I want to brag on my Preacher!!!
If you get a chance listen to my preacher, Ken Whitt, preach the plainest I have ever heard about the King James Bible being the Word of God!
http://www.ifbpreaching.com/ken_whitt.html
It is so simple. I guess that is why it is so very hard for me to understand why every saved person can't get it! All "new" Bibles compare themselves to the KJB, and nobody notices. They all come from the same corrupt text, and nobody cares. They don't even agree with each other, and nobody says nothing. No revival has come from the "new" versions, but who cares anyway.
Just open 3 or 4 "new" ones up, and lay them beside a KJB. Look for yourself.
PLEASE LOOK!!!
ybiC, William
posted by William @ 6:26 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
Hey William,
I think people just do not care as far as the Bible issue goes. They are comfortable with their life as it is and they do not really read the Bible anyway. I am talking about people claiming to be Christians. When I got saved I knew that I wanted the whole truth and nothing but the truth. My wife bought me a NIV by the recommendation of the guy working at the "Christian" book store. The guy just happened to go to the church we were attending at the time and everyone called him minister Danny. I as was a new babe in Christ I did not know anything about the differences in the Bibles. My friend at work, who left a gospel tract in our work van which led me to the Lord, told me that the Bibles are different. This led me to research the issue through the internet and comparing the NIV with the KJV. Through the guiding hand of God and many hours I came to realise how the word of God is being corrupted through these new versions. I agree with you that it is so simple. The gospel itself is simple, yet most do not believe it. People just do not want to believe.
Your Brother in Christ
Rusty
There is a popular movement to reject all English translations except the King James Version.
Actually, the King James Version of today is the latest of several revisions, made in 1762. Very few people could understand the antiquated English of the 1611 version. Even since 1762 the English language has changed immensely. Therefore, most people find the King James Version hard to read.
Many knowledgeable scholars defend the Textus Receptus upon which the King James Version (and New King James Version) is based. But it is unreasonable to claim special providence or inspiration for the scholars of the Church of England in 1611 that would not also be claimed for textual critics and translators today. The men who gave the world the King James Version of the Bible certainly didn't claim inspiration!
Some people contend the "Thees" and "Thous"" of the King James Version are reverential rather than archaic. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language (Unabridged) calls the word "thee" "archaic." (p. 2369) When Jesus commanded, "Get thee hence, Satan" (Matthew 4:10), was he using reverential language? Was he showing reverence to Peter when He said, "Get thee behind me, Satan...."? (Matthew 16:23)
Some argue for the beautiful Shakespearean language of the King James Version. If that is their personal preference, fine. I don't try to steer anyone away from the KJV. But it is sinful to bind our personal preferences on others (Romans 14:1-3). I grant that scholars tell us that the Hebrew of the Old Testament is classical and that the Hebrew of Isaiah is some of the most elevated of all Hebrew literature. But it is very revealing that, when the New Testament was written, the inspired writers could have used the beautiful, classical Greek that learned authors used even in their day. Instead, with a few exceptions, they used "koine," "common," Greek, the language of the common people. If we follow the example of the apostles and prophets of the Lord, we will use a translation that is in the common language of ordinary people of our day.
Some lump all the modern translations together and charge that they deny the deity of Christ. First, it is blatantly unfair to lump the New American Standard Bible with Good News for Modern Man. Second, it is simply a slander to charge that all the modern translations undermine the deity of Jesus Christ. There are nine New Testament passages that in some or all Greek manuscripts expressly call Jesus "God." (John 1:1,18; Acts 20:28; Romans 9:5; 2 Thessalonians 1:12; 1 Timothy 3:16; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1) The King James Version translates five of them (John 1:1; Acts 20:28; Romans 9:5; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 1:8) so that Jesus is denoted as God. Both the NASB and the NIV render seven of the passages in such a way that they specifically indicate that Jesus is a divine being.
Others, noting the liberalism of B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort and tying all modern versions to the Westcott and Hort text, charge all newer translations with liberal bias. The only American translation that closely follows the Westcott & Hort text is the American Standard Version. The translators of the New American Standard Bible, the New International Version, the New King James Version, and the English Standard Version believe in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures and the virgin birth of Christ (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:18-23; Luke 1:26-38).
