Hello! I’m excited about joining this group. I’m KJV Preferred, as it’s what I grew up with, what I have always memorized from, and what I truly believe is the preserved Word of God.
Join, Biblical Discussion! And if you want to read about what has been happening in Bible Memory, go to the group called,”Bible Memory Newspaper” and read from the bottom!😁 Thank you all! God bless!
Psalms 91: 9-10 [KJV] Because thou hast made the LORD, which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation; There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling.
Absolutely. Very good points. I feel like the key ingredients for learning the Bible, even the question of which Bible to use, comes down to a humble heart and a believing mind. God will use that. I need to get back to praying for insight before I read…
The Bible is an amazing book. I was blessed to be able to grow up in a home where we read the Bible together as a family several times a week. KJV. It helped me learn to read, and as a 6 year old I could understand enough to ask questions. Knowledge grew. Line upon line, precept upon precept. The “thees” and “thous” were not a problem. And having read the same book for so many years, it’s still rich and God speaks to me from it when I have need. It’s simple enough for a child to understand, rich enough for people to study for years. And if we just take it for what it says instead of trying to say “A better translation is”… my opinion… we can learn the truth about what God has for us, the truth that builds homes, churches, societies, countries. If only we would get back to it as a people, if only we would do as 2 Chronicles 7:14 says - humble ourselves and pray, seek God’s face, and turn from our wicked ways, which we will discover by reading God’s holy Word, God would still, once again, heal our land. Our families, societies, country.
This is not to say that God doesn’t or can’t use other versions. Of course He does. He’s a God of mercy. And truth is truth no matter who says it. But things that are different are not the same. When someone quotes me, I would like to be quoted correctly. And if God can create this whole big, amazing universe, why can’t he preserve His Word accurately?
Cool, Haven! I don’t want to be contentious, or argumentative, just want folks to know that you don’t need a huge Greek/Hebrew education ($$$) to understand and have God’s perfect word. When I came to this realization, I was floored. In a good way. It was a lot of joy mixed with relief. The more digging you do, the better it gets and the more it all comes together. Unless you’re “digging in the wrong place.” (Raiders of the Lost Ark -circa 1989)
I agree with you, Anonymous. I believe that a God who says He is loving is going to be honest and trustworthy. If He’s fickle, neglectful of humanity to the point of letting His Word go so that mere humanity has to try to figure out what God meant, that is not something a loving parent would do, it’s unkind, irresponsible, puts us in a position to doubt Him and His Word, and leads to a whole lot of unnecessary squabbling between the siblings. That doesn’t sound like the God of the Bible, and the God I serve is big enough and loving enough to give us a book we can trust. The enemy, on the other hand, has been saying “Yea, hath God said…” from the very beginning. Why do we as Christians continue to play into his hands on this? I love having a Bible I can trust, and where I can look at each individual word, know that it’s supposed to be in there, and then study the words, phrases, sentences, as God wanted them written, and glean the riches that God has for me in there without having to try to find or insert my opinions into it. I’m not God. I’m not smart enough to be God. No one else is either.
oh man is this a kjv only group???
While I agree that languages are different and impossible to transliterate perfectly from one language to another with perfect efficacy, don’t we have the God of the impossible? Didn’t He invent language? Do you think she speaks them all? Of course. But He is always left out of the equation with people who think there are multiple versions of God’s perfect word. Psalm 12:6-7 says He will PRESERVE His words from this generation forever. If that is true, where is His preserved, perfect word? He said He’d preserve it, where is it? It can’t be all of them, or even two at the same time! There’s too many differences between them. Ironically, the verses (Psalm 12:6-7) used to prove God didn’t “lose” His perfect word, are changed in the new versions. Another question: Why would a loving God let His perfect word (by perfect I mean without error) die out with the very people who wrote it, and thus needed it the least? So if there is a perfect Bible out there, which one is it? I think we all know the answer… or at least we should.
Okay, now there has been time enough for discussion so I'll go ahead with Zachiah's second proof. I think that this one is the easiest to refute because I totally agree with the statements, I just don't think they support the conclusion. Certainly radically different versions cannot be correct. God cannot lie, and he doesn't contradict himself. But that doesn't mean that there is only one version that is accurate. In school, I am learning Latin and when I translate things into English I realize that each Latin word can have many different senses in English. The grammar, too, means the sentences can be laid out in different orders and forms. Then, if you take into account the in terms of ancient words, and the changing of English over the time in which the different versions are translated, it's clear there is room for many translations.
We can talk about that before moving on to your second proof. Thank you to anyone who takes the time to read all this!
Yes, God is powerful enough to do anything, but that doesn't mean that he did it. All Scripture is God breathed, and men spoke from God when they wrote the Bible. We know that because it tells us so. But the Bible doesn't say that men translated from God. On the other hand, we do know that some versions were created in a trustworthy manner and that some translators were dedicated Christians with the Holy Spirit in them. While that doesn't mean that they won't make any mistakes, it gives us a good reason to trust them. The fact that the translations are always open to peer review and debate from educated scholars makes them even more trustworthy.
I am going to now argue that God can preserve his word without there being a perfect translation now. I won't even go into the imperfections of the KJV, though there are many. God has preserved his holy word in manuscripts. That does not mean there is a perfect translation in English. In fact, it is obvious that at some point there was not an accurate translation in this language, for example, before the language existed. But we don't have to rely on blind faith when we read the Bible in English. Versions can be and are vetted, compared, and if necessary, rejected. There are many resources for studying the original and seeing the many reasonable translations.
Zambian Sawyer, I would like to discuss your proofs, one at a time. First, the first proof. I think you are arguing that since God promised to preserve his word, there is now a perfect English translation. Another reason why you think that is because God is powerful enough to use imperfect men to create a perfect translation.
please join my group memorize Gods word. Thank you
Just to add a post on KJV. Before reading "God's word", the very first thing is to examine the matter thoroughly which is God's word. To summarize in a nutshell, all versions (many verses here and there) contradict each other. One saying, "is" another "is not". And some even taking different thing! I used to use NIV when I was still not aware of this problem. Then accidentally bumped on the bible version issue. Examined the issue thoroughly, and now use KJV exclusively, a version that I NEVER care to use before. Now settled, I do not ever go to this bible issue ever.
Thanks for reading! Sorry about the bad formatting and multiple posts, scripture typed makes it difficult to have good formatting. If you have any questions about what I said, please ask me 🤔
#4 Loss of power (modern versions are weak!)
1 timothy 3:16
KJV
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
NIV
Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great: He appeared in the flesh, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.
Notice that the NIV removes the word God. In my King James that is a super clear proof that Jesus is God, not in the NIV.
1 Corinthians 1:18
KJV
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
NIV
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
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.
I don't know about you, but I'm not being saved, I've done been saved. Salvation isn't a process.
#3 stupid things in modern translations (could fill books)
Luke 2:33
KJV
And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
NIV
The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him.
ESV
And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him.
NASB (Revised Edition)
The child’s father and mother were amazed at what was said about him;
The Bible teaches the Joseph was not Jesus's father, yet all these modern versions say he was
#2 There is only one right translation
God only said one thing. So if there are hundreds of verses in hundreds of translations that all same radically different things, then only one is right.
If you don't believe that we have God's perfect word, then what in the world are you doing? how do you know anything in the Bible is true? by faith. How do I know the whole Bible is true? by faith.
