Jump to content
IGNORED

King James Onlyism supported


WBO

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  6
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  32
  • Content Per Day:  0.02
  • Reputation:   8
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/02/2019
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/05/1993

The truth I’m about to present is not popular to Christians which is shocking. But here it is. 

 

The King James Version Bible is the pure Word of God and it does not contain any errors. No not a single one.

 

I understand that nearly all Bible colleges teach textual criticism and they teach that no translation is perfect. Which is a bunch of Confusion and anyone teaching that the Bible has errors are not helping build faith but actually diminished the Power of God’s word and in some cases destroying ones faith.

 

Do you really think God would encourage confusion? Do you think God inspired errors? Do you think the Holy Spirit was absent in the making of the KJV?

Do you think it’s the Holy Spirit speaking when you say that the Bible has errors. 

 

Let me give a few examples of how much translations differences can impact our beliefs.

 

John 1:1 King James Version (KJV)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

So here we see this verse supports the Trinity. But let’s look at how one translation changes it to reject the Trinity.

 

1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.

“NWT”

 

This is an extreme case but it proves just how harmful a slight change of words can be.

 

Now let’s look at another passage comparison.

 

Philippians 2:6 King James Version (KJV)

Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

 

Now let’s see what the ESV says

 

 

Philippians 2:6English Standard Version (ESV)

who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped.

 

When comparing you immediately see that these verses say the opposite thing.

 

The KJV says Christ thought it not robbery to be equal to God. 

And the ESV and NIV says the total opposite.

 

Both cannot be right. Only one of them can be correct! I would easily say it’s the KJV.

 

Now let’s look at some passages where the power of the text was diminished by the NIV translation.

 

Daniel 3:25 King James Version (KJV)

25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

 

Daniel 3:25 New International Version (NIV)

25 He said, “Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.”

 

Did you catch this in Daniel. They both say different things. Very different.

 

John 14:2 King James Version (KJV)

In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

 

In the KJV Jesus use the word mansions. 

Let’s see how the NIV diminishes the power of the promise.

 

John 14:2 New International Version (NIV)

My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you?

 

This is a small but it’s very important to me personally. I get great joy day dreaming about having a mansion that Jesus prepared for me. But when you look at the NIV all you can look forward to is having a room.

The point I’m making is that the power of this promised was greatly diminished.

 

 

Before I close I just want to debunk the claim the The word Easter in Acts was a mistranslation. This one is most common that I hear.

 

First off I want to say that all Greek lexicons don’t translate Easter as being the Word Passover. There are multiple different sources that translate Paschal as being Easter.

 

But now let’s use the passage itself to tell us the truth.

 

Acts 12:3-4 King James Version (KJV)

 

3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)

 

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

 

 

If you noticed verse 3. We see that this is taking place during the Days of unleavened bread. Which according to Exodus 12 always happens immediately after Passover and it last 7 days.

 

So considering the Context Verse 4 cannot be referring to Passover. So this is not an error. The romans were celebrating Easter in these days. So the KJV was not wrong.

 

Now one more passage to conclude that God preserved His Word without any errors.

 

Psalm 12:6-8 King James Version (KJV)

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.

 

This supports that God’s Word is pure, purified to perfection and verse 7 says God will preserve them forever. 

 

God bless you all.

 

Click on my profile for my Learn the Bible in 1 Hour Collection. The website link will be on my profile. The videos on the site are designed to leave to viewer in total awe of the rich complexity and harmony of the Bible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  26
  • Topic Count:  61
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  9,602
  • Content Per Day:  4.02
  • Reputation:   7,795
  • Days Won:  21
  • Joined:  09/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Too many words. Why would I take you seriously?

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Well Said! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  385
  • Topics Per Day:  0.10
  • Content Count:  7,692
  • Content Per Day:  1.94
  • Reputation:   4,809
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  05/28/2013
  • Status:  Offline

25 minutes ago, WBO said:

The King James Version Bible is the pure Word of God and it does not contain any errors

I kindly recommend that you do some research on this.  That is all I really want to say about this topic because I have done this before. In the end, no one bothers to consider the facts of the matter. They just keep beating you over the head demanding that you believe as they do until it all ends in tears with the mods closing down the thread.  

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Well Said! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Steward

  • Group:  Steward
  • Followers:  110
  • Topic Count:  10,460
  • Topics Per Day:  1.26
  • Content Count:  27,738
  • Content Per Day:  3.34
  • Reputation:   15,386
  • Days Won:  126
  • Joined:  06/30/2001
  • Status:  Online
  • Birthday:  09/21/1971

Simply read the intent of the translators in the Beginning of the KJV to better understand their purpose for the new translation in the 1600s.

