1. Hello Guest! You are browsing the forums as a guest; you will have limited permissions as a guest so we advise registering to enjoy the forums fully. Remember: we are a Christian ONLY site - any user who is not Christian will not be approved. Blessings, Christian Forum Site Staff
    Dismiss Notice

Kjv Only

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by ccfromsc, Jul 21, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. I hope I am not mentioning a taboo topic, but has anyone ever met a KJV Only? I have and they are driving me nuts. Help please!
  2. Hi. I am one, and have met many. Hope this helps: Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
    (1Co 13:4)
  3. Personally I like the Kjv. But for the sake of common language usage I tend to use the Nkjv or the Esv. With the Old Testament, I like to weigh any version against the Apostolic Bible (Septuagint), because of several factors not the least being it was what the Apostles taught from.

    Getting back to your original post, (as I interpret it):
    Any 'Bible' that we use is going to be an interpretation of the source documents on hand. There are then three things that will seriously impact on the final product.
    1 The fidelity of the source documents to the actual inspired word of God that is used.
    2 The consensus of opinion from the panel of translators charged with the task of translation.
    3 The current and up to date knowledge of ancient Hebrew/Chaldean and Helenist Greek. (including Gramma as well as lexal meanings).
    There most likely will be doctrinal influences as well, but with the exception of the JW translation and the Mormon translation, these are probably difficult to identify.
    So we have a range of versions based on translation from a couple of source texts. We must realize that we do not have the original texts and that where there are differences, we have little chance of weeding out subtle errors.

    Going back to point 1, the difficulty in choosing one 'source' text over another is that there is no argument that can justifiably identify one against the other based on God's sovereignty to protect the fidelity of His written word.
    How do we choose? If we accept that there seems to be an error or omission in one source text, we must be prepared to accept that there may be an omission or error in another and different source text.
    On point 2, at any given time period, there is usually a panel of translators set aside and commissioned to revamp the Bible using primarily one chosen source text with latitude to consider a competitive source text. This is where consensus of opinion comes in, as well as.......
    in point 3 we have an ever increasing knowledge of the ancient languages and how they were used by the different authors. This will inevitably result in slight differences in interpretation, coupled with or rather influenced by changes in modern language usage. On this last point, a reading of posts by various members on this forum will show (without being judgmental) that the English language is used slightly differently by the various posters. Imagine the difficulties that translators of the future would have in rendering these posts into a new lanuage that reflected perfectly the miriad of thought that we find here on this forum.

    So, those who will tolerate no other version than their own personal preference are like those who will only vote for one political party because that is the one their parents voted for.

    hope this helps.
  4. I'm 58 years old and came to Christ 30 years ago, so, yes, I've met a lot of KJV people (most were KJV ONLY).

    Basically, the KJV was written for The Church of England (long story short, let's not haggle), so there is a Catholic/Episcopal flavor/bias to it (maybe not an INTENSE one, but you can notice).

    Acts 12:4 has the Jews celebrating "EASTER" instead of PASSOVER (an Anglican bias). Many people will disagree VERY aggressively with me for daring to speak against the glorious KJV, but it is GOD ONLY who should be glorified, not the KJV or any version at all.

    Recently, I've discovered that the KJV has been criticized more than I realized, but I won't ATTACK it because I believe that the only proper and acceptable devotion/worship is to approach God with the HEART/MIND (spirit), not a BOOK, no matter which version........(I'm kind of a 'RENEGADE' from TEXT).

    The KJV has an important verse that uses the wrong word. I believe that this ONE VERSE causes a very bad attitude that makes KJV people 'JUDICIAL'.....2 Timothy 3:16 in the KJV uses the word "REBUKE" (which means to "chew out").

    Most everyone on this planet likes to "chew out" anyone they can. Just about anybody on earth will forever make excuses that this is their duty, right, and that it is a Godly thing to do.....IF they have the predisposition to "chew out" a person and enjoy this ungodly act.

    Matthew 5:22
    "But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment;".........."whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council",.......

