Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My swedish ancestors in central Kansas were sure that, when a tall church steeple on the prairie was struck by lightning, it was because that particular church had switched to ENGLISH (gasp!) and was using the KJV. Using English and the KJV in church was sure to call down God's wrath. If it's not Swedish, it ain't Bible.
My swedish ancestors in central Kansas were sure that, when a tall church steeple on the prairie was struck by lightning, it was because that particular church had switched to ENGLISH (gasp!) and was using the KJV. Using English and the KJV in church was sure to call down God's wrath. If it's not Swedish, it ain't Bible.
But, but if the KJV was good enough for Paul it should be good enough for all of us.
Just so you know... that doesn't exist. There is no such thing as a King James Version of the Bible in the Lithuanian language.
Unfortunately, that is true.
Quote:
If a Lithuanian wants to read the Bible the only choices she/he has are incomplete versions written hundreds of years ago (which would be gibberish to today's Lithuanians and were books the commies liked to destroy... so good luck finding one in a used bookstore) or versions translated in.... the 20th century.
Bible work is done by the Lithuanian Bible Society (Lietuvos Biblijos draugija), who produced an ecumenical translation in 1999. Bibles are printed for Protestants and for Catholics (with deuterocanonical books).
And your final quote...
Quote:
Yep. Lithuanians are all reading "modern" versions of the Bible.
I would say to a Lithuanian that they should get a KJV in Lithuanian rather than the NIV in Lithuanian.
And in doing so, you would be giving poor advice. A Bible in Lithuanian should be translated into Lithuanian from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Hebrew autographs, not translated from the King James translation into Lithuanian. The KJV is not an inspired translation. No translation is inspired, only the original language manuscripts are inspired.
Why weren't the Geneva, Bishop's or Tyndale Bibles not good enough English translations? Why is the KJV the only "acceptable" English translation?
You realize that Erasmus' Textus Receptus had whole sections that he re-created from very iffy manuscripts and in some cases, no original manuscripts at all, right?
I like the KJV or the NKJV as it gives some insight in some scriptures which other version do not . And even though some scholars do not think the scriptures are the most actuate ..... Some other versions adopt pride as alright and the KJV is very limited in holding pride up as acceptable
There are differences in the message between KJV and NKJV, so be careful.
1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. KJV
1 Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. NKJV
This is one example of why I rely on the KJV for the meat of God's words because the NKJV and some other modern Bibles has it in that way too, supports the false teaching that believers are not really saved yet, but in the process of being saved. The way it is worded in the NKJV supports such apostasy. KJV and a few other modern Bibles has it right.
Romans 8:26-27 in the KJV is where ALL modern Bibles has it wrong. They imply that the Holy Spirit makes His own intercessions by Himself but His intercessions are unspeakable which means He cannot make them known in verse 26.
At the link above, you will find Romans 8th chpater being mirrored with Greek texts before each verse. Scroll down to verse 26 and click on the last Greek text in that verse that defines the intercessions of the Spirit's as unspeakable as something the Holy Spirit cannot utter.
That is why verse 27 exists and that the "he" that searches our hearts ( Whom is the Word of God, Jesus Christ that knows the thoughts & intentions of the heart as per Hebrews 4:12-16 ) knows also the mind of the Spirit, for this is that He, the Son of God, that intercedes for the saints in according to the will of God which is there is only One Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus ( 1 Timothy 2:5 ) The reason for that is that when Jesus presents our intercessions and the unspeakable intercessions of the Spirit's to the Father, when the Father says "Yes" , the Son answers our prayers so that the Father may be glorified in the Son for answered prayers ( John 14:13-14 ) So this is what it means that He is always there to make intercessions for us in being inbetween us and the Father ( Hebrews 7:25 & Matthew 18:19-20 ) as that explains how and why the Father knows before we ask anything in prayer ( Matthew 6:7-8 ) especially when we do not know what to pray.
This truth is key to understanding why God would never use tongues as a prayer language. There is no need. Plus, the Holy Spirit speaks only what He hears ( John 16:13 ) so that is why God's gift of tongues is of other men's lips to speak unto the people. That is all tongues are for. ( 1 Corinthians 14:20-21 ) Errant and undiscerning believers gloss over verse 13 and 15 in favour of verse 14 that out of context, looks like one can pray in tongues, but in context with verses 13-15, Paul is praying that someone will interpret the tongue that he is speaking as manifested by the Spirit as verse 13 sets the precedent for understanding what he had meant in verse 14. It is his spirit that is praying and not the Holy Spirit's as verse 15 testify. To give the bottomline about what tongues were for because he knew believers were going to misunderstood him, he explained it plainly in verses 20-21 so they can disern God's gift of tongues from the supernatural tongues that other spirits bring that is not of other men's lips but vain & profane babblings ( Isaiah 8:19 & 2 Timothy 2:16,24-26 ) so they can interfere with our personal prayer time thru the Bridegroom to the Father ( John 14:6 ) That verse really means what He said.
God wants us to pray and know what we had prayed for so we can give the Father thanks in Jesus's name for answered prayers. The devil would like to cut into that with vanity of supernatural babbling nonsense.