The King James Version is by-and-large accurate. But it does have notable weaknesses. Ecclesiastical (church) words of the Church of England were sometimes used (e.g., "baptize" rather than "immerse"; "bishop" rather than "overseer"). There are a few mistranslations (e.g., "Easter" in Acts 12:4). Some of these weaknesses have been carried over into the standard modern English translations (e.g., "baptize").
The chief weakness of the King James Version is its age. Most people who did not grow up reading the Bible find the King James Version hard if not virtually impossible to read. The argument that, on average, the KJV uses shorter words than modern translations completely misses the point. The word "eschew" (1 Peter 3:11, KJV) is shorter than the phrase "turn away from" (NKJV), but how many modern readers know what "eschew" means? Should we require those we are teaching to learn Elizabethan English so they might know God's will?
Many Christians are having opportunities in our day to study with people who grew up Catholic or nothing at all religiously. They are not at all familiar with Elizabethan English. We encounter more and more to whom English is a second language. To demand that they study from the King James Version is like asking a country boy to read and understand Shakespeare. The refusal to consider updated English versions of the Bible cripples efforts to reach the lost.
Luzianne,
You might be very, very firm in your belief that the NIV, NKJV, ASV, NASV, Good News for Modern Man, and the Living Bible is the real word of God, just more modern versions of the Bible. If you are that firm on your belief, perhaps you would be very comfortable with taking a small quiz? My goal here isn't to weaken your faith in the word of God, rather to strengthen it and to shed the light of truth on you. I have arranged below a series of questions (not originally mine, I copied them off of a website) for you to answer using ONLY the text of your good ol' NIV Bible.
To take this quiz, you must rely completely on the scripure itself, not the footnotes, as the Bible is final authority.
Footnotes are works of men. Nor rely on your memory, but rather place complete faith and trust in God's word. I wish you luck on the quiz.
1). Fill in the missing words in Matthew 5:44. "Love your enemies, _____ them that curse you, _______ to them that hate you, and pray for them that _______ and persecute you."
2). According to Matthew 17:21, what two things are required to cast out this type of demon?
3). According to Matthew 18:11, why did Jesus come to earth?
4). According to Matthew 27:2, what was Pilate's first name?
5). In Matthew 27:35, when the wicked soldiers parted his garments, they were fulfilling the words of the prophet. Copy what the prophet said in Matthew 27:35 from the NIV.
6). In Mark 3:15, Jesus gave the apostles power to cast out demons and to: ________
7). According to Mark 7:16, what does a man need to be able to hear?
8). According to Luke 7:28, What was John? (teacher, prophet, carpenter, etc.). What is his title or last name?
9). In Luke 9:55, what did the disciples not know?
10). In Luke 9:56, what did the Son of man not come to do? According to this verse, what did He come to do?
11). In Luke 22:14, how many apostles were with Jesus?
12). According to Luke 23:38, in what three languages was the superscription written?
13). In Luke 24:42, what did they give Jesus to eat with his fish?
14). John 3:13 is a very important verse, proving the deity of Christ. According to this verse (as Jesus spoke), where is the Son of man?
15). What happened each year as told in John 5:4?
16). In John 7:50, what time of day did Nicodemus come to Jesus?
17). In Acts 8:37, what is the one requirement for baptism?
18). What did Saul ask Jesus in Acts 9:6?
19). Write the name of the man mentioned in Acts 15:34 __________________
20). Study Acts 24:6-8, what would the Jew have done with Paul? What was the chief captain's name? What did the chief captain command?
21). Copy Romans 16:24 word-for-word from the NIV ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________
22). First Timothy 3:16 is perhaps the greatest verse in the New Testament concerning the deity of Christ. In this verse, who was manifested in the flesh?
23). In the second part of First Peter 4:14, how do [they] speak of Christ? And, what do we Christians do?
24). Who are the three persons of the GodHead in First John 5:7?
25). Revelation is another very important verse that proves the diety of Christ. In the first part of this verse Jesus said, "I am the A____ and O____, the _________ and the ___:"
Conclusion: Little space is provided for your answers, but it's much more than needed. If you followed the instructions above, you not only failed the test, you receive a big goose egg.
(Ed. These are all missing in the NIV.) So now what do you think of of your "accurate, easy to understand, up to date Bible"?
If you would like to improve your score, and in fact score 100%, you can take this test using the Authorized (King James) Bible.