Hebrews 11:1 (KJV) Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
If you do believe that there always has been a perfect word of God, then the modern versions can't be true as their manuscripts were dug up.
#1 God's word is preserved
Psalms 12:6-7 (KJV) The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
I don't know about you, but I believe that somewhere there is a perfect translation of God's word. If God is powerful enough to create the world with spoken words, and is powerful enough to use imperfect men to create a perfect word of God in the original manuscripts, then is not God powerful enough to preserve his word for us to this very day in English?
2 Peter 1:21 (KJV) For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
don't know about you, but I don't believe God would let his word get buried when he promised he would preserve it.
Hi this group was clearly made by a KJV onlyist, and as KJV onlyist is being rolled in the mud like it isn't even a valid viewpoint in these chats and because I am a firm believer that the KJV is God's only perfect word in English, let me present a few arguments.
And no, not everyone in here is KJV only.
Welcome JesuSaves I have the pro version, it's OK but over orived in my opinion. I got it to be able to learn more verses as I think the free version only allowed 50.
Does anyone here have the Pro version? if so is it worthwhile getting?
is everyone on this wall in the KJ only group?
No, I do not believe that
Is there anyone in this group who believes the KJV is the only Bible that anyone should use? In other words, that it is the only translation from God?
Hi, Faith, one of my favorite colors is blue. Why do you ask?
Joanna what is your favorite color 🤔
hi please join my group called God is good 🙂
I would like to learn more, @Bro. Joe. However, for privacy's sake, I am not willing to share my email address. Can I learn more on this message wall? For example, I would like to know what you mean by "hold true" to the KJV. We can recognize it as a good translation without condemning all others.
Hello Tiffany,
I am Joe and i am new to this group. i have never been apart of any groups in the past so it is all new to me as well... i just by chance decided to down this app out of curiosity.. I encourage you to hold true to the KJV, I know there were versions of the Bible before and after the KJV version.. but i still believe that The King James Version was the monumental work in common language known as the Authorized King James Version of 1611. This version is the work of forty seven scholars appointed by King James 1 of England and it has continued to hold first place in popularity throughout the English speaking world for over three hundred years. It is a masterpiece of fidelity to the original Greek and Hebrew texts and is considered a literary work without equal or parallel in the English language.. if you would like to learn more i would be happy to email you more info on this subject, Thank you and may God bless... Greetings to all in this group in the name of out Lord Jesus Christ
Teresa, Good job explaining and backing up statements with reasons. It is very true that ANY translation is prone to some human error. That is why it is important to be open to multiple translations. God preserves his word. 📖
please join my group called God is good 🙁
And the KJV was just what man THINKS the Bible says... That's with ANY translation no matter how old it is. The words have changed in the new translations because the English language has changed. The newer translations have been translated from older manuscripts so I find them way more reliable. And there are always footnotes with any translation that might be debatable on why they made that decision. I find that it's best to compare multiple translations. And get an interlinear. It has the greek/Hebrew text with the literal English of the word underneath it. That's the closest you can get to the originals without knowing Hebrew and Greek. If you like the KJV, that's fine. But don't tell everyone that other translations are tools of Satan without having significant evidence that they are.
So what it says in Revelation about adding to or taking away has not been violated by the New translations. someone added short things to the manuscripts in Hebrew and Greek. Normally these things that were added were probably scribal notes on the margins that accidentally added into the text by a scribal error.
And also about taking away and adding to the scriptures... I assume you are referring to places that the KJV has a few extra words in it or an extra verse, but ESV, NASB, CSB, NIV, etc, dont. There is a reason for that. Since the KJV was translated we have found more manuscripts in the original Hebrew and Greek that are way way older, so closer to the original, than the ones the KJV was translated from. So when we found the better manuscripts we noticed that a few small parts were not in it. And we found that in a lot of older manuscripts. So what happened with those parts is that they were not original, so the newer translations took them out and put them in the footnote with a note that says just that, they were not in early manuscripts.
Actually you know Tiffany that there were English translations before the KJV. John Wycliffe translated the Bible before the KJV. So by your logic, that Bible should be the correct one.
@Tiffany: I agree that any translation of the Bible with any part that is added or changed is not a good translation. But does the age of the KJV Bible ensure that it is more accurate? In other words, is it possible that there is a more recent translation that is more accurate?
hi, please join my new group called help in difficult times
Kylo ... I’m new to this app and not sure if I’m using it right, not sure if it’s ok to respond to old posts.... but anyway, I seen your question about the KJV... here’s what told me the KJV is the 1 and only. 1st off we can not get the 1st original bible and if we could we wouldn’t be able to understand it. The original English bible, the Bible the US was built on, the oldest English bible we have access to, is the KJV. The 3rd to last verse in the Bible says “And if any man take away from the words of the book of this prophecy God shall take away his part out of the book of life and out of the holy city and from the things which are written in this book” The Bible’s written AFTER the KJV, are all just translations of what man THINKS the Bible says. There are words taken out, words added, words changed to mean a total different thing than what it originally meant in the KJV. I would love a bible older than the KJ. however I can’t get one. Therefore God knows my heart, he knows I want the truth and he shows me the truth. Reading newer bibles, revised versions, they just aren’t right. They are a trick of satan.. Hope this was helpful and I hope you see this..
Umm... Administrator, why do all the verse references seem to say that they are way more verses than they actually are? Benaiah, you seem to have memorized lots of these without fixing them. Can anyone explain the reason?
You are welcome! It is amazing how many people think that the KJV is the original.
Thanks for clearing that up.
🙂
Well, the exact parchments that the first scribes and prophets wrote on, which were not in English, are not around today. But we have very old, meticulous copies, like the dead sea scrolls, also not in English. The originals were not in English. All English versions are translations from Hebrew or Aramaic. The KJV was commissioned by a King named James, and was one of the first common English translations. That's why it sounds so old.
Hi Joanna, what do you mean? There are no originals left?
Did you know that all English versions of the Bible, including the KJV, we're translated by people from the originals?
No-one she advertise their group on others groups. There is a thing called inviting people if you want them to come...!
Uh, yeah. Agreed @Sethers.
Hey Marilyn! did you know that you are not allowed to advertise your group on other groups? you were getting people in trouble for that and yet you are doing it?
There are other translations easier to understand than just the KJV. Prove to me that this translation is the only true one.
Psalm 38:7 For my loins are filled with a loathsome disease: and there is no soundness in my flesh.
Hey everybody, we are starting a new game on FINAL EVENTS SDA. It is called WARRIOR WORDS. It is similar to BIBLE TAG, but without the tagging. Come join us when you get the chance. Bye for now! 👋😄
I am memorizing the whole new testament and I memorize a chapter at a time, so I have a binder with the text printed out with no verse numbers and I read it out loud about 10 times in a row a day, and then I come on this app to learn the individual verses and get them word perfect. Sadly my account had problems a few months ago so I had to create a new one and lost my verses, but I'm trying to relearn the 4 books I know.
I've fallen into the trap of only being able to remember them if I am typing them out lol. I need to practise reciting them out loud to. Anyone else have the same problem?
Just don't get so used to reviewing your verses that you forget the meaning behind them. I've done that.
I really like this app! I been trying to memorize verses from the Bible and I just couldn’t do it, until I found this app.
Well said. I like the anology of the ladder. I might use that one day lol
Yeah, me too, it's my hearts desire to understand Jesus and His Word. No, you didn't seem at all prideful.
