Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

Sign in to follow this  
Guest Guest

Why is the KJV superior to modern Bibles?

Recommended Posts



The Alexandrian text or earlier text goes back as far as 125 or 135 A.D. We have a fragment of the gospel of John that goes back to 125 or 135 A.D. It is a papyrus called p 52. The Siniaticus is 4th Century A.D.The Vaticanus is 4th or 5th Century A.D. We have many papyri that are 2nd and 3rd Centtury A.D. The Textus Receptus earliest manuscript is abouot 9 or 10 Century A. D. The Byzantine manuscripts did not become the majority until the 9th Century and after. There are no Byzantine manuscripts before the 4th Century A.D. The reason the Byzantine manuscripts agree so much is because most of these were produced by scribes at a later date when many change had been made by Scribes to the later manuscripts. this is why there is more variation between the earlier manuscripts and the later byzantine text or majority text. With the earlier text we can better get back to the original text of the New Testament.
Except that the dead sea scroll agree with the TR, and not with either of the "earlier" texts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be picky, but I don't really see how this argument is applicable. It's pretty much conjecture to begin with. Also, they didn't have printers back then that they could just order up another copy. I think it's pretty hard to tell which copy was used more frequently. And I think that they go on more than how it looks to determine its age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to interject with some material that really helped me when I was trying to sort out the King James issue. The material is taught by James Knox whom I find to be a very solid teacher, and it answered a lot of the question that I had, some of which I have seen asked here. They are in MP3 format, and they go very in depth, so there are quite a few files.

http://www.biblepreachingarchives.org/audio/James%20W.%20Knox/KJV/

And just remember, God if fully capable of looking after his word, preserving it, and using Men to translate it into the English language perfectly, without error. To assume that there is no perfect translation, is to assume that God is incapable of keeping his promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Kevin,

This well thought out defense of the TR is a foundational building block by authors such as Dr. Edward F Hills, (earned doctorates from both Yale and Harvard), Scrivner in his Making of a NT text deals much with this essential rudiment of the Doctrine of Preservation. Zane Hodges also has several chapters on this principle, the preeminent collator Dean (that was his title not his name) John Burgon also wrote extensively on this wonderful and well proven doctrine.

Perhaps you should broaden your education Kevin and find some of the books of these men and just maybe, just maybe you would quit sounding like a fool every time this subject coems up.

It's so sad that these authors are no longer mentioned in the defense of the KJB and altogether forbidden to be read in the major Bible schools of today. The fruit is a host of young men who while professing themselves to be wise are made to be fools as they question the ability of God Almighty to preswerve a written record intaxt and in one volume His words.

God bless,

Calvary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of educated men say a lot of different things. That's why God gave me a mind of my own to decide with my own logic what makes sense to me and what doesn't. I don't see how that argument can be logically used. There is probably a lot about the subject that I don't know when it comes to manuscripts, etc. Perhaps you could make it clearer for me by explaining the logical reasoning behind it because I fail to see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The Byzantine text represents a later time period than the Alexanderian text. Additions from other type of text were but together into a fuller, conflated text in the Byzantine text. Also this fuller text give evidence of expansion of piety, additions have been made to the text by scribes with a desire to protect divine truth. The reason the Byzantine text type has the majority of manuscripts of the Greek New Testament today is that within a few centuries after the writing of the New Testament Latin replaced Greek as the language of the people in the west. The only area that continued to speak and use the Greek language was into the middle ages was Constantinople which was part of the Byzantine Empire. The Brave people of This area continued to use the Greek language until the 15 Century. This is why there are many more byzantine than Alexanderian text. The Alexanderian text is the oldest type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive said it before and Ill say it again. It comes down to you either believe God when he said he preserved his word, or you dont believe Him. If you believe him and the KJV was the standard for the english speaking people for around 274 years, you cant accept a MV as a preserved copy. If you dont beleive God preserved his word, then enjoy your MV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not trying to take a stab at the KJV, just trying to challenge the reasoning a little bit. If we're going solely on the basis of faith, and God preserved His Word in the Greek and Hebrew for a while, then in the KJV, could not He continue that line of preservation in a modern version? Also, how do we know that it was preserved in the KJV aside from faith? I could put my faith in a modern version as the preservation of God's Word, does that make it so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we're going solely on the basis of faith' date=' and God preserved His Word in the Greek and Hebrew for a while, then in the KJV, could not He continue that line of preservation in a modern version?[/quote']

God preserved the manuscripts behind the KJV - the history of the manuscripts prove this. The modern versions are not using those same manuscripts; therefore are not in "that line of preservation."