    ......"and whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be liable to the hell of fire".

    .........(the term "lake of fire" is only used in Revelations, but JESUS speaks of a "HELL of fire").

    Of course, even this will not deter the intellectual masters of text,.....and of course neither will the following verse...

    Jude 1:9
    "But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you.".

    GOD is THE judge and we should NOT "presume" to have the right to be judgemental and "REBUKE", but many insist on being able to "rebuke"...because they ENJOY doing so (where's the "Spirit" in that?).

    All of the other popular versions I've seen say that scripture is profitable/useful for "REPROOF" (to REPROVE means simply to PROVE WHAT IS RIGHT without 'chewing out').

    It is probably even likely right now that I'm going to get "chewed out" by the KJVers (because that version encourages the wrong attitude).

    The JEWS would feel free and enjoy chewing out other people (including their own worship brethren), but we SPIRIT-FILLED JESUS WORSHIPPERS should have a more GENTLE demeanor/spirit (we should NOT BE "JUDICIAL" and desire others to be served a penalty of any kind,...even SHAME or HUMILIATION).

    My verses are from the RSV.
  5. IsraelsONEhusband posted:
    Yet from either of my two copies of the Kjv, I read: 2 Tim 3:16. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    I see no use of the word 'rebuke' except in the Niv. I know that there are some older and somewhat different copies of the Kjv, perhaps you are using one of these? The reference to Easter in Acts is interesting; it has been corrected in the Nkjv though.
    But this just reinforces my point about doctrinal influence in translations.
    Thanks for the info.
  6. Yes Calvin, you are correct (my fault,...my apology).

    I was on another Christian forum about 2 months ago and someone insisted on being nasty to another poster. They quoted that verse in their defense. As I remember, they said it was from the KJV, but they probably just used the word according to their bias,.......they seemed to really ENJOY "rebuking" the other poster...(and they turned on me too).

    Don't get me wrong, there are some who will respond gently like you (that is where the heart determines a person's devotion and worship)....

    Ezekiel 36:26
    "A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh".

    I have a general fear of KJV ONLY people because they are so rigid and intolerant. The nasty poster was likely not even a legitimate believer in being SPIRIT-FILLED.....(SAD!). Most believers seem to only be aware of THE CROSS ONLY, but Jesus also gave us THE SPIRIT (John 7:39) when He was glorified.

    Again, my apologies about this misunderstanding of 2 Timothy 3:16 in the KJV.

    Maybe the next generation of believers will have more WISE BELIEVERS (God willing, but the condition of the world looks like this might be the LAST generation).
  7. Absolutely no apology necessary. Just good to see the matter clarified for the sake of any others who read these posts:).
  8. You may have met some rude KJVonlies, but rudeness does not qualify a KJVonly. Indeed, as soon as it is known that I am a KJVonly on some forums or in real life it seems I am automatically labelled as a heretic, as aggressive, and/or an illogical oaf.

    My point being, not that all KJVonlyists are kind and charitable; but that rude, aggressive behaviour is evident in all places where people are: simply because the problem is a human problem.

    Therefore, my offer of help to ccfromsc is to encourage him to excercize patience, and brotherly love to those whom he is struggling with, as we all should toward all men. It can be difficult, I know, I have experienced it from the other side of the fence. But even if you could prove that you are right, as also with me-even if I could prove that I am right, what does it matter if we abandon scriptural precepts concerning our behaviour whilst doing so? as Paul made evident with his statement in 1Co 9:27:
    "But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway."
  9. For me, the really great thing is that the Holy Spirit can take a passage and give it a sort of inward relevance no matter what version I am reading. Some times though the alarm bells ring loudly and further investigation shows that the version is wrong, wrong, wrong. Such a situation as reading Deut 22:28,29. in the Niv.....bad translation! 28If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
  10. God bless you my friend and I am one who prefers the KJV.

    As for KJV people driving ou crazy, I would advise you to remember that it is the NATURE of the person to be rude NOT the Bible translation they use.

