The Pure Word of God

I reckon the odds are steep, but I may still read a KJV after all.

 

Prouerbes XXX:5 (KJV1611):

Euery word of God +is pure:
he is a shield vnto them that put
their trust in him.

sidenote: + Heb. purified

Prouerbes XXX:5 (KJV1611 secondary reading):

Euery word of God purified:
he is a shield vnto them that put
their trust in him.

 

Yes.

No. That's why I use the best, most faithul.

 

You're right. The only way to make sure we have the pure word of God is to use only the original Greek and Hebrew and abandon all translations thereof.

 

I have the True and Living Pure Word of God
which is the only Messiah: Yeshua. My eternal
destiny is in good hands: the blessed hands
of our Lord and Savior: Messiah Jesus.

 

The PURE Bible VS the COUNTERFEIT bibles

 

Great. Now we are tacking things on to the gospel message. How is faith in Christ at stake? Are you trying to imply that those who use MVs are in danger of not truly being saved?

And by the way, yes I am sure and no I would not take my chance with a counterfeit.

Neal

 

Without a doubt ... I am preparing my Sunday message from it this morning.

Somehow, I can't see that anyone has ever made the case from Scripture that one's salvation depends on what Bible they use. In fact, I think the questioning of someone's salvation because of the version they use is off limits. You just never learn do you, Pioneer.

 

Pioneer said:

Are you sure that you have the pure word of God? Your eternal destiny is at stake. Your faith in Christ is at stake. Your relationship with God is at stake. Are you willing to take your chances with a counterfeit?

No need to "take my chances" with anything. I have God's pure, preserved Word right here, in my New American Standard Bible. Praise God for the wide availability of his Word in English.

 

Did I say anything about what version you are using? Must be your conscience bothering you. </font>[/QUOTE]Before this discussion can proceed, I (meaning me, meaning Daniel David), need to know who you (Pioneer) are referring to when you (Pioneer) use the pronouns, I and you. You (Pioneer) might be referring to a counterfeit and possibly even the antichrist (2 Thess. 2).

 

Did I say anything about what version you are using? Must be your conscience bothering you. </font>[/QUOTE]My conscience is not bothering me a bit. Your implications are. I think we all have seen enough your posting here to know exactly what you meant. You will not get out of it by this little game you are playing here. The bottom line is that one's eternal destiny is not at stake no matter what version you use.

 

I wonder how many have actually researched the other Bibles versus "old faithful" the King James Version.

One of the members of the NIV translation committee is a self-confessed homosexual. The NIV is printed by only one printing firm. The mother company of that printing firm also puts out the satanic bible. The NIV refers to Lucifer as the Morning Star. I know who the morning star is and it is not Lucifer!

The King James Bible is translated word for word from the original texts. The others are emotional translations.

Satan has chosen the perfect way! He has taken God's word and twisted it so that some folks out there will truly believe that is God's word. We need to remember Revelation 22:18-19.

You may be saved, but not living Godly, according to God's word can get you into trouble. The Lord can punish you here on earth for not following his word.

I am not claiming to be all knowing and never will be. I am not claiming to be like Christ. I never will be that until I am with him.

But, while here, I stand firm on the rock. I will follow the King James Bible always believing that it is God's word translated word for word from the original texts. I believe that through the King James Bible I will not miss one word that he has for us.

 

Apparently, one fewer.

False. The person in question is was an English style consultant, not a translator. There is absolutely no evidence that it was known at the time or that it had any affect on the translation.

Irrelevant. The presses are presses. They possess no spiritual qualifications. Again, there is no evidence that this company has altered the text in any way.

Apparently you don't. The passage in question may refer to Lucifer. It uses the name Helel, which is translated "morningstar." You are thinking of an entirely different passage in a different context. This is simply false argumentation.

This is simply not true either. The most literal translation is the NASB. The KJV uses dynamic translation in a number of different places. There are several translations that are more literal than the KJV is.

There is no evidence that Satan had any had in the translation of the MVs. If he did, he is more inept than one might imagine since he did not affect any doctrine whatsoever. We do need to remember Rev 22:18-19. Remember that word "add" is in there. It applies the KJV which has added to the word of God in numerous places.

This is true, but has nothing to do with which translation of the Bible one uses. The MVs actually help people obey God because they use more clear and precise language in elucidating his commands.

I think we would all make this statement about ourselves. However, that does not exempt you from the necessity of learning, a journy which I hope you will take.

