[Tmonk]

I cant say that I see a need for a certain translation to be a requirement for being saved. I have little love for new paraphrase translations, but all literal translations tell you the exact same things you need to be saved by Grace. I believe good works to be a result of being saved.

Jesus Christ said:

14"You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden;

15 nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.

16"Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.



When a person is saved it will become obvious in them no matter what translation they read.

Be careful of judgment too. I have no problems with the KJV in the sense that it is the Word of God, but so is an NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV etc etc.

Matthew 7 -KJV

1. Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

The debate of KJBO has caused a lot of conflict. There are those that hate on the KJB but then there are people like Ruckman and Riplinger that only fuel to the fires. This issue has strained a close friendship for me. I have a friend who is a KJBO "Ruckmanite" and I totally disagree with him. Ever since this issue arose things havent been the same between us. So tell me what "good fruits" can possibly come from this debate? NONE.

[George]

"Be careful of judgment too. I have no problems with the KJV in the sense that it is the Word of God, but so is an NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV etc etc."

Tmonk,

A person can get saved from a simple Gospel tract that they could have found on the street (or in a garbage can for that matter).

The Gospel is not ALL there is to the Holy word of God. My question for you is WHO has caused WHAT?

From the middle of the 1600's up to the beginning of the 1900's nearly all Christians (with the exception of Catholics and Scholars) agreed on ONE FINAL AUTHORITY - simply known as THE BIBLE (labeled the AV1611 - by the "scholars", and later the King James Bible by the Publishers). All of the confusion, disagreement, and "bad blood" between Christians only came about AFTER the introduction of the myriad of modern "English" translations (over 100 since 1881), so WHO is responsible for the division and hard feelings between brethren? Hmmm?

Your statement: "I have no problems with the KJV in the sense that it is the Word of God, but so is an NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV etc etc." makes no sense. I'm tickled pink that "you have no problems with the KJV" (I'm sure that God is just thrilled that you have "no problems" with His Holy word!) But your "cavalier" attitude towards the Scriptures just don't cut it with genuine Bible believers. How can ALL the translations all be the Holy words of God if they ALL have "different" words; "less" words; or "more" words than the King James Bible?

All English translations cannot possibly be the Holy word of God since they ALL disagree, not only with the King James Bible but with each other also. Can a person get saved by reading the Gospel from a modern translation - of course, but what is their FINAL AUTHORITY? WHAT IS YOUR FINAL AUTHORITY? Or do you even have ONE? That is the question..

[Shofar]

Hi all, something to consider -- if a document of 8 words is copied & 1 word is omitted from the first document -- is it the same document after it's copied? The answer is no, both copies will be in disagreement but which one will hold the truer meaning?

On the subject of salvation, Romans 10:9 - 13 explains that, the Lord knows they who have relationship with Him & He shall lead them to the truth. When I was saved awhile back, I kept 2 different bibles before being brought to the truth of the King James Version, & after exhaustive comparison & contrast, there is no doubt that the King James is by the hand of the Lord above all others of today. & now, the only one I keep is the King James. The Lord leads, that's all I have to say about that.

[Tmonk]

George,
Attitudes like your is why there is no middle ground !!! You took what I said and got something I didnt say out of it. Why the word games??? I have no problems with the King James Version. I said nothing about having a problem with the Word of God and made a statement about other bibles containing the Word just the same. But you make the Word of God and the KJB one and the same with no equal.

Final Authority?!?!?!?! Whats yours 1611, 1629, 1769, 1862, Blayney, Oxford standard, Cambridge? And you talk of tampering. I have 3 KJB's that disagree with each other on a desk at home. 1983 Oxford University Press Edition, 1983 Zondervan King James Classic and of course a 1611 KJB Hendrickson facsimile print. Different words to say the same thing. There are differences between the Oxford and Cambridge , which is wrong? How can I believe the KJV is pure when I dont even know which one is? I have 3 , tell me which one is pure.

My final authority is the message of the Bible, not the thee's and thou's and doest and didst. In John 3:16, John wrote "monogene" but it takes two words to translate it "only begotten". So were we adding words to translate that to English?

You accuse me of reading corrupt translations when there are at least 3 text lines of King James Bibles sold in America alone today?!?!?!?

Before you get the mote out of my eye, pull the beam from yours.

[MC1171611]

Well at least he's not a "my only final authority is God" Alexandrian, but claiming that the message of the Bible, something that God never emphasized nor even spoke of, is the authority above the actual words, which is what God promised to preserve (Ps. 12:7-6), said were pure (Pro. 30:5), and said were given by inspiration (2 Tim. 3:16) is still to the Left when it comes to believing the Bible.

It always comes down to authority. Always. Remember, Satan's first attack wasn't an artillery barrage: it was a subtle, sneaky question; "Yea, hath God said...?"

[Brother Tim]

But you make the Word of God and the KJB one and the same with no equal.

and the problem here is???

TMonk, I couldn't have expressed it better!

The KJB is the Word of God.
The MVs contain the words of God (to a greater or lesser degree of distortion).

and if you insist, the PCE is my choice for to-the-jot-and-tittle accuracy.

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by Tmonk

But you make the Word of God and the KJB one and the same with no equal.

Uh, so? That's kinda the point!

You say your final authority is "the message of the Bible."

How do you determine what "the message" is?

[Winman]

I did not start this thread to start an uproar, I guess that is impossible to avoid.

I personally believe the KJB to be the Word of God. I believe that a holy and just God would preserve his word. And each word is important. For example, Genesis 1:5 in the KJV reads:

Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

The RSV has this:

Gen 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

Now there is a BIG difference between "the first day" and "one day". The "first day" can only mean one specific day, whereas "one day" can mean ANY day.

