Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

That old black Book

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Matt, man cannot update the Words of the Bible only; we all add our 2cents worth somewhere along the way. I don't know if it is ego, or the flesh or what, but no one can got through the entire Bible and "update" it without some sort of word changing. Besides, we all know what "thee" and "thou" means, and that is usually what people refer to when talking about "updating" or modernizing the Word.

The main thing is reading with understanding, and, for the most part, we do understand what we read. The Holy Spirit makes sure of that!

You are right, there is no need now, but I don't believe there will be a need in the future either, in fact, personally, I kind of like that old English jargon! (but I realize that everyone doesn't like it)

Edited by irishman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Are you speaking of Wyclif's Bible?



The Lord was very wise (of course!) in providing a progression of Bibles leading up to the Authorized Version. These always seem to come up in these discussions, but I wonder why? Why do people find it hard to accept, by faith, the old KJB? Perhaps this is what is defined by some as a "gray area" because there is no chapter and verse, per se! (at least none good enough for them to accept) If the Lord would have allowed the KJB that we have today to be printed way back then, they would have made a bigger fuss than the people of today are making! There had to be other translations/versions to pave the way, and "prime the pump" so to speak. You might compare them to (only as an analogy) John the Baptist preparing the way for our Lord.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I didn't grow up with the KJB. As I've mentioned, as a child I attended a Methodist church. The Methodist church used the RSV (the Methodist church in this town still uses the RSV, not sure about other Methodist churches).

When I was saved I only really knew one other Christian and they were new as well. The church we were attending at the time was an Assembly of God (this was the church her sister had got her to attend); not sure what Bible they were using. The pastor was pretty good, even if he was stuck on just two things 1. Salvation, getting folks saved (a good thing), 2. The End Times (way too much emphasis there meaning the rest of Scripture was neglected).

Shortly after getting saved there was a change at that church. The old pastor was called away and the new pastor which took his place was VERY charismatic and "modern". Suddenly there was a band on the platform and the pastor, his wife and a couple others would "speak in tongues" and within a week several people in the congregation began "speaking in tongues" as well. Too much! My girlfriend and I left that church and never found another church home in that town.

A few years later and after many different things I went away to university. While there I met a wonderful Christian friend and he took me to a Baptist church with a by-the-Bible pastor. It was at this time the Holy Ghost directed me to the KJB. Prior to that I had stopped using the RSV and had been using the NASB. I decided to use the NASB because it was an "American" Bible. :icon_rolleyes:

Immediately after the Holy Ghost guided me to the KJB my understanding of Scripture was opened beyond comprehension and Scripture memorization for me became virtually easy. For me, I know the Lord put the KJB in my hands and He's worked mightily through the KJB in my life and I love the KJB just the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Matt, man cannot update the Words of the Bible only;


I agree, and I do not want man to do it, it needs to be from God. If I remember correctly there is around 420 word changes from the KJV1611 to the KJV we have in our hands today. If God was behind that, then He can do it again if He pleases.

Other than that, I am talking only about words where the English spelling has changed. Example in 1611 the word "owne" was used, now it is spelled "own" so it was changed in the Bible. Of course, none of these things was a "revision" of the Bible and these changes did no harm whatsoever to the text. If they did, our Bible in our hands would be corrupt.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

NO,

What was wrong with the Wyclif Bible?
In case you don't know the board rule is when posting scriptures from the Holy Bible, its to be from the KJ Bible only.

Where did I quote Scripture? :puzzled3:
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Then why is it acceptable with the Bible we have in our hands? If that is the case, the Bible we have in our hands has already been changed. The changes I am talking about, it the same "updating" that was already done in our current KJV Bible.


God did it. It was not in man's hands.


I agree, and I do not want man to do it, it needs to be from God. If I remember correctly there is around 420 word changes from the KJV1611 to the KJV we have in our hands today. If God was behind that, then He can do it again if He pleases.

