Jump to content
IGNORED

KJV vs other Bibles


TheMatrixHasU71

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  318
  • Content Per Day:  0.12
  • Reputation:   85
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  03/20/2017
  • Status:  Offline

 

 nobody seems to be able to declare that they are any more 
accurate than other versions nor can they demonstrate that the KJV has faithfully followed the 
true and original documents that were initially penned.

Teditis, you are correct! Is the King James a good translation based upon the Textus Receptus? Absolutely!

Is the NASB based upon the Eberhard Nestle's Novum Testamentum Graece; the 23rd edition a good translation? Absolutely!

There is no taking away, or plotting to diminish the Deity of Christ, or any collusion with the Jehovah's Witnesses! It comes down to which manuscript compilation you prefer. (It's really hard for there to be a concerted effort to diminish the Deity of Christ when what was written, was written a thousand years before the five late manuscripts the Textus Receptus used).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  13
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  789
  • Content Per Day:  0.25
  • Reputation:   873
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/07/2015
  • Status:  Offline

I also care about people, and it worries me to see so much misinformation being passed around. It's thanks to a Good News Bible that I am a Christian, and I've never had any problems using modern versions. I have been shown nothing that I have missed out on by not owning or reading a KJV.

If there really has been a plot to disrupt the church through dodgy Bible versions going on for more than a century, it seems to have been spectacularly unsuccessful. Where is the evidence that they are changing us all into Catholics and JWs (both at the same time!)? I haven't seen any, and since 1975 I haven't met a single Christian who still uses the KJV (except in online forums, which aren't really representative).

Yes, there are a few weird and wacky Bible versions in print, but they are easy to spot and you don't tend to find them in churches. That isn't really the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  13
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  789
  • Content Per Day:  0.25
  • Reputation:   873
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/07/2015
  • Status:  Offline

I see and hear plenty of false teaching, but none that I can put down to the use of modern Bible versions (KJV users seem to be at least as guilty, if not more). What is this "tons of evidence" that the Bibles are responsible? - people seem very keen to talk about it (and sell books about it) but surprisingly reluctant to produce anything concrete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  7,689
  • Content Per Day:  2.41
  • Reputation:   2
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  06/30/2015
  • Status:  Offline

18 hours ago, Giller said:

I know many people who have the KJV version, and most churches (not all) aren't what they seem to be, there is tons of evidence of an apostasy, and if you do not see it, which some do, may God help you.

 

Those in the apostasy can't see it.

Some of those outside the apostasy can see it. (YHWH decides).

The gulf between them is great today, 

and maybe  impassible tomorrow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Teditis

I agree with the previous assessment of Jack Chick source-material... it's a horrible thing to be educated by Chick.

And in my opinion, immediately taints the discussion and the ability to retain anything credible out of it. It drives

any discussion down rabbit-holes and misty regents of circular reasoning... among many other logic-fallacies. He

driven by hate and conspiracy theories that are by their nature unarguable.

Please find other source material to support your suppositions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  7,689
  • Content Per Day:  2.41
  • Reputation:   2
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  06/30/2015
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, Deborah_ said:

I see and hear plenty of false teaching, but none that I can put down to the use of modern Bible versions (KJV users seem to be at least as guilty, if not more). What is this "tons of evidence" that the Bibles are responsible? - people seem very keen to talk about it (and sell books about it) but surprisingly reluctant to produce anything concrete.

JESUS HIMSELF addressed a lot of false teaching. 

The religious leaders then (as now) were the ones HE brought corrections for,

as well as the regular people who had been tricked.

They had the perfect SCRIPTURE then.

Today,  we have to rely on JESUS.

'k with me ! (HE IS A PERFECT SHEPHERD ! )

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  34
  • Topic Count:  1,989
  • Topics Per Day:  0.49
  • Content Count:  48,687
  • Content Per Day:  11.89
  • Reputation:   30,342
  • Days Won:  226
  • Joined:  01/11/2013
  • Status:  Offline

6 minutes ago, Teditis said:

I agree with the previous assessment of Jack Chick source-material... it's a horrible thing to be educated by Chick.

And in my opinion, immediately taints the discussion and the ability to retain anything credible out of it. It drives

any discussion down rabbit-holes and misty regents of circular reasoning... among many other logic-fallacies. He

driven by hate and conspiracy theories that are by their nature unarguable.

Please find other source material to support your suppositions.  

I have found that the basic message Click puts out is ok. Maybe to get a person's attention and plant a seed. But if you go into Jack Chick's history and his KJV only belief it is not a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Judas Machabeus
2 hours ago, Giller said:

and one person that they tell the story of, is Alberto Riviera, which suffered a lot, through the Catholic church.

Lol this has been debunked by Protestants. Alberto has been proven a fraud. But why let facts get in the way right ;)

2 hours ago, Giller said:

and of course protestants and Catholics together, but right now I won't put it, because most do not seem to be open to wanting to see, just a lot of people being offended.

Jack Chick succeeded where so many failed. He was able to unit the Catholics and Protestants together on one thing at least.

----------

but hey,

you can read Jack Chick and believe what you want, but you will be judged by your sources. Just as I will be judged by the sources I use. 

Peace 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Judas Machabeus
50 minutes ago, Giller said:

But whatever the case, a lot of times if someone does not like a certain speaker, they will believe whatever suits them about the person, and sometimes do a witch hunt on them.

Perhaps, but in the case of Jack I think when people from your side distance themselves from you and reject your writings, to me that says a lot. 

I have listened to many Protestant speakers and I was even a big Kent Hovind fan at one point. I can disagree with their theology and still find value in what they have to say.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...