Jump to content
Online Baptist Community


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Denomination
  • IFB?

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

BibleBeliever5's Achievements

  1. A KJV update should definitely use the same Scripture texts as the KJV, the Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus.
  2. I agree that the singular/plural information of the second person pronouns should be retained in an update to the KJV.
  3. Let's skip to the bigger question. Can God give us the Holy Scriptures in our language that we use today? With God, all things are possible.
  4. Let me put it this way. I do not support any inaccuracy in the Bible. I believe that a Bible should be 100% accurate. I do not support updating anything in the KJV that makes the text inaccurate. If you think the only way to have an accurate Bible is to have ye and thee, I would disagree with you. Please think more about that.
  5. The 21st Century KJV (KJ21) is inadequate. It still keeps archaic English like thee, thou, ye, and cometh, as well as archaic grammar. So the "eth" endings are unnecessarily kept. Also, it has very strange formatting different than the KJV with larger italic font for words of Christ and then removing the important italics of the KJV. This is unacceptable. It also uses bold lettering for famous passages. So some verses are completely bolded. One quote from the Father was put in all caps and italics. It also capitalizes divine pronouns, which means they have to interpret which pronouns are referring to God, and they could have made mistakes. I think the KJV is much better by not doing that. So the KJ21 does not fulfill the need for a KJV update. It introduces poor changes to the KJV. The Third Millennium Bible, which is also called the New Authorized Version, is the same as the KJ21 but includes Apocrypha and no formatting changes.
  6. Not true. [Jhn 20:31 KJV] 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
  7. Hi Pastor, I think I have already indicated that I am ready to finish this conversation with you that is somewhat off topic from the original post. I am busy. Even if I explain more than I already have, I think it is very unlikely that you would accept it. I know God can reveal to you the correct meaning in time to come. Are you able to let this go? Stay safe and healthy.
  8. Please think more carefully about the words used in 1 Cor. 2:14-15. I think you are missing the nuances of "natural man" and "he that is spiritual" in light of the whole verses. I don't think we need to argue. We actually have lots of common ground. I have already expressed my belief that the natural man in 1 Cor. 2:14 means certain non-believers, the natural ones, as it says. I wish you the best, and let's not argue out of our love in Christ.
  9. I think you are misunderstanding Scripture and not using good logic. Have a blessed week!
  10. Thank you for your time Pastor. I think I have already made my interpretation clear. There's no need to keep saying the same thing. May God be glorified. Have a blessed day!
  11. That is not what I have stated. I have already said the context of verse 10 and 11 show the generality of "things." Of course context matters. But in this case, it is not a constraining context as you claim.
  12. Those verses do not mean all non-believers can never receive the wisdom of God. Of course some non-believers become believers and receive the wisdom of God. In fact, the gospel is the wisdom of God in Christ.
  • Create New...