Jump to content

EndSeeker

Junior Member
  • Posts

    122
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

33 Neutral

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. the problem I have with comparisons like this is that it does not look at the meaning of the passage. I have just done a quick search for the word saints in KJV and then looked at NIV and found no difference in meaning in the five passages I looked at. I made sure to use five books with different authors. I really don't get why people get so caught up on what word is used when the meaning is the same. Can you perhaps explain why it makes such a difference in your opinion? It matters because the NIV is a Catholic Bible (with no Apocrypha) You should read the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" in that you'll find lots of crazy stuff... They believe you have to be dead (for 5 years) to be a saint, even then the Pope has to declare it... So basically I'm not a saint, you're not a saint and we are heretics for believing/knowing we are saints Besides i don't think its the same meaning, being a good person does not make one a saint..and idk which edition you have but "Lords people"..sure it can mean saint but why not just say saint? why change it in the first place? "Saint" is not an archaic word, a lot of people think these new versions are just KJV's with no archaic words but thats far from the truth
  2. I know for a fact the RCC had nothing to do with the KJV.. They didn't want it printed but couldn't stop it thats why they had a counter reformation and printed the 1610 Douay Rheims bible.. all new versions are based off the manuscripts used for that. So in fact they do have a sinister plot to pervert the Bible.. the NKJV doesn't have all the verses in tact.. its based off the TR and also the corrupt text.. mix/match hit/ miss as i said before. Other than that i've 100% agreed with ya
  3. I'm not sure if the translators were inspired... maybe, but if i had to answer i would say no. They didn't have to be. The Bible was translated into english enough times by then that they would know what they were doing.
  4. That still doesn't answer the question as to why an all knowing, all powerful God couldn't have created a perfect English Bible the first time. I would point out that you are making claims about the KJV that not even the translators make. King James wanted a new translation because he didn't care for the commentary notes in the Geneva Bible. The Geneva Bible was the Puritan Bible and the notes in it were Calvinistic and he objected namely the notes in the Geneva Bible that denied the divine right of Kings to rule. The Geneva Bible also angered the bishops because those Geneva Bible notes also denied the right of bishops appointed by the king to govern the church and instead insisted that the Church should be governed by presbyters elected by congregants of each church. The KJV isn't the result of God's inspiring anyone to write it. You need to study history The translators weren't inspired... they were translators translating the inspired word of God. How hard can that be? ............... I agree that i need to study history lol... and i do.. but im already aware of what you mentioned, Obviously Calvinism is false so i wouldn't want that in my Bible... and as far as me knowing history... The reason we are having this discussion is because of the RCC/Jesuits... This whole vile thing traces back to them Do i have permission to state how/why? I realize this is a controversial subject, this should be in that forum.. I'm not ecumenical so i will be very blunt in exposing the RCC
  5. @ GoldenEagle... Okay heres my platter... Okay hope this ain't too long .. I'm familar with the Holy Spirit vs Holy Ghost objection, i had to go back and look thru some stuff tho and Sam Gipp is awesome so i know his Easter vs Passover article etc.. but idk about the Zeus objection. So first.. From what i know "pneuma" can also be translated to ghost. By "ghost," the KJV translators did not intend to communicate the idea of "the spirit of a deceased person." In 1611, when the KJV was originally translated, the word "ghost" primarily referred to "an immaterial being." In the days King James, ghost meant the living essence of a person "breath" or "soul" were often used as synonyms of "ghost." During these times, spirit normally meant the essence of a departed person or a demonic or paranormal apparition. As language evolved, people started saying "ghost" when speaking of the vision of a dead person while "spirit" became the standard term for life or living essence, often also for "soul." With slight exceptions, "ghost" and "spirit" changed places over some 300 years. KJV Genesis 25:8 Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man, and full of years; and was gathered to his people. There he gave his spirit, or "breathed his last", he was deceased. Also Gen 2:7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Luke 4:1 And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, So