Thank you, I love to learn more and more of the bible i still feel as though I have so much more to learn as we all do. I definitely don't think you are prideful, the fact you are willing to learn and hear my points is proof of that. I hope that I don't come off as arrogant or prideful too.
You seem to know the Bible a lot more than me. I very much respect the time you've put in to learn this stuff. I've definitely taken your differences viewpoints into account, and I hope that I'm not blinded by my pride.
Haha. Yes, I quite often have that with a friend also
lol, this majorly reminds me of one of my discussions with my little bro. We so often get into a debates that can last hours, to only find out we were basically saying the same thing from the start. 😂
Because if you really believe in Jesus, you're going to want to love Him with all your being, and your going to slowly (usually, not always), but surely, become righteous.
All I'm saying is, if you are continously sinning and not trying to sin less, then you need to rethink whether you're truly believing in Jesus.
Yes, I couldn't agree more.
The Gospel is not a call to repentance, or to amendment of our ways, to make restitution for past sins, or to promise to do better in the future. These things are proper in there place, but they do not constitute the Gospel; for the Gospel is not good advice to be obeyed, it is good news to be believed. Do not make the mistake then of thinking that the Gospel is a call to duty or a call to reformation, a call to better your condition, to behave yourself in a more perfect way than you have been doing in the past …
Nor is the Gospel a demand that you give up the world, that you give up your sins, that you break off bad habits, and try to cultivate good ones. You may do all these things, and yet never believe the Gospel and consequently never be saved at all.”
"When anyone comes promising salvation to those ‘who make full surrender' of all that they have to God, and who 'pay the price of full salvation' he is preaching another gospel, for the price was paid on Calvary's cross and the work that saves is finished. It was Christ Jesus who made the full surrender when He yielded His life on Calvary that saves us, not our surrender in any way to Him.
It would matter because I don't want you boasting like those Jesus prophesied of in Matthew 7:22-24 KJV
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Notice how they boasted before God of their works, which cancelled out Gods grace. They hadn't fully trusted Jesus.
And if I did believe that works got me to Heaven, and I began to boast, why would it matter? According to what you believe, it doesn't really matter.
Sorry, what I said previously isn't what I meant; I meant that if they weren't aining to get better they wouldn't be saved. Sorry about that. And I believe that faith and works go hand in hand! How could you be faithful and worshipping of Jesus and not do anything? It doesn't make any sense!
Romans 4:1-9 KJV
What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? [2] For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. [3] For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. [4] Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. [5] But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. [6] Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, [7] Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. [8] Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. [9] Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned f to Abraham for righteousness.
The Book of James was written to eternally secure believers to spur them to an active faith.“Saved” in the context of this passage does not refer to whether or not one has eternal life, but is speaking to deliverance of oneself, or others, from trial and perils of life.“Justified” in the context of this passage does not refer to eternal justification before God, but to justification before men.
We are not talking about aiming to be righteous. I agree that we should, the bible says we should. But it's by faith not the aiming. Previously you've stated that a drug addict if thry died in their sin they would not be saved
Faith without works is dead. Which I take to mean, your faith isn't real unless you actually change.
You believe you must have faith and works.
What I'm saying is, if you're to truly believe in Jesus, won't you aim to be righteous? I mean, who wouldn't? it doesn't even make sense otherwise.
Again, I do not think we are saved through works!
They are to seperate things. I believe the sun will come up tomorrow, does that require works? Works are a good thing and we should do works. But never for salvation.
Ephesians 2:8-9 for by grace are ye saved through faith NOT OF Works lest any man should boast. Romans 11:6 and if by grace then it is no more of Works other grace is no more grace. But if it is of works then it is no more grace, otherwise work is no more work. You cannot mix the two the bible is clear, will you boast before God likes those in Matthew 7 and cancel out Gods grace?
How can faith be real, unless works are present?
So faith plus works to be saved?
And yes, I believe in faith plus works; but I don't think we'll inherit eternal life because we were 'good'.
No need to be sorry, it's not your fault, lol. No, I can't explain that, sorry. I'd have to spend more time a prayer on it before I came to a conclusion. But if I were to make a guess, I'd say that this guy truly follows Jesus, and that his flesh will be destroyed and he'll inherit eternal life. IDK, seems very deep. We're also missing information since Paul's talking about an actually person, but we have no clue who that person was.
I dont know your father so I can't comment, and I'm sorry I know how it is to have a bad father.
Can you explain what Paul meant by "destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."
1 Corinthians 5:1-5. And dou believe in faith plus works?
if the person is continuously trying to sin no more, then that's another case.
and he doesn't try whatsoever anymore, but he still does believe Jesus died for him.
if they die in that manner, yes, I believe they aren't saved. My dad is actually one of those people, he definitely believes in Jesus, but he sadly continues being the prideful narcissist monster that he is. There is no way he's going to Heaven if he continues living like that. And even if you say one word to him that he's in danger, he gets angry. And to believe that you still go to Heaven if you are still living a fleshful life is very dangerous.
I just saw your previous message, yes they would if they genuinely believed. But as my last message states it would not be enjoyable for them. I've met many Christians who believed the gospel that got saved while addicted to drugs and have battled hard to get clean. They have lived miserable and felt guilt for abusing Gods grace. Are they not saved?
Yeah, but by what you've been saying, it seems it doesn't really matter, all you got to do is believe.
Also let me make it clear, a Christian should absolutely try not to sin and live a Godly life out of love, respect and thankfulness to God. And if they do go on sinning there are many warnings of God disciplining his children. Proverbs 3:12 Hebrews 12:6 God may even end their life early as with the man fornicating with his step mother. 1 Corinthians 5:5To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Willingly sinning, not caring.
I still would have to receive the car! And to receive the gift of eternal life, one must FOLLOW Jesus, massive emphasis on follow. Not fake following. Quick question: would someone who believed in Jesus, believed He died for them, but they kept sinning, would that person go to Heaven?
I'm not saying you haven't believed in Jesus for the forgiveness of your sins, but don't you think you must be trusting at least some what in yourself to keep his commandments? Jesus said it was finished, he paid the price. The bible says its a gift received by believing. Grace through faith not of works.
If I offered you my car and said it's yours for free all you gotta do is make sure you drive it right and obey the road rules, service it monthly and clean it weekly, would you consider that free?
Yes, I wasn't sure, the english language is confusing, so many people's definition of believe is different. But I definitely know their are Satanists that believe Jesus died for them, but they're like Satan, they're too prideful to follow Him. And look into the Greek word σωζω (saved); the way it's used is in saved from the penalty of sin, and that's what I believe.
Believe/trust. A Satanist does not trust Jesus, they may just believe he existed or but they have not believed the he died for them. Enduring to the end is speaking of physical salvation during the tribulation. If we can endure until the end our physical body will be saved.
I definitely do not believe that I have any power to do get myself to Heaven. But Gow will give me the gift of eternal life if I accept Him as my Father, and obey Him.
what's your definition of believe? I definitely do not believe satanists will go to Heaven, because they do believe in Jesus. I'm 100% trusting in Jesus for sure! But he says that the one who endures to the end will be saved, and I take that to mean we have to follow His commandments until our death.
