Is someone who believes in one version of the Bible unbiblical ?

[charles_creech78]

Sounds good Charles. You do understand the problem with KJVO advocates, right? Nobody is saying that you are wrong in reading the KJV, or prefering the KJV, but .....wait a minute....what did you say?? Ha ha....you had made a perfectly fine post until your last comment. Therein lies the problem...."I stick to the old because the old is better". Is that a little hint of KJVOism in you??!!

*sigh*

Look if you want to be a KJVO person. I will not condem you for it. There is nothing wrong with loving the word of God. Like I said before if all of the bibles are all the same. Then why are some of you not liking someone being a KJVO kind of person. If it is all the same bibles. If he teaches with a KJVO he is teaching the word of God and if he is teaching another bible that is not a KJV but there all the same being the word of God then what is the problem with this. Everyone has there own gift from God. Some people can understand the 1611 edition and some people can't. Some people love the old stuff some people don't. I just love that old time way. Some people like music in the singing some people don't. But who are thou that judgeth another. God shall judge him and you. Let him that love the KJVO bibles love it and him that loves other translation love it. Let him that teacheth TEACH THE WORD OF GOD.

 

[dan e.]

Look if you want to be a KJVO person. I will not condem you for it. There is nothing wrong with loving the word of God. Like I said before if all of the bibles are all the same. Then why are some of you not liking someone being a KJVO kind of person. If it is all the same bibles. If he teaches with a KJVO he is teaching the word of God and if he is teaching another bible that is not a KJV but there all the same being the word of God then what is the problem with this. Everyone has there own gift from God. Some people can understand the 1611 edition and some people can't. Some people love the old stuff some people don't. I just love that old time way. Some people like music in the singing some people don't. But who are thou that judgeth another. God shall judge him and you. Let him that love the KJVO bibles love it and him that loves other translation love it. Let him that teacheth TEACH THE WORD OF GOD.

No problem with KJV at all....or with anyone, including myself, wanting to read it at all, or only read it. You are absolutely right....nothing wrong with it. Prefering KJV is nothing wrong. It is the "O" added to the KJV that makes people get a little riled up about it. That has some connotations to it, and the reputation comes from KJVO advocates (this is not the same as you Charles, who simply prefers KJV).

I don't think we're talking about the same things. I get your point...I just found some of your comments amusing, and reflecting a smidgin' of KJVO attitude. Sorry if I'm mistaken!:wavey:

 

[Ed Edwards]

Rev 22:7 (KJV1611 Edition):
Beholde, I come quickly: Blessed is he that
keepeth the sayings of the prophecie of this booke.

[quote =Quoted by Charles_chreech78]
Re 22:7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that
keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. [//quote]

Both are from the Authorized 1611 King James
Version. But your copy probably come from one of
the fine KJV1769editions (some of which were
American bootlegs that were NOT 'authorised'.

[quote =Charles_chreech78]
If in rev. say not to add or take away and I read
another so called bible and the words are changed
in it then how can that be the writen words of God.

By your own words, because you quoted from a Bible other
than the one you claimed to read --
-- 'how can that be the writen words of God'?

 

[dan e.]

[quote =Charles_chreech78]
If in rev. say not to add or take away and I read
another so called bible and the words are changed
in it then how can that be the writen words of God.

Yikes...I missed that quote. Charles....are you really serious about that?

Why does it seem like some act as if the Bible was written in KJV? Can you imagine? That sounds like a Monty Python movie.

I heard a story, from my OT prof., who said that he pastored when the NIV came out, and some person who was upset about the new translation said that if the KJV was good enough for Paul, than it's good enough for her!

I still laugh about that.

 

[rbell]

I stick with the old because the old is better.

If the KJV is your favorite, great! The KJV is a wonderful translation.

But "because older is better" is not a very good reason.

If "older is better" is your reasoning, get rid of your KJV and get a Geneva Bible. It's older.

 

[russell55]

There was no underlying tone of believing that no other Bible cannot be scripture.

