King James Version only?

[oak]

Murse 32 -

"urne gedce gwamal ican hl af style us to doeg." (1000 AD)

"oure ilk daye bred gif us to day." (1600 AD) - Shakespeare language

"Give us this day our daily bread. (Matt 6:11) KJV

Language changes and if you guessed what I wrote right away, you are truly a scholar. So first and foremost think of language as a living organism. In my opinion so far KJV is understandable even now. I have nothing against different translations, but always cross reference them. Secondly as I have been pounding away in these forums, understanding is not as powerful as faith - many people were illiterate but they got the essence and were guided by the Holy Spirit.

Finally, you can have the most perfect translation and read it over and over again. However how many of us understand the Lord's Prayer and continue to live according to our own will. If the NKJV has spurred you into action, by all means go on, because language changes. However the spiritual comes before everything else meaning:

a) The more you seek the more you will improve.

b) Never forget the Comforter is here to guide us not perfect translations.

Oak

[Murse32]

Murse 32 -

"urne gedce gwamal ican hl af style us to doeg." (1000 AD)

"oure ilk daye bred gif us to day." (1600 AD) - Shakespeare language

"Give us this day our daily bread. (Matt 6:11) KJV

Language changes and if you guessed what I wrote right away, you are truly a scholar. So first and foremost think of language as a living organism. In my opinion so far KJV is understandable even now. I have nothing against different translations, but always cross reference them. Secondly as I have been pounding away in these forums, understanding is not as powerful as faith - many people were illiterate but they got the essence and were guided by the Holy Spirit.

Finally, you can have the most perfect translation and read it over and over again. However how many of us understand the Lord's Prayer and continue to live according to our own will. If the NKJV has spurred you into action, by all means go on, because language changes. However the spiritual comes before everything else meaning:

a) The more you seek the more you will improve.

b) Never forget the Comforter is here to guide us not perfect translations.

Oak

Oak, thank you very much for that. I do not understand why you used me to tell that too, because you are preaching to the choir on what you have said.

You say the KJV is understandable...I agree. I can understand it as well. Does that mean all will because we do? No.

You say you have nothing against different translations...nor do I. As long as they don't change the meaning.

You say faith is more powerful than understanding, we must understand what the scriptures speak of though to know what we have faith in. Those who were illiterate though we're just listening to the words people spoke and from them believing. Though we see in Acts the great Bereans who studied the scriptures to test the things of Paul...they were commended...to study the scriptures though, we must first understand what they are saying...than we can understand, by the Spirit, their great meaning.

And the rest you spoke, I agree with.

[Guest Butero]

my question to you would be, if the Holy Spirit led them, why was there so many errors? why did the original 1611 version have to be changed 3 times to fix the multitude of mistakes?

If it is the perfect word of GOD, why are there mistakes in it still today?

This question isn't even a challenge. Assuming there were 3 revisions in 1611, all that would indicate was a rush to publication. Being led of God, they quickly fixed the problems, and had the correct finished product on the third edition in 1611.

There are not a multitude of mistakes today. You only showed me one minor error that was legitimate, and it was only regarding someone's age. The other things you called mistakes were only your opinion, and I dissagree.

[Born Crucified]

The question was asked by in the OP:

Now here is the million dollar question. Would you rather someone come to Christ reading a modern version or stay lost due to the King James Version?

Your question implies that one cannot be saved under the teaching from the King James Bible... 'would you rather someone come to Christ reading a modern version or stay lost using the King James Version?

IT is clear what was said and it is clear what is implied. I have not twisted anything. I quoted you word for word.

[Murse32]

The question was asked by in the OP:

Now here is the million dollar question. Would you rather someone come to Christ reading a modern version or stay lost due to the King James Version?

Your question implies that one cannot be saved under the teaching from the King James Bible... 'would you rather someone come to Christ reading a modern version or stay lost using the King James Version?

IT is clear what was said and it is clear what is implied. I have not twisted anything. I quoted you word for word.

My question implies nothing of the sort. If you read the entire text you could understand that I was speaking of those who don't understand what the KJV is saying so they set it down and don't pick it up again. Many christians today, even admit this. One on this post even admitted it.

Quoting word for word does not always bring forth the light of the meaning if taken out of context my friend. This is true on this post and in scripture. Let me give you an example by using YOUR words:

"To imply that one cannot be saved through the reading of the King James Bible is to deny the Salvation of all those who were led to Christ over the last 398 years that had nothing prior to the modern versions being released". (user: Born Crucified).

So, quoting WORD FOR WORD, are you saying that people are saved "through the reading of the King James Bible"? I thought Jesus saves. This is just an example how "word for word" quoting can be taken out of context. I am very aware of what your true meaning for this sentence means and in NO way claim you are stating that KJV saves...as I have said, just using your logic.

Let's be civilized and educated as I know most of us are. Thank you.

[Guest Butero]

The question was asked by in the OP:

Now here is the million dollar question. Would you rather someone come to Christ reading a modern version or stay lost due to the King James Version?

Your question implies that one cannot be saved under the teaching from the King James Bible... 'would you rather someone come to Christ reading a modern version or stay lost using the King James Version?

IT is clear what was said and it is clear what is implied. I have not twisted anything. I quoted you word for word.

I wonder how many people get saved in that manner in the first place? I mean by going out and buying a Bible, reading it, and then accepting Jesus as their Lord and Savior. That may happen, but I don't know of anyone saved that way. Most people hear someone preaching the gospel, get under conviction, and make a decision. They purchase a Bible afterward to learn more about God.