I have copied the above word-for-word from Chick Publications Bible versions section. (Note: I have added a few extra lines and have also changed the word "trinity" to "GodHead" in question 24).
To let you know, it wasn't really you that failed the test, rather, if you really did follow the instructions above, it was the Bible you're using that failed you. This is just a small taste of the actual amount of verses either changed added onto or completely omitted in the NIV. It is estimated that well over 10,000 verses are omitted in the NIV. In this case, if you believe the book you're reading is really a Bible just because it says "Bible" on either the front cover or the spine (perhaps both), then you might as well believe you're drinking cough syrup (really chloride) out of a cough syrup bottle just because it says "cough syrup" on it. The sad thing is, of all these verses, the NIV publishers have gone in deeper into not only tampering with God's word, but also directly tampering with God through his word.
In Isaiah 14:12 (NIV), it reads: "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, son of the dawn..." The NIV changes "Lucifer" to "MORNING STAR." (The KJV reads "Lucifer" instead of "Morning Star.")
But wait... I thought Jesus Christ was the morning star? Doesn't Revelation 22:16 (KJV) say: "I Jesus am... the bright and MORNING STAR".
According to the NIV, it was Jesus Christ, Son of God, God in the flesh, Saviour of the world, Redeemer of mankind, the way, truth and life, the Lamb of God, the King of kings and Lord of lords, the bread of life, the hell fire extinguishing water who was cast out of heaven from the presense of GOD ALMIGHTY, NOT LUCIFER (Later called Satan)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have said this before, I will say it again... WHAT BLASPHEMY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you are an NIV reader, and have read this, allow me to ask you a question... actually, allow me to ask you a few questions. Has this destroyed your faith in your "good, faithfully preserved, more modern, easy-to-understand" Bible? If it did, I will not say I am sorry, I am not sorry, truth cannot always be presented without offending people.
However, I will say AMEN! It is better you become offended and led to the truth than not be offended and not know the real difference between Christ and Satan when someone asks you.
Sorry to take up so much space.
By the way, it only takes a second grade education to understand the Good Ole' KING JAMES VERSION. That is the lowest. Compare that to the ninth grade education it takes to understand a NIV.
Luzianne, have you ever seen a photocopy of the 1611 King James Version. I own one. I just wanted to let you know in those so called "revisions" the only thing that was changed was the font and the spelling of some of the words. The font used for the printing of the 1611 Bibles was a gothic font. It was changed to our roman type. Then as far as spelling goes, f was substituted for some "s's." V and u were also interchangable. That was the type of spelling "errors" we dealt with.
Dealing with your second paragraph, I do not find how anyone could find the KJV hard to read unless they just can not. My advise to someone who finds the KJV hard to understand is get a second grade education and read the true Bible. Then there are the "thees and thous." I knew what those meant before I even started school! Why not just leave them alone. By the way, those that say they just change the "thees and thous" are lying. I can find contridictions in every other modern per-version.
What makes anyone think that there are mistranslations? The word Baptize comes from the greek word Baptizio. Baptizio is NOT a translation but a transliteration. It meant to dip or immerse. That does not seem wrong to me.
Then there is the word Easter. The word, "Easter" has been incorrectly translated "Passover" in all Bible versions except for the King James version. How do I know this? The Bible shows it. In the passage Acts 12:1-4, King Herod killed James and when he saw that it pleased the Jews, he took Peter DURING the DAYS OF UNLEAVENED BREAD and was going to bring him forth to the people AFTER Easter.
Easter could not be Passover because Passover occurs BEFORE the days of unleavened bread which is when they arrested Peter. Passover had come and gone. Herod decided to bring Peter forth AFTER Easter. This is the sequence:
1. PASSOVER
2. DAYS OF UNLEAVENED BREAD
3. EASTER
Once again the KJV Bible defends itself. I would continue with my discorse, but I do not want to upset the moderator.
Whooa!!!!
Sounds like Luzianne has so much education that she can't understand plain english. I have but 1 comment on this: Satan is the author of confusion. Why do you want to add confusion to the word of God? These other versions are just simply tools of the Devil to water down the importance of God's Holy Word. Do you not beleive the Bible when it declares that God would preserve his Word? Thank God for the KJV Bible and the Gospel for which it stands.
Post a Comment
<< Home