    IF we say that KJV people are rude, that would be like saying that you are a car if you stand in your garage.

    People are rude, mean spirited NOT because of the Bible translation they use, BUT because that is their attitude and nature to begin with.

    I know many, many elderly people as I visit and speak at several retirement/nursing homes. My experience is that people DO NOT get agitated, mean and crotchity because of their age. The fact is they were always like that in life.

    So, bear with us and know that we love you and respect you and look forward to communicationg with you on a Loving Christian level no matter what translation you use!!!

    KingJ likes this.
  11. KJV only? No. Not for me. My NKJV Spirit Filled Life Study Bible is the one I turn to when I am uncertain about a scripture. I also have an NIV study Bible that is great for references, but no matter what version anyone is partial to should never be presented with rudeness; it is a personal preference. No matter what version a person is partial to should be studied with the help of the Holy Spirit. So, KJV only!? Nah, but it is one of my favorites.

    Cross & Bible 04.jpg
  12. No matter what version we use, it is a translation into English of the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. This alone poses problems as different languages often conceptualize things differently, so translation is more than merely substituting an equivalent English word. Often there is no directly equivilent English word. Add to that how far the translators were removed from the context of the day, that is, how much meaning was derived for the contemporary writers of the original words from living in the times. Just think of how much meaning has been attached to words like "fundamental" in modern times because of changing attitudes and associations with people, events, and teachings. A thousand years from now, someone translating that word with whatever word in their language means "basic, essential, or foundational" is going to miss a lot of the contemporary nuance of the word.

    With the KJV, this problem is compounded by the fact that the English used is also archaic and many of the words used are either in disuse, or are used differently today, with different connotations. This doesn't mean the KJV is obsolete, but it means that this has to be taken into account when using that version.

    I don't have a problem with someone who sincerely believes that the KJV is the best version and uses it exclusively, but I do have a problem when they insist that no other version is legitimate, or that people who use other versions are less spiritual, perhaps even deceived.
  13. This would make sense if KJVO's shared the same premise as you, that the translation of the scriptures into english is solely man's endeavour. I don't know any KJVO that has this premise
  14. Rumely expressed the reasons for mistranslation very well. Some CONCEPTS were better/properly understood in Jesus's days.

    Words are one thing, but the "CONCEPT" being expressed is from a "culture", often the PERSONAL culture/background of the individual reader.

    The Jews of Jesus's day seemed to have no trouble at all with the fact that God cares for no man....

    Matthew 22:16 and Mark 12:14

    "you care for no man".

    Today, society and the individual is (summed up)...DEFENSIVE (humanity has always been defensive on a personal level, but today we have something called "political correctness"). God does not care about the accomplishments and acheivements of a "person" (God is no "respecter of PERSONS", the POSITION of a person).

    The Jews had no quarell with that quality of God and fully accepted it, but 'expressing it' to future generations...SO THAT IT CAN AND WILL be taught has left opportunuty for satan (in ALL scripture).

    The "flesh" is not evil or disgusting, it is simply the human (mortal) WEAKNESS. Having a "heart of flesh" instead of a "heart of stone" cannot be taught from a book, pulpit scholars, or intellectuals of any kind. Only if the "culture" of a person can understand such concepts as 'God cares for no man' can the "INNER MAN" be strengthened ("inner man" is an N.T. concept, but the Jews never had the opportunity for the FULL understanding of such a concept, the structure of their "LAW" and worship did not allow for 'DIVINE' SPIRITUAL UNDERSTANDING).

    The Jews were told by God to 'LAW THIS' and "LAW THAT', etc., they OBEYED but they never were encouraged to develop an understanding of the culture of the "inner man".

    .....the "forever"/eternity name of the creator is "I am who I am".....the inner man is sovereign (accountable to "self"....INITIALLY of course).

    Exodus 3:14 and 15
    "God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM."........"this is my name for ever"/eternity.

