Featured Converting thy to your is really the only requirement to modernizing the entire KJV Bible

Th problem is that many who grew up only on the Kjv have no real issues reading and using it, but what about those who never had a bible before got saved?

 

Brother, for the umpteenth time, you need a verse that teaches that inspiration is reserved only for the original autographs.
If there's no verse, it's not a doctrine.
It may be sensical, it may be logical, but it can't be scriptural without a verse.

 

I grew up on the Arabic SVD 1865.
KJB is fine.

 

Give. A. Verse.

 

There is no verse that teaches that inspiration is the process by which Bible translations are made so are you admitting that KJV-only teaching is not Bible doctrine?

 

And yet you are not let from understanding what that means!

 

It is clear from the Scriptures that inspiration concerns the process of the giving of the Scriptures to the prophets and apostles.

According to the Scriptures themselves, it could be soundly concluded that inspiration would be a term for the way, method, means, or process by which God directly gave the Scriptures to the prophets and apostles or for the way that the words proceeded from the mouth of God to the prophets and apostles (2 Tim 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:21, Matt. 4:4, Eph. 3:5, Deut. 8:3).

The scriptural evidence for that position is much stronger than the human, non-scriptural claim of inspiration for the KJV.

 

I've said that no verse specifically proves KJB-only just about half-a-dozen times now, and at least twice to you, you just don't listen.

 

Of course there are. And I've listed them a bunch of times.

 

You intentionally keep ignoring my words. The issue is not that the KJB is given by inspiration. The issue is that you and your kind teach that no Bible at all can ever be given by inspiration.
It's not a KJB issue, it's a Bible issue.
But it's a lot easier for you to focus on the KJB rather than expose your true position: you believe there is no perfect Bible anywhere, nor can there ever be one.
Some Christian position that.

 

I'm fine with my ESV thanks. And I didn't say I didn't understand the KJV. I said it is not as simple to update it as you try to make it. I would recommend you read the book "Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible" by Dr. Mark Ward.

 

You may assume that you have, but you jump to wrong conclusions.

Translations of words in another language that are the words given as part the supernatural process of inspiration to the prophets and apostles is not at all the same thing as Bible translations made after the end of the giving of the New Testament.

The words that directly proceeded from the mouth of God by inspiration to the prophets and apostles are the original-language words of the Old Testament and the original-language words of the New Testament even when words originally said in another language may be quoted.

The pagan poet was not given his words by inspiration of God, but when Holy Spirit moved Paul to quote the words from a pagan poet in Greek (whether translated or not) they became part of New Testament Scriptures. It is the words that proceeded from the mouth of God to the apostle Paul that are the original-language words of New Testament Scripture (not the words of the pagan poet in whatever language that poet first stated them). When Pharaoh first stated his words, they were not given by inspiration of God as Scripture. It is the words in Hebrew as given by inspiration of God to Moses that are Scripture because God chose that certain things said by Pharaoh be included in the Scriptures.

 

You keep ignoring and dodging what I actually state as you try to put words in my mouth that I have not stated. You bear false witness with your misrepresentations and distortions.

By inspiration God gave absolutely pure and perfect Scriptures to the prophets and apostles.

The Scriptures are the specific revealed, written words of God given by the miracle of inspiration to the prophets and apostles. According to the Scriptures, God revealed His Word to the prophets and apostles by the Holy Spirit (Eph. 3:5, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 15:4, 1 Cor. 2:10-13, Rom. 16:25-26, Heb. 1:1-2, Acts 1:2, Eph. 2:20, Acts 3:21, John 16:13, John 17:8, 14, John 3:34, 2 Sam. 23:2, Luke 24:25, 27, 44). The word of the LORD came to the prophets and apostles (1 Sam. 15:10, 2 Kings 20:4, Isa. 38:4, Jer. 1:4, Jer. 29:30, Ezek. 6:1, Dan. 9:2, Jonah 1:1, Zech. 7:8, Acts 3:21). A true prophet spoke from the mouth of the LORD (2 Chron. 36:12, Luke 1:70, Jer. 1:9, Acts 3:21, 2 Sam. 23:2, Deut. 18:22). The actual specific words that proceeded out of the mouth of God or that God breathed out are those original language words given by inspiration to the prophets and apostles (Matt. 4:4, Deut. 8:3, Luke 4:4, Isa. 55:11). God’s Word is “the Scriptures of the prophets” (Rom. 16:26, Matt. 26:56). God gave His words or spoke by the mouth of the prophets (Luke 1:70, Jer. 1:9, Acts 1:16, Acts 3:21, Ps. 68:11, 2 Chron. 36:12). All Scripture was given by inspiration of God to those prophets and apostles (2 Tim. 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:21, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Eph. 3:5, Eph. 2:20, Jude 1:3). While 2 Timothy 3:16 may not directly mention the prophets and apostles, the parallel verse concerning inspiration (2 Pet. 1:21) clearly connected the miracle of inspiration to them when considered with other related verses in the whole of Scripture. Comparing scripture with scripture, the holy men of God moved or borne along by the Holy Spirit in the miracle of inspiration were clearly the prophets and apostles (2 Pet. 1:21, Eph. 3:5, Eph. 2:20, 2 Pet. 3:1-2, Rom. 16:26, Luke 1:70, Matt. 26:56). The exact same words that the psalmist wrote in Psalm 95 the Holy Spirit spoke or said (compare Ps. 95:7 with Hebrews 3:7). What Moses said to Pharaoh as the LORD told him (Exod. 9:13), the Scripture said (Rom. 9:17, Exod. 9:16). The whole counsel of God or the overall teaching of the Scriptures would indicate that there can be no new inspired works without living apostles or prophets (2 Peter 1:21, Eph. 3:3-5, Heb. 1:1-2, Luke 1:70, 24:27, 44-45, Acts 1:16, 3:21, 26:27, Matt. 2:5, Rom. 1:2, Rom. 16:25-26, Jer. 29:19, 2 Chron. 36:12, Dan. 9:10, Amos 3:7).

It is the Scriptures that God gave that teach that words added by men or that errors introduced by men would not be the inspired word of God. An error is still an error whether introduced by copiers, printers, editors, or translators.

 

Does a consistent application of your own assertion suggest that relying on one exclusive group of Church of England scholars in 1611 "sounds Popish"? Do you contradict your own reasoning?

 

The Holy Spirit had the writers write down the Originals in Aramiac, Hebrew, and Koine Greek, not the Kings English!

 

No verse stated that anything other then what was written down in the originals would be inspired!

 

The writers of the canon stated that the Word of the lord, and the Holy Spirit came unto and upon them to inspire, nothing can be said for same for any translator!

 

There is a BIG different between the Kings English of tthe Kjv and modern day American!

 

Interesting that Baptists side with those who held to infant baptism and other doctrines against what Baptists hold with!