Yes acts 16:31 believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved and thy house. The gospel of John, the only book of the bible which states it was written that someone might believe Jesus says to believe over 100 times and never lists turning from sin as a condition of receiving or maintaining the gift of eternal life. How about you, are you trusting 100% in Jesus alone or are you also trusting in your own ability to live to a certain degree of righteousness?
Well, repent means a complete change of mind; so if you were to repent from you fleshful ways, you wouldn't be doing those fleshful things anymore, otherwise it's not actually repentance. So you believe that you just need to believe in Jesus and you're saved?
I'd agree, a change of mind. People seem to have changed the meaning of the word to turn from sin. Turning from sin is not a part of the gospel, if it were none of us would be saved. We should all strive to turn from sin once we are saved. The only thing we need repent of when it comes to salvation is our unbelief or anything else we may have been trusting in to be saved.
Obviously we need to recognise our sin and need for a savior to. I think it can be dangerous to say one need to turn from sin as it hinders many unbelievers to being saved as that is not the gospel/good news.
it's a weaker form of the meaning of repent I'm taking about.
How would you explain repent in this verse? Exodus 13:17 And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt:
Truly turning away from your sin, not pretend turning away; that's the gist of what I believe, but it definitely get more complex. If I were to repent, I would be trying my hardest to follow Jesus and His commandments. Sadly, lots of people aren't truly doing that.
Oh ok. What is your definition of repentance?
I'm not saying it can be lost necessarily, I'm not sure if the person ever actually had it. If you haven't truly repented, that's how disobediant you have to be.
Every Christian is disobedient in one way or another. Obviously some worse than others. How disobedient do you think you'd have to be? I actually thought salvation could be lost not all that long ago.
I think that if you turn away from the path and die disobedient to God, you will go to hell; if that person ever truly believed or was saved is beyond me, but I'd think not.
so you believe once saved always saved?
Hi all, what are your thoughts on whether or not salvation can be lost? I personally believe that it can't be lost or given back. If one is believing it can be lost then we must maintain it by works and eternal life ceases to be a gift.
Yeah, we were definitely not fighting. We are just discussing our viewpoints in a civilised manner. And I personally think we need more of it nowadays.
Having a discussion, while disagreeing is not fighting.
It is called a debate. And it isn't fighting.
Can y’all like stop fighting (or whatever u want to call it) please
I don't necessarily either. I just think it is smart to state that it's not proven to be a part of the original.
Well... I think that passage isn't heretical, but it wasn't part of the original
it only makes sense to do what ESV did for example.
I actually think its ridiculous that the modern versions have cast doubt on it.
It's not that it's hard to understand, it's that it's questionable whether it was actually written by Mark.
If a bible passage is hard to understand that does not make it sketchy. We just need to study it which is a good thing.
Nothing in the bible is sketchy.
it definitely is sketchy though.
I agree that verse is not heresy
God bless, no need for apologies.
I will still come on here to debate..but, I am going to have to leave.
Sorry folks, my mom saw scripture -typer and said I had to leave some of my groups 😒
I assume you are talking about verse 9, which some falsely try to claim it teaches baptism as a requirement for forgiveness. "Mk 16:9 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." I see no heresy though as the second part of the verse only mentions he that believeth not is condemned, which we know is scriptual that anyone who does not believe is not saved and the wrath of God remains on them. John 3:18,36 5:25.
It is not a false teaching to say he that believes and is baptised is saved if the verse said "only those that believe and are baptised" then that would be heresy and I would reject the KJV
Of course you maybe pointing out another potential error so I apologise if that wasn't what you were referring to.
I'm definitely not arguing for the sake of winning. Of course a part of me is, but I try my hardest to let my pride go. I truly want to know the truth, and everyone else.
it's not that we don't want to learn about the Bible, it's that we don't want to be deceived!
Like for the modern versions, some of damn able heresy, entire passages removed etc.
Just from quick research I can find some very sketchy translations in the KJV.
That the modern versions removed it. I already told you I will not go on explaining every so called error. Even if I did you would still reject it unless you were actually wanting to learn rather than prove the bible wrong. If you genuinely want to know about the ending of Mark then research it from an advocate of the KJV who will give you a much better answer than I ever could through this program.
Biblically no proof. And I didn't say he inspired it. The oringal manuscript which we don't have were. I believe it is a perfect translation because I see any proof of error. Only accusations and complaints of its archaic.
Man didn't even have access to the bible without persecution until the KJV. I don't know of anyone who hates how the KJV is written either other than non believers. I'm not quite sure how the KJV isn't simple enough to understand the gospel.
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; [2] By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. [3] For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; [4] And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
I'm not saying we cant understand the KJV, I'm saying it's harder to make sense out of. I just think that God would be kind enough to let us have good translations for the exact current language we speak, and I believe he has. And there are millions of people that hate the way the KJV is written, I wouldn't suggest spreading the Gospel only using KJV. People need to hear the Gospel in it's beautiful simplicity!
Sorry for my bad typos, it's difficult to review what I write and correct it. I'm sure you can make sense of it though lol.
Any unbeliever can have a hard time understanding any bible, I fact the can't understand it without the Holy Spirit. I've never had an issue sharing the gospel and someone say I don't like the way that's written. Of they are convicted of their sin and realise their need for a savior they will be hanging on to ever word and not rejecting it because the Holy Spirit is bearing witness with their spirit the truth and life in the bible.
The kjv is in modern English, we now speak late mordern English. Anyone who can speak English well enough can understand the kjv, it might just take some getting used to, which is a good thing, spending time in Gods Word.
The english used in the 1600s is so far from the english we use now? Why would God make the KJV version perfect and never let it be updated perfectly? Makes no sense. We don't speak that kind of english anymore!
Why could other English bibles not be perfect, they could but they aren't as they are filled with mistakes and contradictions. At the same time though, I wouldn't have an issue if people believed the NIV or esv or any other version were the perfect word of God in English, but the fact is no one does because they know its not.
Why do I think God wait to 1611 to use the kjv? This is just my opinion as I can't know why he did but I'd say, he waited until man had the technology for mass printing, the English language had become developed to a modern and dominate language, the king of England authorised it for every one to be able to own and read.
There were earlier english translations, why aren't those perfect?
The moment we put our faith in Jesus we are justified, declared righteous and forgiven from our sin before God. Romans 4:5 but to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifeth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness. Galatians 2:16 knowing that a man is not justified o by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the p faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.
Matthew 21:22 KJV
We can understand God's Word in it's perfection! Praise Jesus for prayer and it's effectiveness!
If* on* Sorry, I send before looking it over. lol
No, we've got Jesus to talk to. I all we had was the Bible, and we didnt have any connection to our Lord, then yes, but thankfully Jesus let's us have conversation with Him! Through Him comes the truth, I'm going to hang in to Jesus Himself rather than His translated Word.
If the bible is preserved with human error then we can't be 100 percent in what is error and what is not, we are left with doubt. Just how Eve doubted what God had really said.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying. lol.
Reminds me of the devils first lie to mankind, yea hath God said...
Those verses aren't very compelling either. Ironically, I think Psalms 12:6-7 might've been translated incorrectly; but I haven't looked into it much. And the other two are very vague as to what they mean exactly.
I never said humans couldn't translate correctly; I don't think they can perfectly. And depending on how you define preserve, it can still be preserved with some human error.
Matthew 24:35, psalm 12:6-7 kjv, 1 Peter 1:23
But if the Septuagint is a translation of the Hebrew it's not preserved because man cannot translate correctly, therefore God has not preserved his word.