    I am who I am sent His Son to begin the age of eternity (the 'Jesus dispensation'). This concept/understanding (Proverbs "Get understanding",....higher than "wisdom" is "understanding") is noticeably not learned from the 'empirical' (something that can be measured or weighed) mastery of scripture, but can only be taught by God and His "anointing" when we choose to move ahead to a "solid food" devotion.

    The doctrine/teaching about Jesus as the final sin sacrifice has been done and is final, we should move ahead to "solid food", but the Jews did not have this opportunity, they could only be empirical.......POOR JEWS!,...(we know that God provided for them as promised, but that should be of no concern to us)....."They shall NEVER" be afforded the glory of JESUS, (Hebrews 10:4 "never enter my rest").

    I was discussing with a poster about 2 years ago the "doctrine of" Christ. He had many versions of scripture, but the KJV was his favorite. I pointed out to him that in Hebrews 6:1 that the phrase used is "PRINCIPLES OF" Christ is used in place of "DOCTRINE" of Christ. He investigated further and found that the original authorized 1611 version DID USE the correct "DOCTRINE of Christ" wording, but since they didn't understand what this doctrine/teaching was, they inadvertently fell to satan's wishes (for this all important doctrine about Jesus is IMPERATIVE for all who are ordained to eternal life)......

    2 John 1:9
    "Any one who goes ahead and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ DOES NOT HAVE GOD".

    So, we must learn not to glorify any version of scripture, we must glorify the WORD OF GOD that hung on the cross.....

    "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of God; and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed".

    Any version can be criticized (even my RSV is missing verses, some explanations are offered in the footnotes, some are not even pointed out with a mark or asterisk), but if God has led you to have a sincere and pure heart, do not let scripture and man's feeble thoughts misguide you (let the inner man show you where to find "the anointing")......the kingdom is within. The present/inner kingdom foreshadows the destiny part of our eternity.

    The KJV was a noble endeavor in it's time, but it was not maintained properly. Over time, it was allowed various changes (just like many versions, I don't know if the RSV changed since it's inception, but it doesn't seem to matter anyway, it's God's MESSAGE that matters). God's "message" is not in print/text, it is found in the "depths of God" (1 Corinthians 2:10) by searching for God's truth WITH THE SPIRIT.

    For the believers who would ignore the all important "doctrine of Christ" and would rather LOVE PEOPLE as part of DEVOTION/WORSHIP and perform righteous works,....remember...."For God is not so unjust......" (Hebrews 6:10).

    Devotion is all about loving GOD, not "brethren" who have decided that The Lord's grace is not sufficient for them (we should love others ONLY AS MUCH as we are in love with ourselves)....

    ......(are you obsessed with and full of yourself?).

    I grew up with 51 years of suicidal depression. I felt like a hypocrite whenever I showed more kind regard to other people than I felt for my own low self-esteem "self" (because I was being a hypocrite).

    "and I will put them with the HYPOCRITES".

    God is not about books or empiricism, or intellect, or partisanship/protocol obedience, God is about the inner man. He wants to know the true inner man of your "self" so that you can be recconected to Him in harmony.

    ...and if you learn this well, you will be able to explain this to a new generation of believers (today's youth need to understand a LOVING KIND God).
  15. I do not hold the premise that the translation of ancient texts to English is solely man's endeavour. Well, there are some versions where that probably is actually true. I believe that God has taken care to transmit to us what we need for salvation and godly living. Someone who is not well versed in ye olde English will probably miss some things in the KJV text. Not that they aren't there, but that they aren't obvious to one familiar only with modern English. A literal translation will give some idea of how cumbersome it can be to translate ancient thought into readable modern language. It's like reading writings from early American history. In just a few hundred years, the language has changed enough that a modern person can find it difficult to read. Some of the words have different connotations, even completely different meanings, in some cases. This is not a reflection on the clarity of thought in the writing, but on our ability to fully apprehend the thought.