Study out the history of the manuscripts. The Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus are the manuscripts that true churches (not the Catholic church or cults) throughout the ages have preserved. Whereas these Critical Texts were compiled from manuscripts that were hidden or were kept by the Catholic church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin,

I would be careful before I put much stock in another "educated man" who would bring to the table the old and false babblings of Wescott and Hort's "Resension Theory" which was ably refuted over an 100 years ago by the Dean John Burgon in his treatise entitield "The Secret Spanking of Wescott and Hort" Further evidence can be found in the still revelant paper titled The Last 12 verses of Mark. (same author)

Are you aware that the false teaching posted by "John the Baptist" was based upon a mere 8 verses put forth by Wescott?

Kevein, it makes no effort at all for you to "challenge" the teachings of KJB or TR only mss. Especially when you have consistently demostrated a complete lack of information and seem to be merely inclined to follow blindly others that would help boosts your ego to new heights.

John the Baptists' post made no sense over 100 years ago when first presented by W&H Conflationists claptrap. and makes no sense today.

I'll try to explain why Jerry's short post was correct.

Several years ago I was given a new Cambridge wide margin by a group to show me their appreciation for teaching the Bible on Thursday nights to them. My previous Cambridge had worn out. Due to notes, ragged page edges, a section of Romans had fell out of the binding and other deterioration of the Bible.
They purchased the same edition that I had always used with them.

Ever open another's Bible and have a slight problem finding a well known verse or passage? Sure we have, all of us. The familiarity was gone. It was not yours.

The fact is I didn't neded a "new" Bible, I needed a copy of the Bible I already had.

Perhaps you've never worn out a BIble, perhaps you don't use yours enough to do so, or perhaps you can't fathom that a Bible wears out due to use, not due to age.

Now use that so called "logic" you claim to have.

Why are there 98% of the extant (available) mss found in the "TR" (Byzantine) classification and only 2% extant mss found in the Alexadrian (Egyptian) classification? (We are talking NT mss here)

Because the Alexandrian mss have never been used and didn't wear out, they didn't need to be replaced by believers as they were not accepted by the earliest Christians as true examples of the true recieved text.

I have some 27 English versions of the Bible, several other foreign language versions.

I have worn out 2 KJB Bibles. I have never worn out a NIV or an NSAV or any other Bible. They sit on my shelf (read that "sheleved"), pristine, new and in near perfect store bought condition.

Have you ever read a physical description of the Vaticanus, or D, or Aleph or C or the few other "better because they're older" mss?

They are always described as new, pristine, extremely well preserved, etc...

I wonder why.


Why are there so many more mss that represent the Byzantine text? Simple Kevin. Because they were the texts being used by Christians.

Why are there so few Alexandrian texts extant?

Simple. They were shelved by the early church and ignored by all until some fools tried to revive them as better because they are older. Those two heretical apostates were named Wescott and Hort. They were trianed by the German rationalist. Textual Criticism is a farse and lures men who think themselves to be somewhat. Kids like you Kevin, who think they're too smart to learn anything from some old timer. Your desire to appear intelectual will be your down fall young man. From where I sit, I see no intelligence at all. Just a brash young man who wants to be accepted as a scholar.


I suspect that this argument doesn't hold your fancy as "intellectual" enough. Very well.

Men like John the Baptist are followers of these mens' lies.

You can follow whomever you please.