When you said "someone who believes in only one Bible" I thought you meant that this person believes that there is only one version that is truly the Bible. I'm guessing that every person who answered yes on your quiz understood your question that way. There are people on this board that believe that and that's unbiblical.

 

[charles_creech78]

Rev 22:7 (KJV1611 Edition):
Beholde, I come quickly: Blessed is he that
keepeth the sayings of the prophecie of this booke.

[quote =Quoted by Charles_chreech78]
Re 22:7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that
keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. [//quote]

Both are from the Authorized 1611 King James
Version. But your copy probably come from one of
the fine KJV1769editions (some of which were
American bootlegs that were NOT 'authorised'.

[quote =Charles_chreech78]
If in rev. say not to add or take away and I read
another so called bible and the words are changed
in it then how can that be the writen words of God.

By your own words, because you quoted from a Bible other
than the one you claimed to read --
-- 'how can that be the writen words of God'?

Ed there is no diffrents in what verse you just quoted. Tell me in this scruture the words that are changed. There not. Prophecie, prophecy still the same thing. Book, Booke still the same thing. Beholde, behold still the same word. there is no diffrents in these words. Thee, the still the same word. Sin, sinn still the same word. Ed you know what I mean about changing it. You can not tell me they have not change the word of God and not be lieing about it. I just stay with the older ones because it is close to the word of God then some of them new ones. The word that I used for them scripture was from my computor program bible witch is to be a KJV. I have a 1611 edition bible and it is harder to but scripture up by tiping then to look in on my computor bible. If you can give me a web that has a program that has the 1611 edition I would us it. But them words are the same . Just writen in better english. Tell me Ed is there Bibles out there that are changed. Tell me the truth yes or no. Ed does you r 1611 say this. TO THE MOST HIGH AND MIGHTIE Prince, James by the grace of God King of Great Britaine,France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, THE TRANSLATORS OF THE BIBLE, wish Grace, Mercie, and peace, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[dan e.]

What??!!!! Your computer program bible is a witch?!!! THOSE newer translations are no further from the originals than the KJV, obviously depending on which one of THOSE that you would pick up.

 

[Cutter]

Rev 22:7 (KJV1611 Edition):
Beholde, I come quickly: Blessed is he that
keepeth the sayings of the prophecie of this booke.

[quote =Quoted by Charles_chreech78]
Re 22:7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that
keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. [//quote]

Both are from the Authorized 1611 King James
Version. But your copy probably come from one of
the fine KJV1769editions (some of which were
American bootlegs that were NOT 'authorised'.

[quote =Charles_chreech78]
If in rev. say not to add or take away and I read
another so called bible and the words are changed
in it then how can that be the writen words of God.

By your own words, because you quoted from a Bible other
than the one you claimed to read --
-- 'how can that be the writen words of God'?

See Bro. Charles, this is exactly the type of snobby putdowns you get from supposed know it alls that can't be satisfied with letting someone who has simple faith in God and the Word that he uses to follow God be his choice. Although they advocate tolerance and acceptance from others to make their own decisions and make they own bible choices, woe unto you for being satisfied with what you have. The way they talk down to you is pathetic. Their post imply you are ignorant, unlearned, and incapable. God knows better and so do I. I admire your faith and commitment to the Word. And as you quoted, "But who are thou that judgeth another." They will have enough to answer for themselves instead of worrying about you.

 

[Cutter]

What??!!!! Your computer program bible is a witch?!!! THOSE newer translations are no further from the originals than the KJV, obviously depending on which one of THOSE that you would pick up.

Another below the belt sucker punch by somebody trying to be cute!
You knew what the man meant and you try to exploit it to make yourself look good.


**Slang comment deleted**

 

[dan e.]

See Bro. Charles, this is exactly the type of snobby putdowns you get from supposed know it alls that can't be satisfied with letting someone who has simple faith in God and the Word that he uses to follow God be his choice. Although they advocate tolerance and acceptance from others to make their own decisions and make they own bible choices, woe unto you for being satisfied with what you have.

