-The only Bible that can be trusted-

bigape · Puppy Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 210

For me, the whole issue of the KJV, boils down to it’s source. (The Textus Receptus). Choosing a Bible version, should have nothing to do with “how well you like it”, but “can you depend upon it”. The KJV is the ONLY English Bible, that is translated from sources that can be trusted.

But be careful, when you search the internet for information about the Textus Receptus, because Satan hates you, and he hates the Bible and doesn’t want you to know the truth. Therefore he has spread a lot of lies about the Textus Receptus, in cyberspace, because he knows that this is where most lazy people, will stop their search. If you really want to do some research about the Textus Receptus, you will have to search through “books”, on the subject, that were written years ago(the older the better). ....I will fully explain, in future posts, why “older is better”(older, being before 1875).

Anyway, the Textus Receptus is a collection of about 5000 manuscripts, of the New Testament, that have survived the ages. The reason these copies are grouped together, and bear the name Textus Receptus, is because they all agree with each other. (They all record the same words, in the original language, that we can read in English, in our KJV New Testament.) About 400 years ago, the KJV was translated from the most accurate Old Testament(Masoretic text), and the New Testament(Textus Receptus), and Satan hated it. Satan’s internet lie, is that “all the 5000 manuscripts, don’t really agree with each other”, but for hundreds of years, all Christians, all over the world, have agreed that they do. It has only been in the 1900's, that Satan’s attack on the Bible, has started to take hold.

The fact is, that of all the English versions of the Bible, available today, ONLY THE KJV, was translated from these accurate sources. Every other English Bible, has been influenced by a new man-made manuscript, that was put together back around 1880. Of all the subjects, that we can talk about on the internet, this is one that Satan wants us to shut up about. Because he knows that if he can get us to doubt the Words of the Bible, than he has won the battle for our hearts and minds.

More will be coming, on this subject later.

JB · Grizzly Bear Joined: 16 Feb 2008 Posts: 737

bigape,
I personally prefer the New American Standard as an English text. I find that it is much closer to the LXX than the KJV.

JB

bigape · Puppy Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 210

Hi, Fierce Puppy or Emperor of the Galaxy (which ever is correct)

You may be right, about the NAS, being closer to the LXX(the 70): but the LXX, isn’t the best manuscript of the Bible, available. As I put forth in this post, the Textus Receptus and the Masoretic text, have been determined to be, the preserved Word of God.

Oh by the way: The way that these were determined to be, the preserved Word of God, was by the person of the Holy Spirit. For about 300 years(from 1611-1900), 99% of English speaking Christians, accepted the KJV, as God’s Word, and as a result, more people were saved during that time, than during any other time in human history.

All of those billions of Christians(during that period), had the indwelling Holy Spirit. And I guarantee you, that if they were using a corrupted Bible, than they would have rejected it, over time. Now I am “not saying”, that if a person doesn’t use the KJV, than they aren’t really saved. That would be ridiculous. What I am saying is, that 300 years, is a long time. The KJV, has been “time tested”, to be God’s Word. And if you already have God’s Word, then why go looking for something new.

See you later

pastor2022 · Moderator Joined: 07 Dec 2006 Posts: 726

Which version of the KJV do you hold to as being the "inspired" version?
_________________
Faith is the confident obedience to the Word of God in spite of circumstances or consequences.

Plotinus · Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 7:32 am Post subject:

revmattchoo.com · House Cat Joined: 02 Sep 2003 Posts: 165

The KJV does have its benefits. It has been read in English and poetry classes as a work of classic literature. I doubt they would as readily read an NASB or NIV as quickly for classical literature as they would the KJV.

However, I do have this one question: What is filthy lucre? I would like to know.
_________________
“Experience: that most brutal of teachers. But you learn, my God do you learn.” - C.S. Lewis

“Has this world been so kind to you that you should leave with regret? There are better things ahead than any we leave behind.” - C.S. Lewis

Plotinus · Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 9:26 am Post subject:

Plotinus · Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 9:30 am Post subject:

revmattchoo.com · House Cat Joined: 02 Sep 2003 Posts: 165

Thank you Plotinus. That helps.