Calvary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of good books on the subject are This Little Light by Pastor Marty Braemer and Purified Seven Times The Miracle of the English Bible by Evangelist Bill Bradley. These two books contain all the information I will ever need to be fully pursuaded that my KJV is the perfect, inerrant, preserved word of ALMIGHTY GOD. I would highly recommend both books to anyone who is truly searching for the truth on this issue. Both books are available from Revival Fires! Publishing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would be careful before I put much stock in another "educated man" who would bring to the table the old and false babblings of Wescott and Hort's "Resension Theory" which was ably refuted over an 100 years ago by the Dean John Burgon in his treatise entitield "The Secret Spanking of Wescott and Hort" Further evidence can be found in the still revelant paper titled The Last 12 verses of Mark. (same author)

I didn't put any stock in another man's theory. I merely pointed out that I can't base my beliefs on what an "educated" man said because, as you just stated, they can't all be trusted simply because they are "educated." It goes both ways.

Are you aware that the false teaching posted by "John the Baptist" was based upon a mere 8 verses put forth by Wescott?

I wouldn't know, I didn't pay much attention to it. I'm not nearly educated enough on the manuscripts involved to argue either way. I know a little, but not enough.

Kevein, it makes no effort at all for you to "challenge" the teachings of KJB or TR only mss. Especially when you have consistently demostrated a complete lack of information and seem to be merely inclined to follow blindly others that would help boosts your ego to new heights.

I'm not challenging the "teachings of KJB or TR only mss." I challenged the reasoning behind the argument for it. I'm not sure who you think I'm following or why I would need an ego boost. If I needed an ego boost, I wouldn't go against the grain like I oftentimes do. lol

Why are there so many more mss that represent the Byzantine text? Simple Kevin. Because they were the texts being used by Christians.(as a brief summary of the argument)

Your argument might make sense on a practical level, but you didn't present any evidence to back it up. It sounds like it might be a possibility. I mean, yeah, it might have happened like that. But the point is, we don't know whether it did or not. I can't have an opinion or belief based on theory, but on the concrete. If theory works for you, great, we all tick a little differently.

I'm not going to answer your last paragraph, because I don't really see the point. I'm a man as much as you're one and I believe maturity is shown in a person's character, not in their age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to Calvary:

Why are there 98% of the extant (available) mss found in the "TR" (Byzantine) classification and only 2% extant mss found in the Alexadrian (Egyptian) classification? (We are talking NT mss here)

Because the Alexandrian mss have never been used and didn't wear out, they didn't need to be replaced by believers as they were not accepted by the earliest Christians as true examples of the true recieved text.


I gave ample reason for the fact that their are more Byzantine manuscripts than Alexanderian, but in your KJV Only Circlular reasoning you cannot accept truth concerning this matter. What proof do you have that the early church rejected the Alexanderian text. You have no proof, simply KJV propaganda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Attack On The bible
by Terry Watkins

God has placed a lot of importance upon His words.


Matthew 24:35 reads, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my WORDS shall not pass away.

"
Psalms 138:2 says, ". . . for thou hast magnified thy WORD above all thy name.

"
Psalms 119:89 says, "For ever, O LORD, thy WORD is settled in heaven.

"
The spiritual life-blood of the human race is the word of God.




It brings salvation: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God. . .

" (1 Peter 1:23)

It produces faith: ". . . faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Romans 10:17).



It produces spiritual growth: ". . .

desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:" (1 Peter 2:2)


Jesus Christ said in John 6:63, ". . .the words that I speak unto you, they are SPIRIT, and they are LIFE.

"
And the first time Satan attacks the human race was a direct attack on the word of God!


Genesis 3:1 says, "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, YEA, HATH GOD SAID. . .

?"
Satan planted a small seed of doubt into the mind of Eve. And as Eve questioned the truthfulness of God's Word - the fall of mankind was only a bite away.




Satan's aim of attack hasn't changed!

In Luke 8, Jesus Christ tells the parable of the sower, verses 11,12 read, "Now the parable is this: The SEED is the word of God. . . THEN COMETH THE DEVIL, and taketh away the word. . .

"

Satan knows - if he can supplant even a small seed of doubt in God's word - MANKIND WILL LOOK ELSEWHERE!

