, I was indicating the Jubilee year was 50 when slaves where set free not 7 years

Indicating no matter how good a book is, people get it wrong anyway

Explain why you worship king James. Why not the Geneva 1560?

You're a secularist.

"In the beginning was the word, God was the word" - The Bible

"So that means da word of god is da Bible an Jesus! " - Secularism

Where do you humans get this crap?

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: JON666

originally posted by: Joecroft
a reply to: Raggedyman

The evidence Exists

Go find it yourself...

- JC

The king James since 1611 has had 421 words changed one of the words changed was Slave for servant since slave had become non PC.

I think slavery being consider immoral is a little more than just being not political correct. How can the Bible be the absolute word of God if it cannot even get the morality of slavery correct? I think the Bible was written by men who made interpretations based on the history and context of their lives.

The idea of being a slave to Jesus is very different than being a servant. Servant sounds like you have some sort of say in things were slave has the opposite implications. www.scribd.com...

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Yea so what, it their language, nothing I can really do about that. And that old god Allah, is arabic twist of Yah Weh or Elohim, the father in Christainity, which Muslims reject the idea, all the while the Oringnal semetic word for God was EL.

All the while Jesus is name for Joshua, and everyone been wrong this whole time.

a reply to: Specimen88

Jesus is Jesus Joshua is Joshua when it comes to English.

I went to school I have a ThD and have learned that If you know the English that is all you need.

a reply to: Raggedyman

This has been a problem since German Higher Criticism Opinions are better than a preserved English copy of the Bible. I Hold to the opposite, the Preserved English Bible as found int eh AV is better than my opinion of it.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Raggedyman

This has been a problem since German Higher Criticism Opinions are better than a preserved English copy of the Bible. I Hold to the opposite, the Preserved English Bible as found int eh AV is better than my opinion of it.

My opinion is that my Young's Literal or my Ferrar Fenton or several other versions are better than your AV - simply because they do not promote the Satanic doctrine of Hell.

BTW, if you really have a "ThD" then you should at least know the basics of Greek and/or Hebrew.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

I would be reluctant to place all my faith in 1 bible
Many options of bibles and each gives the reader an idea of a different scope
The church and different opinions within of the text, why we as Christians are called to study the bible and fellowship in groups as opposed to individuals
Holy Spirit, obviously

I can’t put my faith in 1 book, but in Christ alone where the book teaches us to put our faith

Best thing about christianity is we can disagree and still be family, hopefully

a reply to: Raggedyman

I don't put my trust in any Bible, I put myself in the trust in Christ alone for salvation. And having that salvation I trust God's word when he says he will preserve his word

Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

After 25 years of reading through 32 different versions of the Bible (which are basically all copies of the Jesuit Rheim's Bible of 1582), I found that the AV has all the words of God in it (disputed or not), and where they added words to it those words are in Italics (you wont see or find that in any other version).

Another observation is the the AV has a built in cross-references that God inspired through out it using words, phrases, verses, and sections. Also though I often use a dictionary for further meanings of words found in the Bible, every word in it s defined by the context of the chapter in which it is found. The modern dictionary allows us to see that the Bible has meanings of words that give us advance revelation from the time in which the Bible was completed in English. This is what truly gives the the reader a different scope and view as found in the text.

I am not against anyone who wishes to study their Bible as that is commanded. the reason they are commanded to study the Bible is not to Change it or alter it, it is so they can understand the contextual meaning and reason of the scriptures which are for Doctrine, Exhortation, Correction, Rebuke which equips us for every good work. This is important because we learn what Jesus wanted us to understand when he told Satan that man is not to live by bread alone but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

I am against those whose study results in changing, altering, redefining and deleting the words of God. Because those results end up destroying peoples faith in the final authority of God's word being without error, whole and complete in a language they can understand. This in turn urges people to trust in scholars, preacher and themselves as the final authority and not the word of God in any version.

Placing ones faith in Christ alone for salvation is absolutely a true doctrine, but with out that faith for salvation a person cannot correctly study and understand the words of God. Those who do not believe that Jesus Christ is the embodiment of the true and living God, but believe he became a god after his death are Christians in name only, and therefore are not God's Children, and are incapable of knowing any more of God's word than the basic Gospel of Christ.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

I think you are wrong
I think we have the bible, each other and the Holy Spirit to help us learn and grow from to be accountable and fruitful as servants of Christ
You seem to think and suggest it’s just the book

We disagree, it’s ok, plenty of other things we disagree on as well but in Christ, we agree, is that not enough?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn

Psalms 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” (Psalm 12:6-7)

While noting the King James Bible critics of the late 1800’s, we know that Christians for over three centuries believed the King James Bible (in English) was the inspired word of God and never wrote a contrary article or book. ...