Oh Cutter, enough with the violin monologues. You know good and well why this is even an issue. I've read numerous people, myself included, say that there is nothing wrong with reading KJV, or even preferring it over others. It is statements like "older is better" that are weird, and come off wrong. As well as saying that if the words are different than the KJV than it is different then the word of God. Please stop twisting this from what it is about.

[End violin music]

 

[dan e.]

"If in rev. say not to add or take away and I read
another so called bible and the words are changed
in it then how can that be the writen words of God."

I just wanted to provide the quote of what I was talking about....no need to think of dramatic, tear jerking violins as you read this. Maybe on the next post.

 

[charles_creech78]

"If in rev. say not to add or take away and I read
another so called bible and the words are changed
in it then how can that be the writen words of God."

I just wanted to provide the quote of what I was talking about....no need to think of dramatic, tear jerking violins as you read this. Maybe on the next post.

Dan are you telling me that some of the New bibles are not changed. I said old is better because it is closer to the true writen words of God then the New ones. It is just what I believe brother and if you have a problem with that then go to God about it. man God did know they where going to change it because he but that in rev. Plus I did not say anything WHICH bible it was that was changed. I just stick with the older ones so I won't read one that is changed. Some of the new ones are changed and you can't tell me that they an't.

 

[charles_creech78]

The niv:2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters 6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good. 1611 EDITON KJV 2 And the earth was without forme, and darknesse was upon the face of the deepe; and the Spirit of God mooved upon the face of the waters. 6 And God said, Let ther be a firmament in the midst of the waters: and let it devide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament; and divided the waters, whichwere under the firmament, from the waters, which were above the formanment: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament, heaven: and the evening and morning were the second day. 10 And God called the drie land Earth, and the gathering together of water called hee, sea: and God saw that it was good. Rev. 18 NIV I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this SCROLL: if anyone of you adds anything to them, God will add to you the plagues described in this SCROLL. What happen to the word BOOK. Or the words if any man. You can not read this and tell me that the words of God have not been changed hear.

 

[Mexdeaf]

The niv:2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters 6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good. 1611 EDITON KJV 2 And the earth was without forme, and darknesse was upon the face of the deepe; and the Spirit of God mooved upon the face of the waters. 6 And God said, Let ther be a firmament in the midst of the waters: and let it devide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament; and divided the waters, whichwere under the firmament, from the waters, which were above the formanment: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament, heaven: and the evening and morning were the second day. 10 And God called the drie land Earth, and the gathering together of water called hee, sea: and God saw that it was good. Rev. 18 NIV I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this SCROLL: if anyone of you adds anything to them, God will add to you the plagues described in this SCROLL. What happen to the word BOOK. Or the words if any man. You can not read this and tell me that the words of God have not been changed hear.

Charles,

I am not trying to 'put you down', I consider you a brother in the Lord, but you do realize that the Bible was not originally given in English, right? The Greek word translated 'book' (KJV) and 'scroll' (NIV) is 'biblion'. The KJV in the NT translates it as 'book' or 'books' around 29 times, as 'bill' once, as 'writing' once and as 'scroll' once (in Revelation 6:14, not referring to an actual scroll as such).

So you can see that it may be written as either 'scroll' or 'book' and be perfectly in agreement with what John originally wrote. Not to mention that what we call the 'book' of Revelation was originally written on some type of scroll.

No one is denying your right to use the KJV, God bless you. What we do disagree with is your saying that "old is better because it is closer to the true writen words of God then the New ones." That is just plain WRONG, my friend.

 

[Amy.G]

I did not say mt OP question was not answered I was refering to one poster in a discussion that we where having about a specific question. I agree with you and posts similar. :thumbs:

My bad. I apologize. Glad we agree. :wavey:

 

[charles_creech78]

Charles,

I am not trying to 'put you down', I consider you a brother in the Lord, but you do realize that the Bible was not originally given in English, right? The Greek word translated 'book' (KJV) and 'scroll' (NIV) is 'biblion'. The KJV in the NT translates it as 'book' or 'books' around 29 times, as 'bill' once, as 'writing' once and as 'scroll' once (in Revelation 6:14, not referring to an actual scroll as such).