Never in history has such doubt and confusion over the Bible existed as is today. And nothing has flamed the fire of confusion and doubt over the Bible more than the scores of different translations flooding the scene. Time magazine (April 20, 1981 p.62) reports, ". . . there is an UNPRECEDENTED CONFUSION of choices in Bibles. Never have so many major new translations been on the market." Since 1880, over 200 different translations have appeared.

Every six months a new English version appears!


NO WONDER PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED!

The question has to be asked - is God the author of this flood of new versions? Is God the author of CONFUSION in His word? 1 Corinthians 14:33, clearly states, "God is NOT the author of CONFUSION.

"

BUT SATAN IS! He knows, if he can plant the smallest seed of doubt and confusion - that individual will not take God's word serious!


God promised to preserve His word...

God promised in Psalms 12:7 that He would preserve His word, "Thou shalt KEEP them, O LORD, thou shalt PRESERVE them from this generation FOR EVER.

"

And God keeps His promise! I believe, without a doubt, the King James Bible is the preserved word of God.

And the new versions are satanic counterfeits to cast doubt, cause confusion and ATTACK THE LORD JESUS CHRIST!
And I'm going to prove that on the remainder of this message! If you've come this far, please keep reading - what you're about to read - may be the most important words YOU WILL EVER READ!


Are the new versions different?

Most people believe the different versions are basically the same. They believe the newer versions are just "harmless" updating of words and made easier to understand.




NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!

One of the clearest verses in the Bible proclaiming the deity of Jesus Christ, that Jesus was God in the flesh, is 1 Timothy 3:16. The King James Bible reads, "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH. . ." The King James says, clearly, "GOD was manifest in the flesh".



The New International Version (NIV) says, "HE appeared in a body". The NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV, etc, change "GOD" to "HE". "He appeared in a body"? Big deal! Everyone has "appeared in a body"! The KJV is clear and definite, "GOD was manifest in the flesh". "He" is a pronoun that refers to a noun or antecedent.

There is no antecedent in the context! The statement does NOT even make grammatical sense!


AN ATTACK ON THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST!

In Philippians 2:6, The KJV again, clearly declares the deity of Jesus Christ: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery TO BE EQUAL WITH GOD" The new translations completely re-word the verse to deny the deity of Jesus Christ! The NIV, RSV, NASV, NRSV, NKJV(1979 ed.), etc.

reads, "Who, being in very nature God, DID NOT CONSIDER EQUALITY WITH GOD something to be grasped,"

Someone is attacking the most important doctrine in the Bible - the deity of Jesus Christ!


WHO WOULD DO SUCH A THING?
They attack the virgin birth!

In Luke 2:33, The King James reads, "And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him." The NIV, NASV, NRSV, etc. reads, "The CHILD'S FATHER and mother marveled at what was said about him." The "CHILD'S FATHER"? Do you believe that Joseph was Jesus's father? Not if you believe the virgin birth! Not if you believe John 3:16, that Jesus Christ was the Son of God! A subtle, attack at the virgin birth.

Think these are just isolated cases? NOT BY A LONG SHOT! There are over 6,000 changes!

They remove the Blood!

Consider Colossians 1:14: the KJV reads, "In whom we have redemption THROUGH HIS BLOOD, even the forgiveness of sins:" The NIV reads, "In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins." The NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV and co. rip the precious words "THROUGH HIS BLOOD" out! Friend, salvation is only "THROUGH HIS BLOOD".

That old song says, "What can wash away my sins, NOTHING BUT THE BLOOD OF JESUS!"

They attack John 3:16!

And something has to be done with John 3:16! So the NIV and company reads, "For God so loved the world that he gave his ONE AND ONLY SON, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" - removing the critical word "BEGOTTEN"! If Jesus was "the one and only" then what happens to the wonderful promise to believers like 1 John 3:2, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God. . .

"? AN OBVIOUS CONTRADICTION APPEARS!

They tell lies!

A blatant error is found in the NIV, NASV, NRSV and "buddies" in Mark 1:2,3: "It is written in Isaiah the prophet: I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way -a voice of one calling in the desert, Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him." It is NOT written in Isaiah! "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way" - is found in Malachi 3:1! The King James correctly reads: "As it is written in the PROPHETS, . . .