Also, what verse are you referring to when you say God promised to preserve His Word?
Because we're flawed. and yes, God has preserved His Word, just because I don't think there is a perfect translation doesn't mean I don't think we don't have the Word of God.
Why not? God used man to write the bible. By this logic we do not have the word of God anymore only parts of it. God promised to preserve his word, I believe he has.
men cannot be trusted to translate to 100% perfection.
Loved by Jesus I am sure if you did an honest search of Google you could find the answers to these so called flaws. Also the revisions were just to correct printing and grammar errors, the 1612 had many. So if the modern versions such as the esv, use the Septuagint which is a translation from the Hebrew because you reject the masoretic text as being preserved then there is no perfect word of God as men cannot be trusted to translate?
Why do you all think that God wouldn't have allowed men to make a perfect translation. Do you believe the Septuagint to be a perfect translation from the Hebrew?
Sorry, I did not mean to put words in your mouth.
The dead sea scrolls are not the most trust worthy scrolls. Off the top off my head I can't remember everything about them. But what I do remember is the people there were known to be the most hard core strict cult sect of Pharisees with crazy beliefs. There was heaps of tampering with the manuscripts found and they also had a bunch of other occultic writings. I think the only reputable scroll found may have been Isaiah
Some are found in the KJV, but definitely not all. And please don't put words in my mouth, I never said the only way to understand the Bible is through prayer, and I also never said the Bible states that; what I'm saying is, to best understand God's Word is to talk to Him yourself and meditate on it, and the Bible definitely does back that up. And we can come to understand Greek and Hebrew a lot more than we did 400 years ago; we've just got so much more data and more points of view. They never had the Dead Sea scrolls, we do; this kind of stuff is a massive help to getting correct translations.
Even the thee's and thous and ye's are in there for a reason. They are more specific then just the word you.
@loved by Jesus, I'm not sure why you think they couldn't speak Greek or Hebrew just as good as they can now. The men that translated the kjv spoke it fluently and would only speak the language they were translating at the time for every day use not just during the time spent translating.
Those words that you say the English language doesn't have most people call them archaic and they are found in the KJV. No where does the bible say we can only know his word by lots of prayer either.
how could any english translation be perfect* Sorry, a bit sloppy.
Yes, Ava makes a great point. I mean, how could any english translation when we've got such a vague language at times. E.g. in english there is only one word for love, while in Koine Greek there are multiple that mean completely different things. And the English translations, for the most part, translate them to just love. No translation is perfect, God's word is perfect, but humans have messed with it; as soon as fleshful human's hands edit anything, that thing is no longer perfect. The way to truly understand God's word in it's perfection, is prayer, lots of prayer.
No, no english translation is perfect.
Yes I do. God promised to preserve his word and I believe he has. If I didn't think it were perfect how could I trust it. I would be forced to learn Hebrew and Greek. Do you believe that any English bible is perfect?
I agree with her dad... Yes, people do disagree...
@loved by Jesus, with all due respect to your father I disagree. We shouldn't just believe someone because of a title they hold. I'm sure there are theologians that disagree with your father also. And no I'm not independent fundamental baptist, although I do agree with a lot of what they believe.
@midgi no, there are subtle changes. For example the nkjv in Matthew 7:14 says the way to eternal life is difficult. The kjv says its narrow. Those are two different things, it's not difficult to receive eternal life, it's easy just believe. It is narrow though because Jesus is the only way. Perhaps you might think I'm being over the top, but the devil is very subtle and has been corrupting Gods word since the garden of Eden. Also the nkjv is not TR only.
@Aaron, so do you not trust the NKJV?
We had some of that debate on here..
@midgi, I have somewhat compared them to the Greek and Hebrew but not speaking the languages myself I can't really expect I'd translate them any better than the people who can fluently speak the languages. Then there is the whole manuscript debate too. Either way I still trust the KJV from my own research.
@Aaron, try comparing different translations to the original Greek/Hebrew texts. Then you will see if they're trustworthy or not.
Some versions are junk. But I think some other versions are o.k. I use kjv frequently, I like it. But other versions are good as well. 😉
I only use the King James. This app isn't the best place to explain why as it's hard to use. If you genuinely want to know why then youtube search "king james bible vs modern bible versions"
It has a picture of 2 glasses of water one clear one muddy and goes for about 2 hours .Personally I do not trust modern versions and I once thought the kjv was an outdated translation.
I'm trying to learn Greek now and Hebrew in a few years. lol. 😀
Yeah lol... I am trying to learn Hebrew now and Greek in a few years...
I don't think many of us actually believe KJV is the only valid translation. I personally joined to see if anyone did, but couldn't find anyone. I think that it's really stupid to say that KJV is the only valid one, no disrespect, but if you translate from original Koine Greek amd Hebrew, you can clearly see that most of the commonly used translations are really good. if you want to be sure to get the exact meaning of the scriptures, learn to read Hebrew and Koine Greek. This is just my opinion, no hate to anyone.
Ava
Thursday, Mar 19, 2020 at 10:39 AM
remove
Read the previous posts... Half of us are not KJV only on here... I use ESV personally
hi, new here. I want to ask some respectful questions, I’m not trying to cause any such strife here. Why do you think that KJV is the only translation that should be read? I think KJV is a decent translation and in some ways more accurate than NIV, but I like memorizing in NIV so that I can share the word easier to unbelievers. I was told by one of my elders in my church that some translations are generally “Thought for thought” translations from Greek/Hebrew manuscripts (like NIV), and others (like KJV, ESV) are more “word for word”. I will tell you that I personally like studying with ESV, but I don’t just study with one translation, I usually compare and look at what each one has to say. I defiantly won’t disregard the fact that some “translations” are utter garbage though. Please! I want this as a discussion not a debate. Thanks!
@Everybody: As the Covid-19 virus continues to be found around the world, a couple good verses to remember this morning are Psalm 34:7 which says, "The angel of the LORD encampeth round about them that fear Him, and delivereth them." And Psalm 37:3, which says, "Trust in the LORD, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed." Have a good day! ☺
Matthew 10:16 in the KJV says, "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." We need to keep our eyes open to the wiles of the devil. See Ephesians 6:10-18. 😌
"Matthew 10:16 in the KJV says, "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." We need to keep our eyes open to the wiles of the devil. See Ephesians 6:10-18.
@Aaron: I've believed that (about the family of God being like a surname) for many years. It has helped me separate myself from the confusing beliefs about this subject that have come up over the years. Satan likes to have confusion going on for as long as he can, with people stressing over subjects like this, instead of learning the important things God wants them to focus on. Satan likes to keep us busy concentrating on everything but what God really wants us to be exploring. It's Satan's way of keeping us occupied so that we miss out on learning important truths that God wants us to learn.
I should have said 3 "separate" gods.
@Aaron: That was a good explanation of the trinity. I like to remember what Jesus said, that we should be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. He would not include the Holy Spirit if he was not included in this Divine family. We can't totally understand it, but this family of God consists of three entities, not three Gods. God is like a surname for one family.
How is everyone coping with this virus at the moment. People are acting crazy here in Australia. Everyone stocking up and the shops are empty
Yes I'm in agreement that God is a trinity.
I think I get what you are saying now.
So u r in agreement with me and Ava and lbj, etc?