Now, regarding the KJV, I would want to read the original 1611 version, as it was originally translated in the English language of its time. That would render John 3:16 as thus, "For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. (e-sword.net/bibles.html)" That is what I would want to read since it is the original 1611 version of the King James Version before the words' spellings were updated into today's spellings.
_________________
“Experience: that most brutal of teachers. But you learn, my God do you learn.” - C.S. Lewis

“Has this world been so kind to you that you should leave with regret? There are better things ahead than any we leave behind.” - C.S. Lewis

Plotinus · Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 12:50 pm Post subject:

Paul2 · Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject:

bigape,

bigape · Puppy Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 210

Hi everyone, I am back;

First, please forgive me for getting every bodies names messed up.

bigape · Puppy Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 210

Hi Pastor2022

I really appreciate your question, and the within a question: when you added the word “inspired”, to your main question. I will answer them both.

First, I will answer, the hidden question: As you know, the KJV, was finished in 1611, and over the next 100 years or so, it was revised many, many times, to correct spelling errors and misprints. Take note, that it’s foundation was just fine, they just had some bugs to work out. In answer to your question, none of these revisions was “inspired”. I have never stated, that the KJV was inspired, but just that it is THE BEST ENGLISH TRANSLATION.

I understand the root of your question, and here is what I think about that(as I said earlier, in this site, to 45degreeN). When ever I talk about the superiority of the KJV, I try to always make it clear, that I am talking to English speaking people only. I do this because of that false teaching out there, called “Double inspiration”. Those people, that have come to the conclusion, that 400 years ago, when it was translated, that the KJV, was freshly inspired.

As to your surface question, about revisions to the KJV. For years and years, I ignored this issue, because none of those older copies, with the spelling errors, were even available to me. Although my mind was changed a few years ago, when I bought my wife a new Bible for Christmas, and a few days later, we discovered that at least one of the words had been changed. It was one of those words, that some editor thought was archaic, so he felt free to change it, and the word he replaced it with, had a different meaning. I promptly returned it to the Bible book store, where I had bought it, to find the clerk, totally unconcerned. She said “I use the NIV, so what’s the big deal”. I got the distinct impression, that this Bible was going to be put right back on the shelf, to be sold to someone else.

Therefore, from now on, I will be more careful, about the Bible’s I buy.

Hope to here from you agian.

"Iron sharpeneth iron”

bigape · Puppy Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 210

Hi revmattchoo

As I said, in the first paragraph of this thread, “Choosing a Bible version, should have nothing to do with “how well you like it”, but “can you depend upon it”. I have found other Bible versions, that (on the surface), I seem to like more than the KJV(like the Amplified version), but that is just on the surface. You know, I never suggest to people, that they “read” the Bible. I always encourage them to “study” the Bible, and this is when, an accurate translation, really pays off.

As for this argument, about the “older manuscripts”. There is a good reason that they are older, and are in such good condition. i.e. (Because they were never studied.) Because real Christians, who love God’s Word, refused to study them, because of all their errors. So they were just left on the shelf, and hundreds of years later, they are now called, “the best manuscripts”. It really bothers me, when I am studying a Bible, and find a little mark, by a verse, that leads me to the bottom of the page, where it says; “This verse isn’t found in the best GK manuscripts”. I see this notation, as from Satan, in his attempt to cast doubt upon the Word of God.

I hope, that this answered your questions. Hope to hear from you again.

bigape · Puppy Joined: 18 May 2008 Posts: 210

Hi revmattchoo

Yes, the KJV, is a beautiful document, and it blesses my heart to read it.

As for the meaning of “Filthy lucre”, it is talking about a persons attitude about money. All those people that go out to the gambling casinos, are given to filthy lucre.