"
A better translation! Easier to understand! BY A LIE!

Psalms 119:160 says, "Thy word is TRUE. . ." John 17:17 says, ". . . thy word is TRUTH." Titus 1:2 clearly says, ". . .

God that CANNOT LIE"

How could the God of Titus 1:2 be the God of Mark 1:2,3 in these new versions? Either the translators of the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV, "crowd" can't read or have never read Isaiah nor Malachi (which is likely!) or somebody is deliberately tampering with God's Word to DISCREDIT IT!

Who would do such a thing?

I'll give you a hint - he's called the "A LIAR, and the father of it" in John 8:44!

Oh, by the way, did you think David killed Goliath? Not according to the NIV, NRSV, NASV, and "boys". In 2 Samuel 21:19, they erroneously read, ". . . Elhanan son of JaareOregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, who had a spear with a shaft like a weaver's rod.

"They make Lucifer and Jesus Christ - THE SAME!

In Isaiah 14:12, the father of the new versions removes his mask. The King James reads, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!. . ." The NIV, NASV, NRSV etc. reads, "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, son of the dawn. . ." The new per-versions change "Lucifer" to "morning star".

According to Revelation 22:16, the "morning star" is the Lord Jesus Christ! What blasphemy! What perversion! And there's no basis whatsoever for the change! The Hebrew word for star (kokab) is not even found in Isaiah 14:12! Is there any doubt who is the "daddy" of these new versions?
They take out hell!

If Satan is the author of these new versions, one subject he will aim his attack, is the place the Bible calls hell.

And the new versions go "into loony land" removing it!

Many times they change "hell" to "grave" or "death", but the word "hell" is far and few in the new versions! Like Psalm 9:17: in the King James reads, "The wicked shall be turned into HELL. . ." The NIV, reads, "The wicked return to the GRAVE. . .

" We ALL "return to the GRAVE"!

Many times when the new versions come to the obvious word "hell" - they replace it with the Greek word "Hades" or Hebrew "Sheol"! (See Matt.

16:18, Luke 16:23, Acts 2:31 and many, many more, the NEW King James does this 29 times!) Rather than translate into the obvious word hell - THEY REFUSE TO TRANSLATE IT!

And this is a better translation? And these new versions are "easier to read" and "understand"? Who in their right mind thinks Hades or Sheol is "easier to understand" than hell? Why didn't they leave in the Greek word "Ouranos" for heaven? It's obvious! Because someone is trying to remove and cast doubt on the place called hell!

In Isaiah 14:15, the King James Bible condemns Lucifer to hell: "Yet thou shalt be brought down to HELL . . ." The new versions refuse to send Lucifer to hell! The NIV reads, "But you are brought down to the GRAVE. . .

" The NASV, NRSV, NEW King James (NKJV) places him in "Sheol"!

hmm. . .
I wonder which one the Devil prefers?

The Lord's or The Devil's Prayer?
An alarming display of Satanic perversion is found in Luke 11. The "The Lord's Prayer" is subtly (see 2 Cor. 11:3) transformed into "The Devil's Prayer".

The King James Bible in Luke 11:2-4, reads, ". . .Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil." Incredibly, the NIV, NASV, NRSV, etc. take out: "WHICH ART IN HEAVEN. . . Thy will be done, AS IN HEAVEN, so in earth. . . but DELIVER US FROM EVIL.

" Heaven is completely removed! The "father" of the new versions is NOT IN HEAVEN and DOES NOT DELIVER FROM EVIL!

I wonder who it could be? (hint: see John 8:44)
Are you getting the picture? Do you see how subtil (see Genesis 3:1), seemingly, harmless the changes are - AND YET HOW DEADLY THEY ARE TO THE INTEGRITY OF GOD'S WORD!

They attack the Lord Jesus Christ!
They attack the plan of salvation!
They glorify Lucifer!
And they deny hell!

Yes friend.
Satan has launched an attack on your Bible!