im sure that "Holy Ghost" designates the third Person of the Trinity. In contrast, they used "Holy Spirit" to refer to the Spirit of God or Spirit of the LORD encountered by the Hebrews and Jews in the Old Testament. In the KJV, "Holy Ghost" occurs 90 times in its New Testament portion. The phrase "Holy Spirit" occurs four times in the NT. Peradventure in the original Greek there is no difference between "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit." the Greek words are identical: pneuma = ghost, spirit; and hagion = holy. KJV - Ghost Matthew 1:18 — "she was found with child of the Holy Ghost" [pneuma hagion] ... Matthew 3:11 — "he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and fire" KJV - Spirit Luke 11:13 — "how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit" Ephesians 1:13 — "ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise" God never sent "the Ghost," only "the Spirit" (John 3:34; 14:26; 15:26). in the 16th century, Bible printers reinforced the distinction of introducing capital and small letters. In the OT they used "spirit" and "holy spirit." In the NT they printed "Spirit" and "Holy Ghost," but with subtle distinctions. These translation and printing differences do not exist in the Bible itself, in either Hebrew or Greek. They are invented theological biases imported into the English Bible. They provided both verbal and visual validation for the already existing conviction that Christianity must be separated from its Hebraic/Jewish foundations. **NOTE KJV OT** * Psalm 51:11 — "Take not thy holy spirit from me" Isaiah 63:10 — "They rebelled and vexed his holy spirit" Isaiah 63:11 — "Where is he who put his holy spirit within him?" ^only occurs 3 times. Easter vs Passover. I agree with Sam Gipp, i seen someone quote his article on here already so thats that. Jupiter/Mercurius instead of Zeus/Hermes This i don't know of...but i do know the NKJ is NOT a KJV In short.. The NKJV has both sets of greek manuscripts so its mix and match / hit and miss.
  6. Interesting. So anyone who doesn't read the KJV is reading a counterfit or perverted version of Scripture. I think we'll have to agree to disagree. Care to address the objections presented in previous posts in this thread re: 1st and 3rd God bless, GE As long as its not "The Message Bible" and maybe a few others..overall its fine to read a new version as long as they know about the issue and can see that Joseph is not the father of Jesus (Luke 2:33) etc.. etc. and the only reason why we believe Calvary is because Luke 23:33 in the KJV... But the gospel is still there so anyone can be saved by reading those Bibles. So as long as salvation is not in jeopardy i have no problem.. people just need to know about this issue (which i found out many people don't) So its okay to disagree.. call it... denominational if you will lol.. we still have unity. I will address those objections as soon as i can God bless
  7. So what about the previous English versions? I mean why did God wait until 1611 to give the English speaking people a perfect translation? Was God unable to preserve His Word in English until 1611? As with any book, it needs to be proof read and edited, and with translations its more difficult, as its impossible to have the exact 100% wording from Greek to English.. it just doesn't work that way. It takes more than one try to get it as close as possible. So this needed to take time, and the "English Bible" was being "purified"... Besides i took a little trip back into history and found out a lot of disturbing things... to name one is.. The Tyndale Bible was never completed, The Roman Catholic Church caused him to be a martyr because he tried to give the people the Bible in their own language. At that time, the RCC wanted everyone to rely on them for teaching and interpretation. Later on in the1600's They never wanted the KJV to be printed, thats why they had a counter-reformation and printed the 1610 Douay rheims bible with the corrupted manuscripts that are in all new versions... When these new bibles come out saying "older and better manuscripts" its a lie... The translators of the KJV could have used those manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus) but they seen they were corrupt. (Luke 2:33 should say Joseph ...not "father") (2 Timothy 2:15 should say study ...not "do your best" or whatever) those are just 2.. i can provide more...much more but those 2 i memorized... The AUTHORIZED VERSION (1611 A.D.), The seventh Bible Psalms 12:6-7 Psalms 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. The King James Bible was the seventh English Bible, and it was translated in seven years. Do you think that’s just a coincidence? No other Bible was needed after that.