    I remember watching an episode of Bonanza years ago where some people were supposed to belong to a sect like the Hutterites or Amish or something similar. I was greatly annoyed that they kept saying "thee" when they meant "thou". Clearly the script writer didn't do his research. Oh, and I believe they used a "would" when they should have used a "wouldst". :rolleyes:
    NZDave likes this.
  16. The translators of the original "1611 authorized" version of the KJV just like the translators of ALL VERSIONS, of course, had some shortcomings (NO VERSION is completely accurate to what was actually SAID....the words used), but they didn't add a 'NO CHANGE' clause when the project was done.

    ALL VERSIONS can, and are, left open to criticism by their own failures of translation, but the modern KJV's deletion of the phrase "doctrine of Christ" is unforgiveable. Like I said, it (the KJV project) was a noble undertaking, it is only the CHANGE THAT WAS ALLOWED in order to remove such an all important phrase/term as "DOCTRINE OF CHRIST" that was of satan (the original translators might have had no knowledge of the change, I don't know when it occured). I certainly would not fault the original translators for not KNOWING what "doctrine of Christ" meant, they were only being faithful to what had been taught for centuries.

    Prophets were only for the O.T., but we WILL "prophecy"/declare a new message......

    "God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets".

    "and on my menservants and my maidservants in those days I will pour out my Spirit; and they shall prophesy".

    .....(yet many will continue with their dreams and their visions).

    Jesus said that He will "shake" His church ("the heaven").....

    "so that what cannot be shaken may remain" (Hebrews 12:27).

    ALL VERSIONS and text of any kind leave themselves open to criticism, but the heart holds the spirit (TEXT does NOT have "spirit"). God has been guiding everyone that truly looks to HIM whether or not their eyes and ears have been trained by MAN ("VERSION" does not matter for the SINCERE).



    http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils in Government/Police State/501c3.htm


    ....so, if you made it this far regardless of your 'textbook', it is because your heart and mind are being guided BY GOD (yet there are still somethings to be aware of that are TRULY pleasing to God in devotion/worship).

    He "yearns jealously", so should we for "Abba Father" in return (James 1:17, a 2-way relationship).

    The KJV is not the only version that has ommitted the phrase "doctrine of Christ", other modern versions have also, but they were likely just following the KJV's lead. The change in wording is only for an ATTEMPTED understanding, increased readership for consumers, and sales in the bookstore, but no ACTUAL understanding was ever available (because ACTUAL understanding was never sought.......the "secular church" has always been insincere and was a moneychanging "church" that always sought "MONEY" instead).

    Whatever version you have, devotion is made of....

    1)"His Spirit" AND....

    2) "the inner man".
    http://www.blueletterbible.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=strengthened with might through his Spirit in the inner man&t=RSV&sf=5
  17. There are no known extant original autographs of those whom God has used to produce Holy Writ, so preservation of the original scriptural autographs exits in copies because God has promised a plenary verbal inspiration of its content (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:21).

    It stands to reason the more the content of Scripture, the more potential for spiritual growth and conversely, the less the content of Scripture, the less potential for spiritual growth. Of all the methods utilized to attempt to distort the written Word of God, I believe omitting Scripture is the most detrimental because it leaves one void of material to grow by.

    One of numerous significant examples of omission is 1 Peter 1:22: “Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart.” As we know, the Father and Son do all things “through the Spirit” and in this passage we are taught that we obey the truth through the Spirit, unless of course the translation you’re reading is devoid (majority of modern bibles) of the phrase “through the Spirit”.

    I use this omission as an eye-catcher but it only effects the serious Bible student: "Again there was war at Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare-Oregim the Bethlehemite killed [the brother of] Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear [was] like a weaver's beam" (2 Sam 21:19. The phrase "the brother of" is omitted and regardless the reason, it reads that Elhannan killed Goliath, which is inaccurate because it contradicts 1 Chron 20:5.