Long before the King James Version came off the press opposition to it had mounted. Why? People had grown familiar with the versions they had; they preferred to keep what was familiar. So, being used to the Geneva Bible* and not keeping in mind the purpose of the Scriptures, the people frowned on the new King James Version. The fact that it made improvements over earlier translations meant little to them. (*: before 1611, many English translations of the Bible had come into being. There were the works of Wycliffe, Tyndale and Coverdale. There was the Matthew’s Bible of 1537, the Great Bible of 1539, the Geneva Bible of 1560 and the Bishops’ Bible of 1568.)

From almost every quarter the King James Bible met opposition. Criticism was often severe. Broughton, a Hebrew scholar of the day, wrote to King James that he “should rather be torn asunder by wild horses than allow such a version to be imposed on the church.”

The translators, not unaware that people preferred to keep what had grown familiar, knew that their work had unleashed a storm. They tried to calm the people down. They wrote a “Preface of the Translators” to explain why the King James Version was made. This preface is called by the Encyclopedia Americana “a most illuminating preface describing the aims of the translators which unhappily is omitted from the usual printings of the Bible.” Thus most Authorized Versions today, though they contain a lengthy dedication to King James, omit the preface. Its presence would clear up many misunderstandings about the purpose of the revision. The reader would learn that strong opposition was expected:

“Many mens mouths haue bene open a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about the Translation so long in hand . . . : and aske what may be the reason, what the necessitie of the employment.”

The reader would learn that the King James Version was a revision of earlier works made with a modest hope of improvement and no thought of finality: “Truly (good Christian Reader) wee neuer thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, . . . but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeauour, that our marke.”

In time the clamor died down, and the King James Version prevailed over the Geneva Bible. For more than two and a half centuries no other so-called authorized translation of the Bible into English was made. Little wonder that many people began to feel that the King James Bible was the only true Bible. Like many people who once objected to any change in the Geneva Bible, many persons today object to any change in the King James Bible. They oppose modern translations perhaps as vigorously as the King James Version itself was once opposed.

a reply to: whereislogic

So the question is basically one of faith in God doing what he says he will do and has done when it comes to His Words.

If he says he will preserved them to each generation forever, our current one's dominated by the English as a trade language and he has not done so then he is a God we should not follow or put faith, trust or belief in.

If he has done so, without the help of men because God does not need our help, then we are to study and locate that preserved word of God so we can have it in our hands to learn the doctrines he has established for us to live by.

Peter said that in times past we had prophets speaking forth the words of God after they spoke they were written down after that is God who will preserve His words to every generation forever.

2Peter 1:19-21 ¶ We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Ps 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

We are told that it is the Holy Ghost who teaches us as we study. I know you, as a Jehovah Witness, study you Bible, but you follow the teaching of men when it comes to study and not the Holy Ghost. The Jehovah Witness position is that the Watchtower and AWAKE have both placed their writings as equal to the scriptures. But this is just opinions of men and not the Holy Ghost

2Tim 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
1Cor 2:13-16 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

So what it comes down to is faith. Faith in God's word of promise to preserve his words HIMSELF to every generation forever. Or God did not keep his word and left it up to the opinions and reinterpretations of men. I know the AV was put into place by men of differing Denominations (not sects) and they did so with fervent prayers and trust in the Holy Ghost to lead and guide them in the process.

I chose the AV 1611 only because it is the only Bible available that has all the words in it. I chose this over the 36 versions that I have personally read, that have have many words removed, altered, changed and added to it without any indication what was added. The AV uses Italic to identify to you what words they added to it for English clarification and smooth reading of the scriptures. No other version does that.

I can not make anyone believe as I have, all I can do is point out that God made a promise and I believe he has kept that promise.

Man does not need the Bible to come to salvation in Christ alone. Man needs the Bible to learn the clear doctrines God has placed in.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn


I chose the AV 1611 only because it is the only Bible available that has all the words in it. I chose this over the 36 versions that I have personally read, that have have many words removed, altered, changed and added to it without any indication what was added. The AV uses Italic to identify to you what words they added to it for English clarification and smooth reading of the scriptures. No other version does that.

You like the 1611 AV? Did you know that it contains the word "hel"? Hel is the name of the Norse goddess of the underworld, or Helheim (House of Hel), where they supposed you went if you did not rate going to Valhalla. This name is clearly pagan, but if we see it in the 1611 AV, it is suddenly Christian, especially if we tack on the extra "l"?