YOU'D BETTER BELIEVE IT!

Did you know, the King James Bible is the only English Bible in the world that has a command to "study" your Bible! That's right! 2 Timothy 2:15, "STUDY to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" - has been changed in every English Bible on the face of this earth! BUT ONE!

They take out whole verses!

In Acts 8:37, the King James reads, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

" The NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV and "buddies" reads - ZIP! NOTHING! THEY TOOK THE WHOLE VERSE OUT! One of the best verses in the Bible on salvation through Jesus Christ and they rip it out! Why?

Why is it that every time a sinner is saved by grace in the book of Acts - THEY ATTACK IT? In Acts 9:5,6: Paul is getting saved, and they take out 20 words! In Acts 16:31 when the Philippian jailor is getting saved, the word "CHRIST" is delicately removed! Why do these new bibles so fiercely attack God's wonderful plan of salvation?

WHO WOULD DO SUCH A THING?

Several times the Lord warns against "adding and taking away" from His Word.

Deuteronomy 4:2 reads: "YE SHALL NOT ADD unto the word which I command you, NEITHER SHALL YE DIMINISH ought from it . . .

"Proverbs 30::6, reads, "ADD THOU NOT unto his words . . .

"And just in case you missed it, GOD'S LAST WARNING is Revelation 22:18,19, ". . . IF ANY MAN SHALL ADD unto these things. . . And if any man shall TAKE AWAY FROM THE WORDS of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life. . .

" And despite these clear warnings, the new versions, take out and add text, over and over! One of the greatest verses in all the Bible, Matthew 18:11: "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

" - THEY TAKE IT OUT!

WHY!

They take out: Romans 16:24, Mark 11:25, Acts 15:34, Luke 23:17, Acts 28:29, John 5:4, Mark 7:16, 9:44,46 and many, many more - as your Bible is literally cut apart!

Jesus Christ says, in Luke 4:4, ". . . It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD OF GOD.

" Not according to the NIV, NASV, NRSV and crew! In fact, the even "tear out"the last half of Luke 4:4 - "BUT BY EVERY WORD OF GOD"!

Yes, but the new versions have the deity in other places. They contain the plan of salvation in other places. There is good in them.

Did you know ONE tiny, microscopic AIDS virus will "defile" a whole batch of perfectly "good" blood? It has some "good" in it - BUT IT WOULD BE DEADLY!

Would you "inject" it into your child, loved one or congregation? And would you "inject" them with a Bible that is "defiled" because it has some "good"? It could be far more costly than their physical life - THEIR ETERNAL SOUL! Galatians 5:9 says, "A LITTLE leaven leaveneth THE WHOLE lump.

"But aren't the new versions easier to read?

One of the lies used to promote these per-versions is "they're easier to read and understand". But according to a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level research study, The King James Bible is by far the easiest! Out of 26 different categories - the King James graded easier in a whopping 23! (New Age Bible Versions, Riplinger, pp.

195-209)

But haven't "older and more reliable" manuscripts been discovered?

But haven't "older and more reliable manuscripts been discovered" since the King James Bible. Dr. Sam Gipp writes, "The fact is, that the King James translators had ALL OF THE READINGS available to them that modern critics have available to them today." (The Answer Book, Gipp, p.110) Not only that, but most of the recent discoveries support the King James Bible! And furthermore, it is a well documented fact that 85 - 90 per cent of all readings agree with the King James Bible! SO WHY ALL THE CHANGES? See Genesis 3:1.

What about the "ORIGINALS"?

Your King James Bible is attacked by preachers, some intentional and some simply out of ignorance, by "correcting" it with "THE ORIGINALS". There is one itsy-bitsy problem. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "THE ORIGINALS"! We don't have the "originals" Moses, or Paul, or David wrote.

There are no set of "ORIGINALS" on the face of this earth! The ghost of "THE ORIGINALS" is a LIE! See John 8:44!

Preachers, by the thousands, will stand weekly in the pulpit and "correct" your King James Bible by saying, "This is an unfortunate translation" or "a better reading would be" or "this word in the 'Greek' can also be translated. . .

