NEW KING JAMES VERSION - COUNTERFEIT

LOL.

Symbols, like words, have context.

Do you also believe the Star of David is a Satanic hexagram?

 

Please be aware that slandering a publisher which tends to be quite litigious places the BB and the BB webmaster at risk. Please refrain from slandering any author or publisher on this forum. I will begin deleting slanderous posts without warning.

 

That "little light" is burnin' mighty dim right now ...

 

I didn't see a link, which I would be interested in reading.

I find it interesting, that someone would call any translation of scripture a counterfeit.

Why? Because to someone like me, who is multi-lingual, all translations of anything are in part, counterfeit. I have learned that it is impossible to keep 100% of the meaning of any phrase AND and 0% to the meaning whenever you translate something.

Knowing that, I do not worship scripture, I worship the author. I study what He wrote, because I want to get to know Him.

Just like when I went out to sea for 6 months and read my wife's letters over and over again. I wanted to be closer to her, so I read between the lines, I read to understand her and to feel her presence. I never did memorize any of her letters, nor did I ever limit my understanding to only the literal words. I still have all 54 of them in a box.

Someday, we'll read them together again.

 

A KJVO friend of mine printed that out for me a couple of years ago.The article is full of errors and untruths.Also, the article makes the "guilt by association". Please forgive me for not listing the problems, where would I begin? Stop comparing versions with the English Version (1611), even though it has been the accepted one for so long. Go to the languages the KJV is based upon, please start from there.

 

Andrey-Thank you for posting such a touching illustration.

Steve

 

The KJV arguments concerning the triquetra symbol on the NKJV cover have been answered, and refuted, many times before. Why not let the intent of the publishers speak for itself?

The triquetra is a Celtic knot, a piece of artwork, which early Christian missionaries to Britain used as an object lesson to teach truths about the Trinity. Perhaps it had pagan connotations before; maybe the pagans adopted the symbolism from the Christians (as pagans are often wont to do - look at the jargon of the New Age movement for examples). No one knows for sure who adopted the symbol from whom. But the KJV-onlyists are guilty of wrenching the cover design out of context and again committing the fallacy of guilt by association.

 

Ransom is correct. The symbol on the NKJV is a Trinitarian symbol that is very common in Christian art.

 

Bible believers do not intentionally misapply & misrepresent the Word. If you will study your Bible, you will see that Paul is referring to the "gods" they had fashioned - the idols and statues all over Athens (Acts 17:16)

[ April 01, 2002, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: TomVols ]

 

This Little Light said:

A Bible Believer would believe: [Acts 17:29]

You are taking Paul's words out of context: he is speaking of the idols he found in and around Athens, because of which "his spirit was provoked within him" (Acts 17:16, NKJV).

Paul was referring to representations of false gods. The triquetra symbol does not represent a false god. It is a decorative and nonrepresentational design with some ancient symbolic significance.

[ April 01, 2002, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

The vast majority of us here do. YOu have no corner on this.

 

One day I will learn how do do all these 'quote' things and stuff you all are already so good at.

But, until then, I shall use plain text, as I ask you a simple question, which is very related to what is happening right here:

What is God's Word?
A. The Holy Bible
B. Jesus Christ
C. Whatever God Says
D. Whatever an Angel, acting as God's Messenger, Says
E. All of the above.

According to "A", in John Chapter One, the answer is . . . "B".

There is also much evidence throughout "A" that "C" and "D" are very much the answer for many, many centuries, especially before "A" was written.

The Bible _is_ Holy, and so is the rest of God's Word. If I were to say that ONLY the Bible (any version) is God's Word is for me to turn my ears deaf to God.

God (or His angel) spoke to Joseph, to Mary, to Zacharias (John the Baptist's father), the shepherds, to Simeon, to Anna, and to Jesus. Those are all New Testament examples, by the way.

God Speaks Even Today, and I pray that we may Hear Him, Recognize His voice, Understand what He is telling us, and respond properly.

Oh, the answer might be, just might be "E".

 

> But I can say this there are fewer and fewer that take God at HIS Word and not try to change it.

so we noticed, with KJBO folk going around here n hissing yea hath God said at what they presume to be perversions n corruptions.

> The Westcott and Hort Only CULT has drummed up much fighting in the fundamental churches.

are u also a devout follower of mister walker's "research"?



> Gone are the time when most people just trusted God's Word, now scholiars have to question every word and select which one they would like to use this week and of course the church can count on their endless wisdom to tell them what REALLY

like i said, we've heard the hissin.

> Luke 20:46 "Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;"

amen. so we've noticed, too.

 

We have already dealt with this. The KJV is, and always has been, under copyright!

Upon publication of the Authorized Version in 1611, King James I of England assigned to that great work a "Cum Privilegio" (Latin: with privilege). The Cum Privilegio was issued in the form of a "Patent" which is very much like our copyright. However, the King realized that patent (copyright) law stated that a patent or copyright was only good for the life of the person holding the copyright, plus 50 years, so, instead of placing the patent in his name, or the names of the translation committee members, he issued the patent in the name of the Crown (a "Royal Letters Patent in Perpetuity"). In this way, he was able to secure the patent for the duration of the British Crown, plus 50 years. This means that it will never come into the public domain unless HM the Queen or one of her successors releases the patent.

 

God did not inspire the biblical writer to write in English,[edited] which means that any literary work published before 1900 can be reproduced virtually without limitations.

[Last warning on the name calling.]

[ April 01, 2002, 11:28 PM: Message edited by: Thomas Cassidy ]