  8. (i forget if i can post links here, but this is an excerpt from biblebelievers(.)com) : "Because the King James Bible is in the publick domain and not copyrighted, these worldly publishing companies think they can make minor changes to the standard text so that they can please certain groups which translates into extra sales for them. That's the way the modern world operates to day. All the common ordinary Bible believer wants is the same Bible that his grandmother had and the same Bible her grandmother had and the same Bible her grandmother had etc. that's all. Just give us the text that has established itself as the standard text of the Holy Bible, an old fashioned, Christ exalting, devil kicking, Authorized King James Bible. To the best of my understanding this is the 1769 edition of the 1611 King James Bible with a few minor printing errors and spellings corrected along the way in the 1800's." So its really not a big deal, the 1611 needed reprinted as with any book we need to proof read and make edits sometimes, even today... Plus the font used in 1611 was very hard to read other than that, the KJV is essentially still a 1611. With the alterations or spelling errors, they just tried to modernize it but that still takes away from the text.. Depending on how bad it is.. "Counterfeits" are just "spelling errors" (modernized) or at least bad connotations like : a 6 letter Savior (should be 7 letter Saviour) lower case "spirit" as in Spirit of God ( Holy Spirit appears 7 times in the KJV and is always capitalized) (Holy Ghost 90 times) -when spirit refers to a person it should be lower case obviously.. In Genesis 1:1 it should read "heaven" not "heavens". (These "corrections" aren't found every time tho.) These are less critical changes.. Asswaged has been changed to assuaged. Basons has been changed to basins. Chesnut has been changed to chestnut. Cloke has been changed to cloak. Enquire has been changed to inquire. Further has been changed to farther. Jubile has been changed to jubilee. Intreat has been changed to entreat. Morter has been changed to mortar. Ought has been changed to aught, and rereward has been changed to rearward.... etc. etc God gave the KJV to us in a pure language, and that language is the standard text of the King James Bible. This is the Bible that has stood the test of time without any editing whatsoever. The Believers organization, with God's help, intends to preserve for all future generations. The Bible cannot be "improved" the KJV is God's infallible word for the English speaking people.
  9. Wow. So basically you base your view of the KJV and NIV on superstitions and random word translation numbers? If thats how you choose to see it then sure, but its much more than that. And not superstition but indeed a conspiracy. I did my research and i can point out A LOT of verse perversions and scripture that was taken out. A few months ago i seen a post somewhere in the forums here from someone that said all the new versions are satanic... i thought he was crazy, but then i kept seeing it all over the place, and concluded he was right. The enemy is trying to destroy Gods word.. and if anyone has a Bible published by "Zondervan" ...BURN IT, that publisher is owned by Harpercollins, which also publishes the "satanic bible". So thats who your money is going to. (and zondervan also makes counterfeit KJV's)
  10. The KJV has 3 sets of 7 references to each of the following words and phrases describing Christ; 1. The Word 2. The Mediator 3. "After the order of Melchisedec" The NIV has removed 1 of each of these words. So the NIV has 3 descriptions of Christ that add up to 666. The KJV numbers are 777. The number of perfection, 7, its the number thats most associated with God in the Bible. And I'm sure we all know what the number 6 means, specifally 666. My conclusion is the NIV is satanic, KJV Word (capital) (BTW the Bible is the "word of God" ...not "Word of God") John 1:1 (3 references) John 1:14 1 John 1:1 1 John 5:7 (X) Revelation 19:13 KJV=7 The NIV removes 1 John 5:7 dropping the number down to 6 Mediator Galations 3:19 Galations 3:20 (2 references) (NIV -1) 1 Timothy 2:5 Hebrews 8:6, 9:15, 12:24 KJV=7 The Niv removes one of the references in Galations 3:20 Niv=6 Melchizedek Psalm 110:4 Hebrews 5:6, 5:10, 6:20, 7:11, 7:17, 7:21 KJV=7 Niv removes 7:21 (=6) KJV=777 NIV=666 PS Not sure about this matter in other versions but the NIV is corrupt... the 2011 NIV does not have the word "saint(s)" in it at all The KJV has it exactly 100 times. Overtime the NIV has removed "saints" more and more and now not at all. My belief and conclusion from my personal study is that ALL new versions are Catholic. Even the "NKJV", ..its half Textus Receptus and the other half is from the perverted Catholic manuscripts from Alexandria Egypt. Those are just my 2 main points in not using so called "new" translations.. so in short, yes, I'm KJV only
  11. I've heard about this, Pastor Doneta from my church is in China right now. She has been for at least a year now.
  12. Awesome. I never watch Colbert but this is hilarious.
  13. I also seen them them perform this live. An awesome live band to see, definitely put a lot into their shows
  14. This is Hillsong United with a Dubstep remix .... Hillstep
×
×
  • Create New...