" Friend, where is the Lord God? The One that "spoke" the worlds into existence - can He not preserve His word as He promised in Psalm 12:7 and Matthew 24:35? Did God Almighty NOT know what He was "inspiring"? Does the Lord need these "Bible correctors" to "help" Him "straighten-out" His word?

As God promised, He has preserved His word for the English people in the King James Bible. Proverbs 16:10 says, "A divine sentence is in the lips of the KING. . ." Ecclesiastes 8:4 says, "Where the word of a KING is, there is power . . ." King James. "James" is not an English word but a Hebrew word. Did you know the Hebrew word for James is Jacob! You'll never guess what Psalms 147:19 says, "He showeth His WORD unto JACOB . . .

"

2 Timothy 2:9, reads, " . . . the word of God is NOT BOUND." Anybody can freely (there's that word Eve omitted in Genesis 3:2) print, distribute, and reproduce the King James Bible, without asking anybody for permission! All other translations are "bound" by

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I gave ample reason for the fact that their are more Byzantine manuscripts than Alexanderian' date=' but in your [b']KJV Only Circlular reasoning you cannot accept truth concerning this matter. What proof do you have that the early church rejected the Alexanderian text. You have no proof, simply KJV propaganda.


How about we just tack this up to your Critical Text propaganda and circular reasoning? And while you're at it, remember that this IS a KJVonly website. You have been here long enough - anymore garbage like these statements made here and you will get an official warning from these boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore, Dr. Hills believed all principles about Bible Preservation must come from God and the Bible. "In New Testament textual criticism, therefore, we must start at the highest point. We must begin with God, the supreme and eternal Truth, and then descend to the lower, temporal facts which He has established by His works of creation and providence. We must take all our principles from the Bible itself and borrow none from the textual criticism of other ancient books. It is only by following this rule that we will be able to distinguish facts from the fictions of unbelievers." -KJVD pp.115. Notice how Dr. Hills placed "temporal facts" at the bottom, while modern critical scholars start with this tangible evidence and search their way through the variant filled manuscripts up to faith in God.
Dr. Hills believed that if we begin all our thinking with God and His revelation, then His Son Jesus Christ will become our teacher and model on how we should approach scripture. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast (Eph. 2:8,9). If we have received from God the gift of faith and if we have taken Jesus Christ, God's Son, as the starting point of all our thinking, then we must adopt the same view of Holy Scripture that Jesus believed and taught during the days of His earthly ministry. Let us therefore consider first the doctrine of our Savior concerning the Hebrew Old Testament Scriptures." Dr. Hills covered this subject in chapter #1 of Believing Bible Study. In chapter #2 of Believing Bible Study, Dr. Hills applied the promises of Jesus Christ for the New Testament to the manuscript evidence. Therefore, Dr. Hills based his approach to textual criticism in both the Old and New Testaments upon the example and teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Finally, Dr. Hills believed that our Lord Jesus Christ left us with an anointing which has guided each generation of believers to accept truth and reject error. "But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him." (1John 2:27).
Dr. Hills believed the Holy Spirit led the church to accept the canon of Holy Scriptures and reject non-canonical books: "Thus through the Holy Spirit's guidance of individual believers, silently and gradually - but nevertheless surely - the Church as a whole was led to a recognition of the fact that the twenty-seven books of the New Testament, and only these books, form the canon which God gave to be placed beside the Old Testament Scriptures as the authoritative and final revelation of His will." -Believing Bible Study, pp. 33.
"This guidance of the Holy Spirit was negative as well as positive. It involved not only the selection of canonical New Testament books but also the rejection of many non-canonical books which were mistakenly regarded as canonical by some of the early Christians....Soon all Christians everywhere were led by the Holy Spirit to repudiate these spurious works and to receive only the canonical books as their New Testament Scriptures." -Believing Bible Study, Page 33
Finally Dr. Hills reminded us that the Holy Spirit not only led in the forming of the 66 book canon of Holy Scriptures, but also the content of each book in Bible Preservation. "Thus the Holy Spirit guided the early Christians to gather the individual New Testament books into one New Testament canon and to reject all non-canonical books. In the same manner also the Holy Spirit guided the early Christians to preserve the New Testament text by receiving the true readings and rejecting the false. Certainly, it would be strange if it had been otherwise. It would have been passing strange if God had guided His people in regard to the New Testament canon but had withheld from them His divine assistance in the matter of the New Testament text. This would mean that Bible-believing Christians today could have no certainty concerning the New Testament text but would be obligated to rely on the hypotheses of modern, naturalistic critics." Believing Bible Study, page 33. This ministry of the Holy Spirit collectively through each believer in each generation down through the centuries is termed "the common faith" by Dr. Hills. This is the theological presupposition by which we can assert that each generation had a providentially preserved Bible upon which they could rest their faith for time and eternity. Not only has this been true collectively for the past generations of saints in history, but it is true subjectively for each saint who holds this same theological position today. Dr. Hills said, "This then is the basic reason why I know the Bible is true. The Bible is true because it is true for me. The Holy Spirit bears witness with my spirit that I am a child of God and that therefore all the promises of holy Scripture are true in my case With Jesus Christ I am join heir, because His death by faith is mine (Rom. 8:17), But what more precisely do I mean when I say that the Bible is true? The Bible itself tells me that I mean four things. First, the Bible is God's revelation of Himself. Second, the Bible is eternally established. Third, the Bible is infallibly inspired. Fourth, the Bible is providentially preserved." -Believing Bible Study, pages 59,60.
Dr. Hills defended all the verses in the KJB. He reminded us that God used the Old Testament priesthood, and not the Roman Catholic church to preserve the Old Testament canon for us. - BBS, pp. 12,62. This is a scriptural fact. "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God." (Romans 3:1,2). Dr. Hills reminded us that God used the common faith of the believer priests in the New Testament to validate the canon both in scope and content. -BBS, pp. 30,50,5l.