If someone is believing in a Jesus that is not a member of the trinity Godhead in which the bible describes then its another Jesus.
Only the God of the bible can save you not a made up god.
I hope that makes more sense. It's hard to explain well on this little chat format.
If you believe in the Son, you would believe in the Father and vice versa. To say it's just Jesus you are denying the Father therefore you are denying Jesus too as he couldn't be the Son if there is no Father
1 John 2:23-25 KJV
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. [24] Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.
What are u trying to explain?
Plz explain a little better Aaron, u r confusing me.
Anyone who denies the trinity potentially has another Jesus and is not even saved.
right Ava, it says it, Over and over again
The Bible makes it clear about there being three members...
CC
Friday, Mar 6, 2020 at 9:21 PM
remove
No because what about baptizing in the name of Jesus? He's the One that walked this earth.
I mean predestined! Not presented...
To add to all these arguments, I believe that giant marshmallows were presented to rule mars, earth, and pluto. You can't prove me wrong! Jk... 😉
There is definitely %100 three, The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The bible states that MANY times, yes, don't believe everything you hear.
The Bible talks about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all as God
And I have followed my own advice, I double check everything my pastors say and compare it to the Bible
The Bible clearly teaches the trinity. CC, don't just believe whatever your church tells you. Pick up the Bible and some theology books and think for yourself. Pastors are not God, they can get things wrong.
CC
Monday, Mar 2, 2020 at 9:33 AM
remove
@Loved by Jesus I know we don't believe in the Trinity. We baptize in the name of Jesus. Not the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
What is the Jesus only movement?
CC
Monday, Feb 24, 2020 at 10:08 AM
remove
Who @Loved by Jesus?
CC
Friday, Feb 21, 2020 at 7:11 PM
remove
I don't remember all of what he said so I might need to ask him about that.
CC
Friday, Feb 21, 2020 at 7:11 PM
remove
@MidgiMadface Some ppl just think it points to the Trinity so I was just curious who thought what. Also I'm a bit confused myself but my pastor says it's only saying three names but that they all equal One=Jesus.
Matthew 28:19 seems like a clear verse what needs explaining?
@CC what part of it do you not understand?
CC
Saturday, Feb 15, 2020 at 4:19 PM
remove
And what do u guys interpret from Matthew 28:19?
CC
Saturday, Feb 15, 2020 at 4:14 PM
remove
@Ava I know what I'm trying to say but maybe I'm not very understanding. I know the tree persons in the "Trinity" are rly One that created this whole earth. God=Jesus Jesus=God. I hope I said what I meant right.
Hebrew is harder, good job.
I'm learning Hebrew lol... then Greek later
I just think that if you're are going to get super strict about which translation to use, you should learn Koine Greek and read the original text; for the New Testament.
Midgi, I think its pretty mixed. My stance is kjv only for English speakers others seem to go with what ever version, how about yourself?
is this group supporting KJV being the only valid English translation?
Yes, me too. Well said Ava.
hello????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Ava
Thursday, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:02 AM
remove
I hate to break it to you cc, but that is at the least borderline heresy. the trinity isn't an easy doctrine, but it's the only right one that is based solely on scripture. "A God small enough to be understood is not large enough to be worshiped." -my youth pastor. The trinity, is one God, but three persons. The son is not the father, but they are both one God and they are not different gods and they are each fully God.the holy spirit is just as much God as the father is. I'd encourage you to pick up a theology book on the topic, and read the Bible references that are given. Or find some good articles on the subject. But the trinity is a biblical doctrine absolutely necessary for a real Christian. It is not a debatable issue. I understand where you got the misconception that the Holy spirit is just the gift of Jesus and not God, but that is a false statement and you aren't giving the Holy spirit the credit he deserves. The holy spirit is God, just as much as the father and the Son are. I'll try to explain it better later, but no one understands the trinity, we must accept it by faith.
What sort of church do you go to CC?
CC
Monday, Feb 10, 2020 at 8:25 PM
remove
@Ava that's not what my church and I believe, we believe that the "persons" in the Trinity are One God basically. Jesus is God, and the Holy Ghost is the gift of Him.
Hey! Please join The Legends: Defeat bosses it is the funniest and most active group ever! You get to defeat bosses by memorizing scripture and completing awesome bible challenges! And it is soooo active! It is the #1 best group ever!
CC
Thursday, Feb 6, 2020 at 7:04 PM
remove
@Aaron yes I believe Jesus is God, they teach that He is God in my church. I don't remember the specifics, but I'll find out all the information for you guys and tell you.
there is one God and three persons in the trinity. It's a concept that is very hard to accept, but anything else is Heresy.
Also we only believe there is only one God. No Christian I've ever met believes in 3 Gods.
What do you make of 1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record b in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Cc do you believe Jesus is God?
CC
Tuesday, Feb 4, 2020 at 8:36 PM
remove
O*
CC
Tuesday, Feb 4, 2020 at 8:35 PM
remove
Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear Oh Israel the Lord our God is one Lord.
CC
Tuesday, Feb 4, 2020 at 8:33 PM
remove
My pastor would explain that part a lot better than me because I am kind of confused but it does make sense where there is only one God.
CC
Tuesday, Feb 4, 2020 at 8:32 PM
remove
What I believe is that there is no Trinity, but that there is only one God.
Uh... the holy ghost is the third member of the trinity... Not a language of angels... Speaking in tongues biblically is speaking in languages you haven't learned but speaking it 100% fluently.
CC
Monday, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:26 PM
remove
Hey guys sorry I'm not on much, I'm going to bed after this but... what I'm taught is that, if I remember right it's been a while since I heard this, but I seem to recall hearing that the Holy Ghost is the language of the angles, not sure. I might have to ask my pastor again.
You're welcome... That verse is taken away from the original meaning and used to endorse a practice that is not biblically based. One thing I hate is when people misinterpret the Bible
Thanks Ava for the insight about the groaning of the spirit. I always have Pentecostal friends pull that one out.
*Because not only can God understand what I'm saying, but so can I* I hate my autocorrect, it does the weirdest things sometimes.
Sorry if that sounds harsh
The Bible clearly states that not all believers have the same gifts, and speaking in tongues is one of many. And it was real languages in the Bible. God can hear us just as well in English as he can in what you claim to be The language of the Holy spirit. The verse that says the holy spirit intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words, actually in the Greek says, "with words that can never be spoken." So that disproves speaking in tongues way more than it proves it. If there is a language of the Holy spirit, I doubt that it is what you are doing. Speaking in gibberish, can not be called a gift. We know that speaking in tongues means that you don't take the time to study a language, but all the sudden, you can speak it fluently. That is so different from speaking gibberish. Whenever I pray, I never have spoken in tongues, but I feel the presence of God very strongly. Because not only can be understand what I'm saying, but so can I. In tongues, you don't even know what you are saying, but you trust God knows. I think much better would be to speak in English or whatever ones primary language is and avoid the futile practice of speaking gibberish and calling it the mark and presence of the Holy spirit on your life.
Cc, speaking with tongues is real. In the bible when people spoke in tongues were speaking in real languages so that they could share the gospel with people who did not speak the same language. It was not this gibberish that some people are claiming to be the gift of tongues.
I also disagree that its how you know you have the Holy Ghost. The moment you believe you are indwelt by the Holy Ghost.