Does this make a difference? In my opinion, yes. You could insert any number of days, or even billions of years between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:5 in the RSV. But with the KJV we know that God created the heavens and the earth in one single 24 hour day. Big difference.

The six day creation account is already altered and takes on a new meaning. In Gen 1:8 in the KJV we understand "the second day" as the very next day.

Gen 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

However, in the RSV it says "a second day".

Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.

This could mean the next following day, but it could also just mean another day, with thousands, millions, or even billions of years inbetween.

We have only gotten 8 verses into the Bible, and the ages old question of where did man come from, and how did life originate has been altered.

The creationist believes God created all creation in six literal consecutive 24 hour days. Those using the RSV could very well agree with evolutionists that the earth and life formed over billions of years. Big difference.

Does this matter for salvation? Maybe not. But God wants us to go further than just being saved.

2 Tim 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Now how can you study and rightly divide the word of truth, unless you have the word of truth?

You see, even in 2 Timothy 2:15 God is saying that he has preserved His Word.

When folks say there is no perfect version, they are calling God a liar. I personally have trouble believing that someone who calls God a liar is saved. I am not talking about a babe in Christ. I am talking about those who have made a study of the subject.

[Winman]

Sorry, double post.

[George]

Originally Posted by Tmonk

"George,
Attitudes like your is why there is no middle ground !!! You took what I said and got something I didnt say out of it. Why the word games??? I have no problems with the King James Version. I said nothing about having a problem with the Word of God and made a statement about other bibles containing the Word just the same. But you make the Word of God and the KJB one and the same with no equal.

Final Authority?!?!?!?! Whats yours 1611, 1629, 1769, 1862, Blayney, Oxford standard, Cambridge? And you talk of tampering. I have 3 KJB's that disagree with each other on a desk at home. 1983 Oxford University Press Edition, 1983 Zondervan King James Classic and of course a 1611 KJB Hendrickson facsimile print. Different words to say the same thing. There are differences between the Oxford and Cambridge , which is wrong? How can I believe the KJV is pure when I dont even know which one is? I have 3 , tell me which one is pure.

My final authority is the message of the Bible, not the thee's and thou's and doest and didst. In John 3:16, John wrote "monogene" but it takes two words to translate it "only begotten". So were we adding words to translate that to English?

You accuse me of reading corrupt translations when there are at least 3 text lines of King James Bibles sold in America alone today?!?!?!?

Before you get the mote out of my eye, pull the beam from yours."

Tmonk,

It's time for you "TO PUT UP OR SHUT UP"! Come forth with the differences in the King James Bible. Show us where there are WORD CHANGES (NOT SPELLING AND PUNCTUATION CHANGES) in King James Bibles!

I have a 163 year OLD - "HOLY BIBLE" - THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS (it doesn't say King James Version, it just says - "HOLY BIBLE"), that is a WORD for WORD copy of my 1982 Cambridge King James Bible. If you have 3 King James Bibles that have different WORDS in them (that is - in the TEXT) - bring em on! Show us! Give us some examples - just don't "claim" there are "differences", demonstrate and prove to all on this Forum what you are saying, or forever hold your peace!

I will guarantee you that IF there are ANY WORD CHANGES, they will be in King James Bibles that have been published late in the 20th. Century (when the apostasy came into "full bloom".) - and would have been inserted there by corrupt Bible Publishers (Thomas Nelson leading the apostasy parade!).

What I want to see is WORD CHANGES in King James Bibles published BEFORE the 1960's (when the "apostasy" started to pick up steam); BEFORE the Bible Publishers would dare to CHANGE God's Holy words; when most Christians still knew WHAT God's word was, and WHERE to find it.

You, like so many before you, are trying to coerce, intimidate, or force us to your "point of view". Your looking for "middle ground". I've got news for you, another way to spell "middle ground" is - "compromise". Thanks, but NO THANKS!

Believe what you want, you've got liberty. But don't think for a moment that those of us who believe the King James Bible to be God's Holy, perfect, and infallible word, and who rely on it for our FINAL AUTHORITY are going to "trade it in" for: "My final authority is the message of the Bible, not the thee's and thou's and doest and didst!" Could you give us a simple DEFINITION for the word "Bible" in your foregoing statement - Please?

You don't like my "attitude"? You do realize that this is a "AV1611 Bible Forum", don't you? What should my "attitude" be towards someone who denigrates the Holy words of God and makes light of my beliefs? Hmmm?

Your statement: "I have no problems with the KJV in the sense that it is the Word of God, but so is an NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV etc etc." is nonsensical. Can you not understand that if you have two Bibles that are NOT the same, that BOTH CANNOT be the Holy, perfect, and infallible word of God? It doesn't take a "Rocket Scientist" to figure it out.

Your final two statements are so typical of "thin-skinned" Christians of today:

"You accuse me of reading corrupt translations when there are at least 3 text lines of King James Bibles sold in America alone today?!?!?!?"

I challenge you to go back over my Post #22 (this Thread) in regards to you (and your Post #21) and find MY WORDS where I "accused (you) of reading corrupt translations". It shouldn't be real hard - IF THE "WORDS" ARE THERE! Your accusation is demonstrably FALSE! {Are you aware of what God thinks about "FALSE" WITNESSES? Do you even care that you are so CARELESS with your words, as to accuse me of something I did NOT say}

"Before you get the mote out of my eye, pull the beam from yours."

The first thing, before I would even consider your "judgment" above is that you would have to "prove" to me that you are my "brother"; because you sure haven't been acting like any Christian brother of mine! It's no wonder that you have a "strained" relationship with your former close friend. Your "attitude" towards the brethren that believe in the King James Bible, and towards God's Holy words leaves much to be desired!

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?