Forget the KJB. Is there any version that you believe is perfect?

Respectfully,

Infallibility is not a modern concept:
Titus 1:2, Numbers 23:19, Hebrews 6:18...God, who cannot lie.
The Bible itself clearly establishes both God and His words to be infallible and incapable of lying in its every word.

Inerrancy is not a modern concept:
Psalms 12:6, Psalms 18:30, Psalms 19:8, Proverbs 30:5.
God's words are pure.

Therefore, any Bible that men can point to and have confidence in, should and would not deviate from the originals in any way, shape or form except in "tongue".
Any translation that God's people, who know His voice and follow Him and His words ( because they have "ears to hear" ), should serve as something they can point to and have comfort in.

For those that believe that inerrancy and infallibility disappeared with the originals, I'm sorry that you feel this way.
I have a Bible, and I can point to it and say with confidence that they are God's words in my own language.

While I disagree with George on many things ( even up to and including the tone of this thread ), I do agree that God's word does exist, it has been preserved and I know where to find it.
I also hold that any translation faithfully and accurately translated from that providentially preserved word can and will be trusted by Christ's sheep.

Finally, any faithful and accurate translation performed from that providentially preserved word, will reflect and carry through to the next language, the original infallibility and inerrancy of those very same originals.

 

Some here seem to be stating that unless we have a perfect and an inspired translation, cannot have the word of God!

 

By his own standards, the 1611 Kjv was not the word of God to us in English!

 

ONLY Originals were imerrant and inspired!

 

Even the 1611 translators disagree with you, as they did NOT see their work as neither perfect nor inspired!

 

He also was inspired!

 

Lets see:
1) If I believe my version of the Bible (NASB) is trustworthy and reliable, but not perfect, I am anti-Christian.
2) If I believe copyists accidentally and on purpose altered the inspired text, I am anti-Christian.
3) If I believe translators accidentally and on purpose altered the inspired text, I am anti-Christian.
4) If i test the spirits of those presenting God's word, I am anti-Christian.

Got it!

 

Why not prove the Bible versions if they loved His words to keep the truth in His words?

John 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me. KJV

John 15:20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also. KJV

Can we really believe that the many Bible versions today are for to be easier to read or understand when we need His wisdom anyway even for the KJV?

So I believe the question is... are the Bible versions keeping the truth in His words? Since scripture cannot go against scripture for why the lost books are not in the Bible, then we can use that guideline to discern with Him which kept the truths in His words.

If all Bible versions says the truth that the Holy Spirit cannot speak for Himself, but speak only what He hears in John 16:13, then ask yourself how can the Holy Spirit make intercessions, let alone, turn God's gift of tongues to speak unto the people around for Himself to be praying back to God out loud? Answer; John 16:13 says He cannot. But why would believers think otherwise? Romans 8:26-27 in most modern Bible versions is why, and yet the KJV kept the truth of John 16:13 by citing that the Holy Spirit makes silent intercessions as He cannot even utter His groanings in verse 26, whereas other modern versions implies wordless groans or some sound being uttered.

Romans 8:27 in the KJV explains how the silent intercessions of the Holy Spirit's is given to God the father by the Word of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, that searches our hearts per Hebrews 4:12-16 & thus the One that knows the mind of the Spirit. That is why it is in according to the will of God because the man Christ Jesus, is the Only Mediator between God & men per 1 Timothy 2:5. This is the will of God so that after Jesus gives the Spirit's silent petitions, our own petitions, & the Son's own petitions, whichever ones the Father says yes to or agree with, permitting only the Son to answers the prayers per John 14:13-14 so that the Father may be glorified in the Son for answers to prayers. The Holy Spirit in all that He does, gives the credit & glory to Jesus Christ for the answers to prayers & in the ministry as well per John 16:14-15.