Other than that, I am talking only about words where the English spelling has changed. Example in 1611 the word "owne" was used, now it is spelled "own" so it was changed in the Bible. Of course, none of these things was a "revision" of the Bible and these changes did no harm whatsoever to the text. If they did, our Bible in our hands would be corrupt.


I believe that we have right now, God's word as He wants us to have. When and if He sees a need to do something with it, He will, and I am sure He will provide a way for His people to know it was from Him. But I do not really see that happening. We have His perfect word in English, and it has been around for four hundred years. But if it is His will, the Bible will remain the same or it will change, no matter our opinions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

What was wrong with the Wyclif Bible?

Where did I quote Scripture? :puzzled3:


The Wyclif is not the KJ, that's what's wrong with it.

And no, you did not quote scripture, I just though you might not know this, so I passed it along just in case you did not know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Does not most of those people who have come up with a new version claim to be led by God to bring forth a new version because God's people needs it?

Of course I think they do so for 2 reason, money and to change the Bible to better support what they teach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Does not most of those people who have come up with a new version claim to be led by God to bring forth a new version because God's people needs it?

Of course I think they do so for 2 reason, money and to change the Bible to better support what they teach.


I would agree with you 100%, Jerry.

Following my salvation, I did not have anyone to disciple me, nor in any solid Biblical church. I did hear the Gospel and came to the Lord Jesus. Came the way up through various reformed churches. None used the KJB. I went through several different versions, still coming back to the KJB, dissatisfied with the others. I now have studied up on the version issue, and I have been an Independent Baptist for 5 years now and have seen the evidence and now stand 100% solidly on the King James Bible. No if's, and's, but's, or maybe's!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I would agree with you 100%, Jerry.

Following my salvation, I did not have anyone to disciple me, nor in any solid Biblical church. I did hear the Gospel and came to the Lord Jesus. Came the way up through various reformed churches. None used the KJB. I went through several different versions, still coming back to the KJB, dissatisfied with the others. I now have studied up on the version issue, and I have been an Independent Baptist for 5 years now and have seen the evidence and now stand 100% solidly on the King James Bible. No if's, and's, but's, or maybe's!!


:amen: Praise the Lord!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Amidst the debate... let me praise the Lord!

I recently had a Wed night series on "The History of God's Bible." There was much said about the KJV and the new versions which are corrupt. I talked about the very early corruption, how Rome "took over", and then how God blessed by keeping a Godly and True "stream" alive. We were blessed by learning about men and women who stood for the true word, whether that was Wycliffe, Tyndale, John Rogers, or the KJV translators. We talked about the corruption of Westcott and Hort and Revision...

I am glad to report that since that study was done, several people in the church came to me asking me to get KJV Bibles for them. Several were shocked to learn the truth about their corrupt Bibles. (These are non-members and non-workers as we are a KJV church and all workers must use KJV).

So... I praise the Lord for the entire line of "True" Bibles leading up to and including the KJV .

Edited by holster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Amidst the debate... let me praise the Lord!

I recently had a Wed night series on "The History of God's Bible." There was much said about the KJV and the new versions which are corrupt. I talked about the very early corruption, how Rome "took over", and then how God blessed by keeping a Godly and True "stream" alive. We were blessed by learning about men and women who stood for the true word, whether that was Wycliffe, Tyndale, John Rogers, or the KJV translators. We talked about the corruption of Westcott and Hort and Revision...

I am glad to report that since that study was done, several people in the church came to me asking me to get KJV Bibles for them. Several were shocked to learn the truth about their corrupt Bibles. (These are non-members and non-workers as we are a KJV church and all workers must use KJV).

So... I praise the Lord for the entire line of "True" Bibles leading up to and including the KJV .