I think we would all agree. This same statement would be true about any faithful translation. We encourage people who like the KJV to love it, to read it, to study it, to learn it, and to live by it. We also encourage them to be honest in their presentation of the facts (something that did not happen in your post) and we encourage them to hold a biblical position about Scripture (something which was not presented in your post).

I hope this information here will cause you to do what your opening line suggested was necessary. It will greatly increase your understanding.

 

Here's a new game: How many falsehoods can you stack end-to-end in a single post?

One of the members of the NIV translation committee is a self-confessed homosexual.

No, she was an English stylist, not a translator, and furthermore, she was not a "self-confessed homosexual" at the time.

The NIV is printed by only one printing firm.

False. It is printed by Zondervan in North America, and by Hodder and Stoughton elsewhere. That is two printing firms. I believe that the various Bible Societies (which own the copyright) also print their own, which makes at least three.

The mother company of that printing firm also puts out the satanic bible.

Which proves exactly nothing, since HarperCollins is a very big publisher with a wide variety of imprints.

The NIV refers to Lucifer as the Morning Star. I know who the morning star is and it is not Lucifer!

Wrong. The KJV refers to the King of Babylon as "Lucifer," and the NIV refers to the King of Babylon as "the Morning Star."

The King James Bible is translated word for word from the original texts.

No, it is translated into grammatical English, not translated word for word. Furthermore it contains numerous paraphrases (such as the infamous "God forbid!" in Paul's letters, the literal translation of which would be along the lines of "May it not be").

The others are emotional translations.

This is a meaningless claim.

We need to remember Revelation 22:18-19.

I do, which is why I reject the false claim that the King James Bible, and only the King James Bible, is the perfectly preserved Word of God in the English language. That tradition of men is an addition to Scripture, and therefore has no lawful place in the church.

 

Pastor Larry said:

Irrelevant. The presses are presses. They possess no spiritual qualifications. Again, there is no evidence that this company has altered the text in any way.

And indeed one very significant incentive not to. The New International Version is Zondervan's flagship publication. However, they don't own the copyright to the NIV; they are simply a licensed publisher. The International Bible Societies own the text.

If Zondervan were to tamper with the NIV, do you think they would be the authorized publisher of it for much longer? There's probably not a printing house in the world that wouldn't jump at the opportunity to sign that contract.

 

46 manuscripts supporting the KJV had "without a cause. " Only 9 manuscripts supporting modern versions omitted it.

Remember the story of Jesus and the merchandise in the Temple. Where would the NIV reading leave Christ after he drove out the money changers? If modern versions omiteed "without a cause," then Jesus would not have a cause to anger. Is that right?

 

I wonder how many have actually researched the other Bibles versus "old faithful" the King James Version.
Comparing translation to translation produces no fruit. A fruitful comparison would be to compare translations to the texts from which they came.

One of the members of the NIV translation committee is a self-confessed homosexual.
So was King James, so that should be of little if any significance.

The NIV is printed by only one printing firm.
Actually, the NIV is printed by several firms with permission of the copyright holder, which is Tyndale House Publishers.

The mother company of that printing firm also puts out the satanic bible.
Harper Collins also publishes an edition of the KJV.

The NIV refers to Lucifer as the Morning Star.
Morning Star is a more accurate translation of the word. This has been discussed in threads numerous times.

I know who the morning star is and it is not Lucifer!
Then you've changed the meaning of the original text, and added to the Bible.

The King James Bible is translated word for word from the original texts.
It's impossible to translate "word for word" from one language to another, due to translational differences in verbage and phrases. The KJV is no more or less translated word for word than most other translations. The fact that the KJV contains phrases like "God save the King" and "God forbid", which are not in the original texts, is an example of that.

The others are emotional translations.


Satan has chosen the perfect way!
Yes, version onlyism is destructive to Christianity.

He has taken God's word and twisted it so that some folks out there will truly believe that is God's word.
Yes, it's unfortunate that KJVO's have twisted God's word in such a manner.

We need to remember Revelation 22:18-19. You may be saved, but not living Godly, according to God's word can get you into trouble. The Lord can punish you here on earth for not following his word.
Rev 22 says nothing about versionology. To argue that this verse speaks of such can get you into trouble for adding to his word.

I will follow the King James Bible always believing that it is God's word translated word for word from the original texts. I believe that through the King James Bible I will not miss one word that he has for us.
Good for you. I'm glad that GOd speaks to you via the KJV. But to insist that that is the only appropriate version for all people is unbiblical.