The original 1611 version -- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James_Version,_1611)/Translators_to_the_Reader

The 1783 version -- http://www.bible-researcher.com/kjvpref.html

In essence, the translators were endeavoring to improve the translations before them ... and stated “nothing is begun and perfected at the same time".

Ask yourself why was the original forward was removed from the KJV Bible.  

God bless,

George

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Conformist Theology
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  118
  • Topics Per Day:  0.06
  • Content Count:  4,361
  • Content Per Day:  2.35
  • Reputation:   2,109
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/25/2019
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/03/1953

The first problem with the King James Version is that the language is 400 years old, so the meanings of some of the words has changed. And once you acknowledge that it is possible for a Bible to be imperfect, then one must suspect the King James Version, like all the others, is imperfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  28
  • Topic Count:  338
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  15,673
  • Content Per Day:  2.46
  • Reputation:   8,494
  • Days Won:  39
  • Joined:  10/25/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/27/1985

Lol I get a kick out of anyone who claims that any translation is the perfect one. To make that claim you would have to have access to the original Greek. Without having access to the original Greek you can't prove one over the other as the ?% pure. And we don't have the original Greek.

Now some translations are garbage, for sure. But any good translation is literal, more over good translations draw from multiple sources.

The kjv is a literal translation, and it does draw from multiple sources. So it has that going for it. However what it has going against it is one of the sources is the Latin Vulgate. So the portions that came from that was first translated into Latin THEN Greek. The second thing it has against it is the availability of manuscripts to translate from. They didn't have very many, hence why the Vulgate was used.

Now let's look at the NASB again, a literal translation. However, being more modern it is easier to read, yes, but they also had a wider variety of manuscripts to choose from thanks to modern archealogy, which means in theory, they can compare them all for greater accuracy. And it doesn't use the Latin Vulgate.

Now, I have-read-and use both translations regularly. Neither of them have any huge issues between them. Put them side by side and they both say literally, the same thing, start to finish. 

Which by human standards, should not be. The NASB should be the more accurate by human standards. But from my reading as well as my studies of the greek language, the two are virtually identical in meaning.

There is no human explanation for this. There is however a heavenly one. God promised He would protect His word forever. And He has. Nowhere does He say He will protect His word only in the KJV, just that He would protect it. And He has, regardless of the text used, He has managed to keep it pure, even with multiple translations.

And I should add, unless your using a 1611 KJV your not a real purist anyway. The KJV we use today is more of a transliteration then a transliteration.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Well Said! 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Junior Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  11
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  90
  • Content Per Day:  0.06
  • Reputation:   26
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/02/2019
  • Status:  Offline

16 hours ago, WBO said:

The truth I’m about to present is not popular to Christians which is shocking. But here it is. 

 

The King James Version Bible is the pure Word of God and it does not contain any errors. No not a single one.

 

 

The problem with your claim is that you do not take into consideration the fact that the KJV and all translations are just that: translations. 

You will need to consider the original text from which the Bible was translated: the Greek. If you do not do so, you really have no idea what you are talking about. Which unfortunately is true for at least 90% of those professing Christianity.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Servant
  • Followers:  21
  • Topic Count:  237
  • Topics Per Day:  0.11
  • Content Count:  6,773
  • Content Per Day:  3.24
  • Reputation:   4,724
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  07/05/2018
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  09/23/1954

17 hours ago, WBO said:

The King James Version Bible is the pure Word of God and it does not contain any errors. No not a single one.

What do you mean by no errors? Do you mean no words translated into English from Hebrew or Greek alter the intended meaning of the original text?

Is the political pressure put upon those who were tasked with producing the King James Bible responsible for any misconceptions about the dynamic relationship interactions of the body of Christ that exist today?  

Do non-English speaking Christians have to learn English and read from the KJV or are they simply able to follow Christ from Bibles translated into their own language? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  940
  • Topics Per Day:  0.35
  • Content Count:  13,412
  • Content Per Day:  5.02
  • Reputation:   8,957
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  12/04/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  03/03/1885

3 hours ago, Michael37 said:

Do non-English speaking Christians have to learn English and read from the KJV or are they simply able to follow Christ from Bibles translated into their own language? 

All need to read from the KJV just as Paul did, and as Jesus quoted from when He spoke.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  626
  • Content Per Day:  0.23
  • Reputation:   360
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  10/24/2016
  • Status:  Offline

46 minutes ago, Neighbor said:

All need to read from the KJV just as Paul did, and as Jesus quoted from when He spoke.

 

I can't tell if this was a serious response or a facetious response. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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