Now a lot of believers have gone astray today thinking tongues are for private use; 1 Corinthians 12:4-14,&19-21 are the precedent to read that tongues are not for private use in order to not misapply Paul's words in the 14th chapter when he is trying to exhort believers that if they seek any gift, they should seek the gift of prophesy & began comparing the 2 for why prophesy is better because tongues is not a stand alone gift that the tongue speaker has to pray or it is unfruitful to himself as that tongue speaker until it is. Paul gave the bottom line on tongues for what it is for so as to clarify that by the laws & the prophets, it was for God to speak unto the people in 1 Corinthians 14:20-21 & not to be used as a sign or proof for anything for the believer to know per 1 Corinthians 14:22.

But believer skips over chapter 12 as if those words do not apply, & skip over verses 20-22 in chapter 14 in favor of somehow thinking Paul was making the gift of tongues way better than prophesy for believers to seek after.

My point here is.. we do not have time to squabble over the typical KJV only arguments, but which Bible versions hold the truths in His words that they do not oppose each other so we can use the meat of His words to discern good & evil by it?

I'd say the KJV because the Holy Spirit cannot use God's gift of tongues for His own use, not even by groaning His intercessions back to God. When there is a supernatural tongue in the world that is gibberish nonsense as found in idolatry, occult ( Isaiah 8:19 ), & cults in Christianity, then how can God call sinners away from that tongue unless His gift is a foreign language & not gibberish nonsense?

.But all reasoning is thrown out. All you need is a modern Bible version to cast doubt to the truth in John 16:13 in all Bible versions to say maybe God did not really said that while saved believers go astray by a phenomenon wanting to believe it is of God so they wind up believing every spirit that falls on them after salvation is of God, ignoring John's warning in 1 John 4:1-6 in not believing every spirit but test them in according to our faith since 2 Corinthians 13:5 is the same thing as saying 1 John 4:2 that Jesus Christ is in us or as saying Jesus Christ "is come" in the flesh.. as dwelling in us. 1 John 4:3-4 confirms that is the rightly dividing of the word of truth for verse 2 but only Jesus Can confirm the word to you so don't forget to ask & trust Him as Your Good Shepherd to do this..

So do you think which Bible version keeps the truth as aligned in His words is the better question? I'd say the KJV.

 

You continue your bogus, improper, unscriptural tactic of putting words in the mouths of others that they do not say.

Perhaps you are advocating unbiblical faith in assumptions based on fallacies or on assertions that are not true.

Do you suggest that faith contradicts truth or that true faith believes assertions that are not true?

 

Confining yourself to human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning is a moot faith. It is meaningless, of no consequence, and is untestable. The Scriptures even as translated in the KJV do not teach KJV-onlyism.

No one Hebrew OT manuscript or even printed Hebrew OT text based on multiple, varying manuscripts is named or identified by most KJV-only advocates as being the standard by which the KJV's OT can be tested because they may know that the KJV's OT is based on imperfect, multiple, textually-varying sources.

No one Greek NT manuscript or even pre-1611 printed Greek NT text based on multiple, varying Greek manuscripts is named or identified by most KJV-only advocates as being the standard by which the KJV's NT can be tested because they may know that the KJV's NT is based on imperfect, multiple, textually-varying printed editions and that it does not follow any one 100%.

 

Paul never doubted that he was called and sent as an Apostle by Lord Jesus!

 

Asked and answered, see post # 49.

Lets see:
1) If I believe my version of the Bible (NASB) is trustworthy and reliable, but not perfect, I am anti-Christian.
2) If I believe copyists accidentally and on purpose altered the inspired text, I am anti-Christian.
3) If I believe translators accidentally and on purpose altered the inspired text, I am anti-Christian.
4) If I test the spirits of those presenting God's word, I am anti-Christian.
5) If I believe Christ uses "broken reeds" to further His ministry, I am anti-Christian.

Got it.

 

Circular reasoning logic, as you "prove" the Kjv by believing that it is the only word of the Lord!