:amen: Praise God for preserving His Word for us! :bible:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Just so no one thinks I am off my rocker, I am not talking about a new version of the Bible.:th_tiphat:
The English language changes through time. The English language is not preserved, the good old King James Version is.

holster, praise the Lord. Keep sticking and preaching with the KJV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Just so no one thinks I am off my rocker, I am not talking about a new version of the Bible.:th_tiphat:
The English language changes through time. The English language is not preserved, the good old King James Version is.

holster, praise the Lord. Keep sticking and preaching with the KJV.


I for one don't think you off your rocker! I know where you stand. And I agree and yet dis-agree due to fear.

I agree in that if a good man (or men) changed a few words we would still have the word of God. For example: "prevent" changed to "precede," "suffer" changed to "permit," etc. The true meaning is not changing as the two words mean (or meant) the same thing.

Yet I disagree because of the "slippery slope" prOBlem. Once people get to changing things... where does it end? Man being what he is could he be content to just update a few words?

So I'd rather learn and memorize a few archaic words and leave well enough alone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I never banned anyone for disagreeing with me, yet!!!!! :icon_mrgreen:

I do agree with you about the "slippery slope" and I do not see a need for it now, but I can in the future if the English language changes. I'm just talking about the type of changes that have already been made since 1611. All of those changes that were made from 1611 to 1769 still kept the KJV preserved perfectly for us. Like I said, it is not the English Language that is preserved perfectly.

And none of what I am saying would be a new version or revision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The Wyclif is not the KJ, that's what's wrong with it.

Huh?

And no, you did not quote scripture, I just though you might not know this, so I passed it along just in case you did not know.

Ah, I see. Thanks! :)


Of course I think they do so for 2 reason, money and to change the Bible to better support what they teach.

Most Bibles are translated by a committe made up of people from different denominational backgrounds to ensure no doctrinal biases are used in the text. Of course, the Holman Christian Standard Bible is sometimes derogatorily referred to as the "Baptist Bible" by its detractors because nearly half of the translation team was Baptist and it was published by a Southern Baptist owned company, but I digress. :) Edited by Live4Him
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Amidst the debate... let me praise the Lord!

I recently had a Wed night series on "The History of God's Bible." There was much said about the KJV and the new versions which are corrupt. I talked about the very early corruption, how Rome "took over", and then how God blessed by keeping a Godly and True "stream" alive. We were blessed by learning about men and women who stood for the true word, whether that was Wycliffe, Tyndale, John Rogers, or the KJV translators. We talked about the corruption of Westcott and Hort and Revision...

I am glad to report that since that study was done, several people in the church came to me asking me to get KJV Bibles for them. Several were shocked to learn the truth about their corrupt Bibles. (These are non-members and non-workers as we are a KJV church and all workers must use KJV).

So... I praise the Lord for the entire line of "True" Bibles leading up to and including the KJV .


Yes, some use the new versions ignorantly, and when informed understand. Yet there seems to be a big group that no matter what you show them, they want nothing but the new versions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Yes, some use the new versions ignorantly, and when informed understand. Yet there seems to be a big group that no matter what you show them, they want nothing but the new versions.


There is also a great deal of negative press out there about the KJB and also a lot of false information that turns many away from the KJB.

I can't even count the number of times I've heard, "The KJB has lots of errors" or the similar, "The KJB isn't as accurate as some of the newer translations". This comes from the false information out there which proclaims that newer and better manuscripts have been found which the KJB translators didn't have access to so the KJB is flawed and the newer translations are more accurate.

Of course it doesn't help that so many professing Christians are biblically illiterate and don't do much reading and little, if any, actual studying of whatever Bible translation they own.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Yes, it seems slander is alive and well in the Christians community, the uses of the new versions are good about slandering those who hold to the KJ's. Of course if they held to it, it would shine in and show their liberal ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Yes, it seems slander is alive and well in the Christians community, the uses of the new versions are good about slandering those who hold to the KJ's. Of course if they held to it, it would shine in and show their liberal ways.

Thank God we are not sinners like they are! :saint2:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...