Those seduced into thinking uninterpreted tongues means it is the Spirit praying in an unknown language have no Biblical basis for thinking so except by all errant modern translations of Romans 8:26-27. It goes against other truths in scripture, but only Jesus can give the wisdom to see why "itself" was used in Romans 8:26 & not "Himself" because the Holy Spirit cannot make His own intercessions known Himself because the Son has to know the mind of the Spirit as there is only One Mediator between God and men.
The NKJV comes close but used "Himself" instead of "itself" and thus changed the message in verse 26 for us to discern good and evil in these latter days by implying that the Holy Spirit can make His own intercessions known by Himself which He cannot.
In any event, I leave you to God to see this truth by the Son or not as to why the KJV is to be solely relied upon for discernment of what is good and evil in these latter days.
And in doing so, you would be giving poor advice. A Bible in Lithuanian should be translated into Lithuanian from the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Hebrew autographs, not translated from the King James translation into Lithuanian. The KJV is not an inspired translation. No translation is inspired, only the original language manuscripts are inspired.
Only Jesus can show you that the KJV is an inspired translation.
Quote:
Why weren't the Geneva, Bishop's or Tyndale Bibles not good enough English translations? Why is the KJV the only "acceptable" English translation?
Well the Bible in majority use before the KJV was the 1599 Geneva Bible, and it was the errant marginal notes in that Bible that was running against what the scripture says; like Jesus being Michael the arch angel and that it was okay to rebel against those in authority.
Quote:
You realize that Erasmus' Textus Receptus had whole sections that he re-created from very iffy manuscripts and in some cases, no original manuscripts at all, right?
If you are referring to the disputable 1 John 5:7 ...if you read verse 9 in with verse 6 & 8, if verse 7 was removed; where is the testimony from heaven that was greater than the testimony of men?
But if that is not enough, then see this indepth report where eventually, it lists extracurricular resources that proved that 1 John 5:7 was referenced as is...
Just a few reference quoted below; more at the link above;
Quote:
415 AD Council of Carthage appealed to 1 John 5:7 when debating the Arian belief (Arians didn't believe in the deity of Jesus Christ)
450-530 AD Several orthodox African writers quoted the verse when defending the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals. These writers are:
A) Vigilius Tapensis in "Three Witnesses in Heaven"
B) Victor Vitensis in his Historia persecutionis [Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Academia Litterarum Vindobonensis, vol. vii, p. 60.]
C) Fulgentius in "The Three Heavenly Witnesses" [Patrilogiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina by Migne, vol. 65, col. 500.]
People can look for reasons not to believe, or they can trust Jesus to help them find the truth and see why the KJV is the one to rely on while leaning on the Good Shepherd to understand His words as well as use the meat of His words for discerning good and evil in these latter days since keeping the faith is the good fight which can only be done by His grace and by His help.
Again, trusting Jesus as your Good Shepherd to prove to you why the KJV is the Bible to rely on for the actual meaning of His words is the only way anyone can see the truth of this matter.
Only Jesus can show you that the KJV is an inspired translation.
Well the Bible in majority use before the KJV was the 1599 Geneva Bible, and it was the errant marginal notes in that Bible that was running against what the scripture says; like Jesus being Michael the arch angel and that it was okay to rebel against those in authority.
If you are referring to the disputable 1 John 5:7 ...if you read verse 9 in with verse 6 & 8, if verse 7 was removed; where is the testimony from heaven that was greater than the testimony of men?
But if that is not enough, then see this indepth report where eventually, it lists extracurricular resources that proved that 1 John 5:7 was referenced as is...
Just a few reference quoted below; more at the link above;
People can look for reasons not to believe, or they can trust Jesus to help them find the truth and see why the KJV is the one to rely on while leaning on the Good Shepherd to understand His words as well as use the meat of His words for discerning good and evil in these latter days since keeping the faith is the good fight which can only be done by His grace and by His help.
Again, trusting Jesus as your Good Shepherd to prove to you why the KJV is the Bible to rely on for the actual meaning of His words is the only way anyone can see the truth of this matter.
OK. So if I'm not using the KJV, I either don't know Jesus or I'm not listening to Him. I've seen this assertion before, from other KJV-onlys and it always seems a little weak to me. Just can't find Jesus without the KJV. Even though people do it every day.
Can people find Jesus through the original language texts?
Could they find Him with the Geneva Bible?
What's wrong with the Tyndale Bible? Tyndale got burned at the stake for his efforts to give people the Bible in English. Guess it wasn't inspired though so maybe he shouldn't have placed himself out on that limb.
What you are saying is that Jesus, through the Holy Spirit, is not able to speak to anyone except through a King James Bible. Your position says, quite clearly, that anyone who claims to be a Christian, but uses a Bible other than the KJV is not actually saved. That God's Word in any other form besides the KJV is dead and unusable. Wow. I guess the position is good for you though, since you are in the "right" club. It leaves absolutely every one else out though, including anyone in the early church up until the KJV came out in 1611 who only had Hebrew and Greek texts of the OT and later on, the canonized NT in Greek.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