CC
Monday, Jan 27, 2020 at 8:52 PM
remove
What I am saying basically is that speaking in tongues is real, it is how you know that you have the Holy Ghost, which I believe is God's Spirit inside of you. Someone explain if I'm wrong.
CC
Sunday, Jan 26, 2020 at 9:53 PM
remove
I thought I explained it good, I'll try to figure out what I'm trying to say and tell you later bc rn I have to go to sleep, goodnight
What?
What do you mean about that. That did not make any sence i'm sorry but can you explain to me what you mean differnet to me
thanks God bless -K
CC
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:38 PM
remove
Frankly I'm a bit more confused about the subject now than I was a few minutes ago because I read the conversation that happened earlier, sorry guys. And now I will say goodnight.
CC
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:32 PM
remove
Also to not act like what's not true is true.
CC
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:31 PM
remove
What I'm saying is to not say something that you know isn't true or isn't right and not in the Bible, like the big bang theory.
CC
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:30 PM
remove
If I'm testifying wrong somebody please say so because you are to never speak against the full truth of the Bible, sometimes you might not mean to twist meanings in the Bible, but it's not right to make God's perfect Word a lie. If you know what I mean, I think I made that a bit confusing.
CC
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:27 PM
remove
it's how you speak to God and that's what we call the Holy Ghost, it's God's Spirit inside of you, I think
CC
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:26 PM
remove
Btw I have an opinion about the whole speaking in tongues thing. It is real and there are some verses in the Bible that confirm that fact, I even speak it myself.
CC
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:21 PM
remove
Hi! I just joined and my church uses the kjv Bible so this is great.
hello
hello
hello
hello
hello
hello
Loved by Jesus I agree all except for having to ask Jesus to save you. All one must do is believe.
I was wondering what the people in this group think about eternal life?
Hi I was looking on here and I saw someone asked if SDA use KJV. So yes we use it but we do not specifically follow a certain version I am in a bible memorizing team called Pathfinder Bible Experience where we use NKJV. You can find some of our study groups under PBE.
I believe the signs gifts have ended
i also do believe that there have times when people have spoken in tongues such as tribe and i have heard some missionary story's about that.
Biblical speaking in tongues in America is not common. The key word there is Biblical... People may claim to, but what they claim doesn't fall into the Biblical categories for what speaking in tongues is.
So if it's just gibberish then they don't speak with tongues
I think it might occur in obscure parts of the world... Like dreams and visions.
Speaking in tongues exists, but not really in American culture... Sorry to any Pentecostals or others who do that... But it's gibberish... Real speaking in tongues meant either speaking in a language you had not learned, or people hearing there own language even when you were speaking yours.
Ava
Wednesday, Dec 4, 2019 at 10:01 AM
remove
I heard of that AlphaOmega... It is sad, but will not stop me from worshipping God.
Ava
Wednesday, Dec 4, 2019 at 10:00 AM
remove
I don't believe in tongues either... At least not how people do it today.
People can say some pretty silly things, I've been told Im possessed by a demon and unsaved because I don't believe in the modern gibberish of tongues speaking(no offense btw if you do believe it sorry) as for Tim, I'm not sure if he personally wrote it, he probably didn't but it was written on his church website where he is supposedly one of the pastors. If that is his churches view then I can only assume that is what he believes also.
Marty Sampson, a worship music writer, singer, and active member of Contemporary Pop music band=HILLSONG. Marty Sampson has publicly denounced his faith on social media. News from CBN on 13 August 2019
Let me clarify what I do with Tim Mackie, I listen to his podcast along with many other things. I trust him in Biblical Languages and Manuscripts because that's what he got his Ph.D in and wrote his dissertation on. He has an interesting view of hell that I would not agree with and I don't think he is a young earth creationist. My extent of trust with him is with regards to his knowledge in Biblical Languages and Manuscripts.
No, I think he is a good scholar on Biblical Languages and Manuscripts although he has some views I would not agree with... I've heard him present the gospel and it wasn't works based when I heard it... Hmm... I'm sorry if I overreacted... I think I kinda did... I had a bad fallout in another group where someone called me an agent of Satan 3 times so I'm a bit more sensitive now... Sorry, thanks for clarifying. Where did you see that he said that?
Never asked u to leave. I actually barely comment here. I'm not the admim here so I don't mind if u stay or go. I just asked because I thought it was a kjv group not a debate group. I'm not doubting your salvation why would I? I was just curious after you mentioned you follow Tim Mackie and seeing his false gospel or at best just a very poor muddy presentation I wondered if you to believed as he did. If you believed the same as him I would doubt your salvation.
How do I know I'm saved? Really? How you're doubting my salvation? I know I'm saved because Jesus paid for my sins and I trusted in him as my savior. I joined because I saw there was an open conversation about translations and I had studied about that. It seems I am being asked to leave?
Ava why are you a member of a kjv group and how do you know you are saved
Outspoken? I know what I'm talking about whether you believe it or not... I don't speak on an issue without significant research done. Don't dismiss me as a foolish child, that would be a mistake. I'm memorizing the New Testament, learning Hebrew, and I read through the whole Bible in 7 days. I was saved at 4, I've been a christian for 10 years now. I speak with pastors about this stuff. I never should have told you my age. Now whenever I make a good point, you will try to dismiss it because I'm a teenager. My views on translation are backed by EVIDENCE and I've done RESEARCH. I may change translations later, but I will NOT ever admit to the KJV as a perfect translation. Because there is REAL evidence against it. My pastors, who have studied theology professionally, talk about it with me like they would talk to their peers. Yes, I am young, yes, I will learn more, however that is not going to discredit what I have said. I stand by all my comments on translation. I am offended. Being discredited because I'm a lot younger. I'm also hurt. You probably will not ever listen to me even if I'm right.
Dear Ava, I was as outspoken as you when I was at your same age of 14 years old. Don't misunderstand, honestly i really admire you as a devout teenager, but you still have a long faith journey to go through in the future, whatever you "feel" and "think" now, hopefully can pass through the test of time. You may re-think again when you grow up to become an adult.
Personally I don't think he can be trusted if he doesn't even know the simplicity of the gospel
I looked up Tim Mackie. I know of the bible project which I do think does some good work, although I checked out Tim's Church website. Are you aware he teaches faith plus works salvation. According to his site you must
Repent: Change your mind about who God is, who you are, and what your life is all about.
Confess: Tell Him and His people your sin and hopelessness. Speak from your heart that Jesus died for you, and is now the Lord of your life.
Believe: Trust that what He promises is true, that His provision in Jesus is all you need for acceptance into His family.
Be Baptized: Express and confirm your identification with Jesus in His death and resurrection, His people, and His mission.
Surrender: Recognize that all you are and have now belongs to your Savior.
Obey: Embrace the teachings of Jesus and the Scriptures as the roadmap to a new way of living.
Look up the podcast from Tim Mackie called exploring my strange Bible and listen to the episodes entitled Making of the Bible. I would highly recommend it as he knows what he's talking about and he has the right view of scripture and explains translations.
I compare translations and have a wonderful Bible called the ESV Hebrew-English interlinear. I would encourage you to look it up and it's Greek new testament one called the ESV Greek-English Interlinear. It has the Greek/Hebrew text, the basic meaning of each word directly under it, and the ESV text on the side. Even though you don't use ESV I would say it is a great resource, where you can compare the accuracy of the ESV to the manuscripts themselves, all in two volumes.
