Your KJVO myth is false.

They are the same in meaning. Read the context.

John 21:15,16 – αγαπας

John 21:17 – φιλεις​

John 21:15 KJB - So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.

John 21:16 KJB - He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

John 21:17 KJB - He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
​

How many times did Jesus say "lovest", 1, 2, or 3?

You should really take the Agape, Phileo test ...

 

This "nathan" is a verb used 84 ways We use it for a name. Nathan the prophet " as giver" is a noun


Is Lucifer Hebrew? When you it is say Venus, do you suppose " morning star"?

 

I agree, We would have to know their culture, traditions and the other culture influences.

Back to heylel, Instead of morning star, or Venus,, I think it is a reference to first or prominent Heavenly light.

I have a problem with Jesus called the "morning Star" in Rev 22:6 .

2Pe 1:19¶
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:

Is this day star Jesus or just enlightenment ?

 

Psalm 68:11 The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it.

 

I thought I already admitted the KJV has errors. Are you paying attention?

As far as authority goes, I put authority in the originals. Any translation only has authority as far as it correctly translates the original languages, and the KJV does that quite well, thank you. As far as the ESV and NASB, I've read them both and think they are good translations as far as that goes, but I'm a Byzantine Priority man.

 

Although the KJV says "thou shalt not kill", scholars looking at the Hebrew manuscripts and other passages of scripture to recognize that "murder" was the more accurate word choice. Kill is simply to take life. Murder is to take life without cause or authority.

The main point I was trying to make is that if some of the statements about the KJV are true, there would be no need to turn to commentaries or Strongs for answers to hermeneutical questions. We simply should turn to the KJV. However, in this one specific verse, we can at least admit that the NIV has a superior translation. It's not to say that all the NIV is better than the KJV. You provided one such example. This is why I find it foolish to depend entirely on one translation.

I think many here are confused with what the "infallibility of the word of God" actually means. It doesn't mean the bible is without possible errors. It means that the word of God, as given or inspired to the author was the infallible. However, the minute fallible men put that word to paper, it became susceptible to error. I do believe that because of God's sovereignty and the guidance of the Holy Spirit, no doctrine has been corrupted as a result of any errors that scribes or translators have made. Which is why we can still have faith that the Bible is truth inspite of these minor errors.

 

Wow. What about the words of the Father, or the Holy Spirit?

 

Yeshua was His actual name, not Jesus if we want to be technical. Regardless, it doesn't matter. However, the NIV is right imo to not have a name for God because we honestly don't really know what that name is. However, "Lord" is the title that the hebrews used in place of YHWH out of fear of using "THE LORD'S" name in vain. Jehovah is a made up name by adding vowels to the YHWH.

 

Thank you for clarifying.

 

Wow. The word of God has 'some' errors? How do you know which ones are the errors? Are you telling me God preserved His words from 'most' errors?

Are there any of the words of Jesus, the 'red-letter' words, that are in error?

I do not think you used the word "sovereignty" correctly, or perhaps have another definition of which I am not familiar.

 

Now, you are saying that "Jesus" is not the name of the son of God?

 

I am more Alexandrian myself. But I am picking up what you're throwing down.

 

So what did Jesus say to Peter for the "third" time? Help me out here, really ...

 

Jesuits ...

 

All true, however the NIV "Lord" in those two specific verses, is neither a translation, nor transliteration [even though the NIV will transliterate 'hades', but not God's own name in those two verses], and makes no sense whatsoever to say that God's name is "Lord" in those two verses. "Lord" is not a name. Unless you might be of that class who say, "Lord 'Lord' ...", and I pray you aren't.