    There are many significant problems that will astound you concerning this issue and here is a great source on Bible Translations, which I strongly recommend saving on your computer and getting a free Book copy for study: http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/vital/kjv/part1-1.html
  18. I came to Christ 30 years ago and was a backslider (of sorts) for the last 22 and a half years because I was so disappointed that I was not being taught a DEEP, INTIMATE, LOVE relationship with the creator (I wanted to be reconnected with Him DEEPLY), but I still went to many (MANY) "bible studies", heard MANY sermons, read all kinds of literature, commentaries, scripture encyclopedias and dictionaries, etc.......but I NEVER heard any of these comments.....
    'My Bible puts it this way.'
    'My Bible doesn't even have that verse.'
    'Listen to this Note about ancient and more reliable manuscripts.'
    'My Bible says something totally different.'
    'My Bible says the very opposite.'
    ....THERE IS A HEAVY BIAS in the article.
    The author also says that there were "unbelieving scribes" (as opposed to GOOD 'believing scribes' that are spiritually ACCEPTABLE????).....

    "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you traverse sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell AS YOURSELVES".

    ....(you know that these verses exist, quoting scriptural statements by verse number is a sloppy and bad habit for a HEARTFUL "SOLID FOOD" LOVE devotion/worship,....a TEXT DEVOTION is not a HEART DEVOTION.....the reason I became a backslider).

    .....I hardly believe that we should think ill of the scribes simply because they did not "believe".

    The author is simply a 'MILITANT' (a HOT HEAD with a "cause" of his own) with what he thinks is his own agenda (actually it is the flesh agenda of billions of people). There are many people who simply have a chip on their shoulder against God and all absolutes and convention/right-wrong principles (they are ANTI-CONVENTION and resent the 'GUIDING PRINCIPLES' of any true integrity/merit....'darkness resents light').

    Peace and harmony are logical, evil is ILLOGICAL (after the fall, humanity gained the KNOWLEDGE of right-wrong, but continues to misuse it).

    The Lord's desire is that we live in peaceful co-existence with each other, and so, you can always recognize a 'preacher of darkness' by their words and attitude/speech (violent, aggressive, forceful, etc.....MILITANT for a "cause"/agenda).

    You will also notice some 'irrationality', anger, and LONG WINDED RATIONALIZATIONS (pages instead of a few simple paragraphs)......a lie needs to be 'FABRICATED', rationalized, and BUILT/CONSTRUCTED (watch out for the "fiery darts" of human nature).

    The Zealots were militants and wanted an earthly kingdom just like the Jews wanted (the author is a "son of the kingdom").......

    "the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth".

    I seriously doubt that all of the words that God ever spoke since creation are recorded in scripture. The WORD became flesh. JESUS CANNOT be transcribed or transposed (WRITTEN) onto PAGES (scripture is "THE WORD OF TRUTH", not the "word of GOD".

    In ancient times, God spoke SOME of those words that are recorded. Man has never even taught or encouraged anyone to think of scripture as the 'INSPIRATIONS of God' (which 2 Timothy 3:16 could verify).

    "TRUTH" (real truth, OBJECTIVE truth) is viewed by most people as HORRIBLE TRUTH (because it conflicts with the status quo and all that has been ACCEPTED, but also that it is non-negotiable.......it is UNESCAPABLE)......and so, God's TRUE MESSAGE that I write about will be accepted and understood only by the courageous and those with deep integrity (they have "PRINCIPLES", Hebrews 5:14).

    Not everybody (or even the common man) wants real truth (most people are satisfied by SUBJECTIVE "truth"/bias), they only want their own 'whatever works for myself' (they want 'as I choose to see fit' "truth").....(what is "144,000"?).

    As to the ULTIMATUM....WARNING from a LOVING KIND God to all of His faithful readers that is AT THE END of the last book in scripture, it is a THREAT (it comes from an ULTIMATUM...do this or else) that is being given to all of God's faithful and sincere lovers. It is not a FORE-warning of caution. It is being given to the faithful who have ALREADY demonstrated their dedication by reading ALL of the WHOLE BOOK.....(is God so illogical?.....and ferocious?).

    The term "lake of fire" is only in Revelations (elsewhere in scripture, Jesus talks of a "HELL of fire", the term and concept are from ancient Egypt paganism).