So you can see that it may be written as either 'scroll' or 'book' and be perfectly in agreement with what John originally wrote. Not to mention that what we call the 'book' of Revelation was originally written on some type of scroll.

No one is denying your right to use the KJV, God bless you. What we do disagree with is your saying that "old is better because it is closer to the true writen words of God then the New ones." That is just plain WRONG, my friend.

No my brother that is not the same thing. Ok and what happen to the part IF ANY MAN. What is so wrong with leaving it as book. We'll you have your belief and I have mine. I do not down you for it. I just believe in diffrent things then some ok. No hard filling from hear. I just see a big diffrents in the older one to the new ones. For me I will stick with the old.:thumbs:

 

[Ed Edwards]

Tell me Ed is there Bibles out there that are changed.

I just found out this week that my KJV1769 Edition
electronic Bible is IN ERROR - it is NOT like
other KJV1769 Editions.

I use three Bibles from e-sword. They have been put
on my computer, so I can use it even when the Internet
Service is down for awhile.

1. The Geneva Bible, 1587 Edition
2. The KJV1611 Edition
3. The KJV1769 Edition with Strong's Numbers.

Strong's Numbers are so much easier to use on
such a program - just click on the number and
you can find out what the source Hebrew or Greek
means. This is really useful trying to figure out which
English Bible has the best translation FOR THE 21ST
CENTURY. Much better on computer - that 12-pound
STRONG'S is a gut buster

Tell me the truth yes or no. Ed does you r 1611 say this. TO THE MOST HIGH AND MIGHTIE Prince, James by the grace of God King of Great Britaine,France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, THE TRANSLATORS OF THE BIBLE, wish Grace, Mercie, and peace, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Electronic KJV1611 Edition - NO, it doesn't say that
Paper KJV1611 Edition, the one with the Translator
Footnotes (actually on the side, but side notes are called
'footnotes'), with the Cross-reference footnotes,
but with no comentary footnotes (King James said not
to, revise the Bishop's Bible but don't have any comentary
footnotes):
This copy has the Pagan God 'Sol Invictus' on the title
page. This copy does have the text you suggest.
Unfortunately, so do many pirated copies of the KJV
that are in error. (all I have seen have the logo: "Authorized
Version" -- pretty nifty for an unauthorized version

Here is where I've been documenting variations between
the KJV1611 Edition and other KJVs:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=31304

 

[Steven2006]

"Is someone who believes in one version of the Bible unbiblical ?"

I would answer. No as long as they apply that belief to themselves and not others.

 

[rbell]

Rev 22:7 (KJV1611 Edition):
Beholde, I come quickly: Blessed is he that
keepeth the sayings of the prophecie of this booke.

[quote =Quoted by Charles_chreech78]
Re 22:7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that
keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. [//quote]

Both are from the Authorized 1611 King James
Version. But your copy probably come from one of
the fine KJV1769editions (some of which were
American bootlegs that were NOT 'authorised'.



See Bro. Charles, this is exactly the type of snobby putdowns you get from supposed know it alls that can't be satisfied with letting someone who has simple faith in God and the Word that he uses to follow God be his choice. Although they advocate tolerance and acceptance from others to make their own decisions and make they own bible choices, woe unto you for being satisfied with what you have. The way they talk down to you is pathetic. Their post imply you are ignorant, unlearned, and incapable. God knows better and so do I. I admire your faith and commitment to the Word. And as you quoted, "But who are thou that judgeth another." They will have enough to answer for themselves instead of worrying about you.

I don't see an insult in Ed's post...this post is consistent with things he says to all sorts of folk here...

I celebrate Charles's passion for the Word. And I'm glad that the KJV serves him well. I would venture that Ed would echo my sentiments.