For the entire article,

http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/KJBibl ... RADITIONAL


Kevin, maturity does come with age in the normal course of life. Knowledge alone just puffs up. Life experience seasons the knowledge we have and it converts into wisdom. You admit that you always go against the grain, might not that be evidence of a young and inmature man? At the very least imprudent.

You did in fact state that what John the Baptist posted seem to be the reasonable course and then you stated the same to my scenario. (Does the word "double-minded" mean anything?)

I could and have offerred much proof. The burden for evaluating that proof is to read the sources mentioned for yourself.

@John,

You sir are either too lazy or too convinced of your position to invest the time and monies to read the books by Edward Hills, or John Burgon. Either of which men would easily demonstrate that their personal first hand knowledge of the texts involved would dismiss any reason to hold to the false and unprovable tenets of Wescott and Hort, both of whom history plainly declares to be heretic and apsotate. May God have mercy on your soul.

God bless,

Calvary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John and Kevin: Might as well give up. In the end, onlyism (not just KJV onlyism, but all the other onlyisms, like TR-onlyism, LV-onlyism, and that one French version onlyism) is based on faith. Faith cannot be reasoned with. In the mind of a person with faith, what they believe in is more solid than any fact. It's as real to them (if not more) than their own sight. One must remove onlyism from ones faith before one will consider any arguments, facts, etc... that might be contrary to onlyism. So you are wasting your keystrokes. Your keys are getting all smooth and worn out for nothing! :wink

I look at onlyism just like I do the Catholic doctrine of The Corporeal Assumption of Mary. There is no scriptural support for it (in fact, scripture is completely silent on the fate of Mary). It was made by man, and many people accepted it by faith because it made sense to them. If they want to believe it, that's fine with me. But I don't. Sola Scriptura.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

I only have one thing to say: GOD said He is NOT the author is confusion!!!!

I have compaired the KJV and the NKJV on my own self study. If you are truley saved...one of God children. You can clearly see the difference. At any time you take Christ out the even on verse you have lost the whole point of God writen word. That is to read the Good news that Christ died for our sins and that he is are only hope. You take that out and well you might as well worship budda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 33 Guests (See full list)

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...