I do agree with you that the entire premise is flawed. The more reasonable question would be whether or not it is better to use a translation that is nearly error free but hard to read for some, or to use a translation that is 90 percent, more or less reliable, but easy to read? (I know the new translation apologists are going to challenge that point, claiming that new translations are more reliable, but I am coming from my viewpoint, as someone who holds to the TR as the only reliable original manuscripts.) It would come down to a matter of choice. I prefer the translation that is harder to read, but that I am confident in, the 1611 King James Version. This has nothing to do with whether or not people are saved or lost, but what they place their trust in for truth.

[Guest Butero]

My question implies nothing of the sort. If you read the entire text you could understand that I was speaking of those who don't understand what the KJV is saying so they set it down and don't pick it up again. Many christians today, even admit this. One on this post even admitted it.

If I don't trust a Bible to be reliable, I won't pick it up and read it, and I have no confidence in any modern English translation. I have read the Authorized King James Bible cover to cover at least 12 times straight through, and I am in the process of reading the 1611 King James Bible straight through for the 3rd time. I wouldn't waste my time with the NIV, RSV, Ampilified, Phillips, or any other modern English translation. They would be sitting on my shelf collecting dust, or pulled out for quick reference to compare how they are saying things that are differen't from the true Word of God.

[Murse32]

The question was asked by in the OP:

Now here is the million dollar question. Would you rather someone come to Christ reading a modern version or stay lost due to the King James Version?

Your question implies that one cannot be saved under the teaching from the King James Bible... 'would you rather someone come to Christ reading a modern version or stay lost using the King James Version?

IT is clear what was said and it is clear what is implied. I have not twisted anything. I quoted you word for word.

I wonder how many people get saved in that manner in the first place? I mean by going out and buying a Bible, reading it, and then accepting Jesus as their Lord and Savior. That may happen, but I don't know of anyone saved that way. Most people hear someone preaching the gospel, get under conviction, and make a decision. They purchase a Bible afterward to learn more about God.

I do agree with you that the entire premise is flawed. The more reasonable question would be whether or not it is better to use a translation that is nearly error free but hard to read for some, or to use a translation that is 90 percent, more or less reliable, but easy to read? (I know the new translation apologists are going to challenge that point, claiming that new translations are more reliable, but I am coming from my viewpoint, as someone who holds to the TR as the only reliable original manuscripts.) It would come down to a matter of choice. I prefer the translation that is harder to read, but that I am confident in, the 1611 King James Version. This has nothing to do with whether or not people are saved or lost, but what they place their trust in for truth.

Well Butero, to answer your first question. I am one. Let's think logically. People in the United States today, have all heard the name "Jesus" (or at least the majority of people). Many even know what He stands for. It's peoples outlook on Him that varies. Some say He was a prophet, some say a great teacher, and like us, We say Messiah and Savior.

Well, I, like those, heard the name Jesus, but never really knew the depth of the gospel. I wanted answers. I was giving a NKJV and read it with an open truthful heart. Keep in mind, I have read all the documents on the other religions as well. Finding my answers in the bible is what brought me to Christ. It was the message that enthralled me. How it was put together and what He stood for. I was called and accepted. Of course, I developed a great hunger for the word and got a KJV, NASB, NIV, even bought a linear with 4 different versions....this was for the purpose of study though...not to receive the message. The message had already been received.

I would by NO means call myself a "new translation apologist". And I don't desire to challenge your preference. If the 1611 KJV works for you, praise God!! I like that version myself. It may not be my favorite, but it's a great version. And depending on what Im going to the scripture for, determines what version I pick up as well. If Im just reading to keep fresh...I usually pick up my NKJV or NASB. When studying greek or hebrew...I go to the KJV.

Placing trust in the truth though, is placing our trust on God. Is Jesus God? did He die for our sins and raise from the dead three days later? Was Jesus sinless? Are we saved if we accept Jesus, know we are sinners and repent? This message stems from many of the verses...despite HOW it is written. Once people get this message and understand the scriptures and choose to study more in depth...I would most definetly recommend the KJV/NKJV so that proper studying can be accomplished.

Peace and grace to you!!

With Love in Christ

[Murse32]

My question implies nothing of the sort. If you read the entire text you could understand that I was speaking of those who don't understand what the KJV is saying so they set it down and don't pick it up again. Many christians today, even admit this. One on this post even admitted it.

If I don't trust a Bible to be reliable, I won't pick it up and read it, and I have no confidence in any modern English translation. I have read the Authorized King James Bible cover to cover at least 12 times straight through, and I am in the process of reading the 1611 King James Bible straight through for the 3rd time. I wouldn't waste my time with the NIV, RSV, Ampilified, Phillips, or any other modern English translation. They would be sitting on my shelf collecting dust, or pulled out for quick reference to compare how they are saying things that are differen't from the true Word of God.

And that is fine my brother. I'm not asking you to purchase these. I am asking for those who believe KJV is the only (which you may or may not be) version, to not hinder those that purchase other versions for the purpose of understanding the message.

[OneLight]

Here are some difference from certain versions. Some are a slight difference while others are way out there. Most of the version limit the sacrifice to worship, a few (KJV) tells us it is our service and one says both. The Message, which is becoming more popular, is out in left field. Service is a continual act, where worship is not. There is a difference, and this is just scripture I pulled up, for no special reason.

Romans 12:1-3 (The Message)

Place Your Life Before God

1-2 So here's what I want you to do, God helping you: Take your everyday, ordinary life