    I'm not suggesting that the WHOLE book of Revelation is false I have quoted from it and Rev. 7:16 tells us that we will "neither thirst" if we have living water)....the 7 Judaizer churches were there also for those who accepted Jesus as "messiah" (regardless of whether or how much they embraced and exhibited the "Spirit").

    The ancient Egyptians also had scribes (scribes are still used in the legal and medical fields to "PEN" official documents,....the same as ancient 'religion scribes').

    The "ULTIMATUM WARNING" to all faithful readers makes as much sense as the belief that God is COMMANDING His faithful to LOVE HIM in Mark 12:30.
    "and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength".

    My dad did not COMMAND me to love him, neither can love be legislated (made a rule or law, it can ONLY be freely given).

    God always was fully aware that only His faithful read scripture and that it is not necessary to even SUGGEST that He be loved (He would even be insulting Himself to COMPEL anyone to LOVE HIM).......NO, He is telling us HOW to love Him (we should love WITHOUT having any fear of Him (love Him with "PERFECT love" that casts out fear, that is why we are told to use "ALL" of our whole being).

    So, instead of us reading scripture in a defensive, irrational, partisan, prudish, prideful, and empirical manner (a pure heart can and will understand properly UNLESS we fall 'hook, line, and sinker' for the "strong delusion" that has been embraced by our secular mammon teachers), we will only begin to understand God's true MESSAGE by first coming to Him with the simpleness of a CHILD and be "clay to the potter".

    The fault with "VERSIONS" is really not an issue, for it is the MESSAGE that has been preserved (the "DEPTHS of God" about HIS Spirit and the inner man).

    "Discussion" and debate are necessary in order to explore and discover truth (the real truth, but when we find the real truth, we must be willing to ACCEPT what is contrary to the "status quo" (and that requires the courage of a renegade/'lone wolf' inner man that is SOVEREIGN and self-accountable to CONSCIENCE).

    The Athenian culture.society that Paul spoke to were raised admiring the PRINCIPLES and noble qualities of Socratic truth (Socrates explored/discussed truth and it's PRINCIPLES of decency/integrity and honorable living).
    Paul had a background in philosophy (besides Saul's rigorous dedication, perhaps that was the most qualifying reason God chose SAUL) and the Athenians enjoyed hearing of that which they "worship as UNKNOWN" (Acts 17 beginning at verse 20).

    ....(scroll down to number three).

    So, you see, it is NOT text or literary expertise that makes for devotion, it is CHARACTER (the character of "THE INNER MAN"),.....it is "CONSCIENCE" and the things of the SOUL (a "living, breathing, soul" that has been restored to the way Adam was before the fall).

    Paul noted that their poets expressed concisely that the creator is the origin of all existence as though they LIVED INSIDE OF HIM (we are to spiritually be living inside of Jesus's body (having no gender, "neither male nor female").

    Would you rather be a 'book complier' master of text, slave to man's feeble "interpretation" or a GODLOVER master of yourself?......(live the LIBERTY law for HAPPINESS/"joy in life").....THIS is God's will.
  19. Y'know, your post brings to mind how we need to take care and time to read and digest what people really post before we react.
    When I first read your post, in particular, "My NKJV Spirit Filled Life Study Bible is the one I turn to when I am uncertain about a scripture". My first thought was....My NKJV Spirit Filled ,........Life Study Bible is the one I turn to when I am uncertain about a scripture. I'm thinking what is this person on about There is only 'One' Nkjv. Then I re read it and thought about it a bit more and the 'penny dropped'...My NKJV,.... 'Spirit Filled Life'..... Study Bible is the one I turn to when I am uncertain about a scripture. This is not a comment on your literacy BTW,:) just a rare glimpse into the workings or otherwise of my own mind:rolleyes:
  20. Sorry, rather than "solely man's endeavour" I could have said "primarily man's endeavour" The point being, that if God is in charge of translating the bible into english, then none of those problems listed are a problem. My own personal experience has shown me that non KJVO's do believe that translating the bible is man's work, and apart from him approving a translation work, no real role is attributed to God.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page