I can trust it... Part of it that comforts me is I can look at the Hebrew and Greek and decide for myself what the best translation is... When I say "errors" I think you misunderstand what I mean... I mean that the translators misinterpreted what a certain word means and used a different phrase than what Moses or luke intended. Or a word that we really don't know what it means, like Selah for instance... No one is sure what that means.
Ava how do you trust a bible that you know has errors in it. There could be more you are unaware of? Personally I would not read a bible I could not trust.
I'm 14, my parents have not allowed me to have that and I will obey their wishes... I'm not kidding about this.
I am surprised that you can access to this App while you cannot access to YouTube, are you kidding me?
Actually it says he lived one year, KJV uses the word reigned... Again, ESV more literal
I'm not saying the ESV necessarily translated it right... I'm saying the ESV just literally said what the Hebrew says... Maybe the KJV did that verse better... I don't know... I NEVER claimed the ESV was perfect... I think it is the most accurate, most faithful translation, but it does have errors somewhere... Those are not the places however...
Um... I don't remember, you have to just read a printed ESV bible and watch for the footnote.
I'm not allowed to use YouTube...
Ava, Please search by typing these few words in YouTube: "Dr Phil Stringer-The Truth About the Septuagint"==https://youtu.be/C1mi_RcSLQ8
My mistake sorry. I still don't see it as a contradiction the kjv doesn't say he was 1 years old when he was anointed king, the esv does. The kjv reads as you stated Saul lived one year from previous events the esv says he was 1 years old.
Where can I find exactly where the esv used the Septuagint.
Then you should check an interlinear or use blue letter bible app to check the Hebrew before calling out my version as wrong. All you did with your supposed mistakes is prove my point...
The point is you are contradicting yourself
Then you are arguing the Hebrew, from which the KJV was translated is wrong. I think we need to interpret it or turn to the Septuagint, as some translations have done. The way the ESV could be interpreted is Saul lived one year (from the previous events) and then reigned two years... I think that's how the Hebrew should be understood... Now I have not been learning Hebrew very long, so my opinions may change when I enter advanced Hebrew.
How can you say Saul was 1 years old when he became king. 1 Samuel 9 he was clearly a man. Also it would be foolish of me to try to translate the Hebrew or Greek myself, how would I possibly translate it better than men who spoke the lsngues fluently? God gave us a translation so we would know his word.
The Israelites were all pretty short... Archaeology indicates the average male was about 5' 6"... Pretty short average... Saul would have only had to be about 6 '2" -6'6" to have had a significant height advantage... That is, if the archaeology is right... I'm pretty sure it's right, but we might find evidence against that
About 1 Samuel 13:1, check your Hebrew... The ESV is the only translation to keep consistent... The KJV deviated more from the Hebrew and made more of an interpretive change than ESV... Hebrew rough translation is more like this, "one year Saul when to reign (he was one year old), two years he reigned over Israel he chose for him Saul three of thousands from Israel" parenthesis my comments... I pulled that straight from an interlinear... That verse leaves room for interpretation and ESV true to follow what it says... THEY USED HEBREW HERE... You say they went with the wrong text, when they used literally the exact same one... Look at the Hebrew for yourself... If anything pick on CSB... They actually went with Septuagint.
About 1 Samuel 17:4, they list Goliath having the traditional 6 cubits and a span... The same as KJV... Check it out before calling it a error... It tells you that Septuagint and a bunch of other manuscripts say 4 IN THE FOOTNOTE... for informative purposes... Again, this only helps my case.
It shows that some of the texts say that. They Israelites actually really were short...
Hmm I think I worked out why it does the backslash n.
Every time I hit the return button
Why does the esv have obvious errors if they have the preserved Word shouldn't it be factual.
This is just a couple of examples of where they have chosen to go with the wrong text.
1 Sam 13:1
Do you really think Saul was 1 years old and at 2 chose 3000 men?
1 Sam 17:4
Was Goliath really only 6 feet 6 inches tall? Even Saul was head and shoulders above the Israelites, were they just all really short?
Anyway it sounds like you have found a good church where you are happy, that's awesome and I'm happy for you too.
Works based... Not world based
We did a series rejecting a world based gospel about a month ago too... lol...
You can read more about my views of textual criticism further back in this chat, and I talked about a podcast by Tim Mackie about the textual history of the Bible. It will tell you most of what I've learned in the subject.
There are a lot of "Christian" songs that are vague, my church does not use those songs though.
The Septuagint was translated from older Hebrew manuscripts than we currently have. Have you ever really studied textual criticism? The ESV primarily used the Masoretic texts when translating and a footnote is always given when they found the Septuagint to be more reliable. God did preserve his word. But some scribes made errors. The Masoretic text has a lot of small scribal errors in it. But due to textual criticism we can figure out where the errors are. Our study will only get us closer to God's original word, not further away. THEY BELIEVE IN THE PRESERVATION OF GOD'S WORD. They however, acknowledge that humans make small mistakes when copying texts and change a few things, such as spelling errors.
Personally I have found more churches preaching a works based gospel which is is no better than a prosperity gospel.
As for the whole kjv topic, you ask for evidence.
Why do I need to provide evidence, it speaks for itself. I have found zero errors in it compared to modern version. I believe God preserved his word as he promised to multiple times in scripture. I believe the manuscripts that was used for the kjv were the preserved Word of God and that the 54 translators faithfully translated it into the English language. The modern versions don't believe in the preservation as in some instances of the old testament text they use some manuscripts which they were translated from the Hebrew to the Greek, meaning some of the old testament is translated from a Greek textbecause they believed the Hebrew to be wrong in certain places. Therefore they simply don't believe Gods promise that he preserved his word and it is not the true word of God as it was not preserved.
Sorry Ava, all that I simply meant was that a lot of modern Christian songs are so vague that just about any denomination or religion could sing them and have no issue. Some even sound like a song off the radio they have just added God to the lyrics. Obviously not every church that worships with such music preaches a false gospel.
I don't know how, after really studying facts, you could think KJV is perfect. If you have some evidence please share.
If you really think that we are allowing heresy into our churches you cannot and should not just say it's a matter of preference. If you truly believe you're right then you should not be silent about it.
I'm learning how to read Hebrew and I've been comparing the Hebrew to KJV vs ESV and so far, with what I've done, ESV works better. The manuscripts ESV were translated from are much more reliable than those used in KJV. I will learn Greek later and then I'm sure that I will come to the same conclusions. Due to the process of translation, every translation will have errors. Any translation will have used the wrong word AT LEAST once.
I don't know what churches you have visited, but you have obviously never visited mine or a church like mine. The prosperity gospel may be associated with modern translations and modern worship in your mind, but stop thinking that. Just because prosperity gospel people twist a verse in NLT that doesn't mean NLT is a prosperity gospel translation. The prosperity gospel preachers could just as easily use the KJV to do it.
Well if you believe that then you should find an issue with these things... Bible believing churches use CSB modern worship and Still preach the gospel, whether you like it or not. Such is my church. I use modern worship because I find that I really worship to it. If a song is heretical, I don't sing it and I talk to someone on the worship team about it. I've only had to do that once. I don't know what songs you are referring to, because we sing songs that proclaim the gospel, the trinity, and other very important bible doctrines that other religions cannot sing along to. I study theology all the time and debate about it with my pastors. You simply cannot lump all the churches who use modern worship together and say that we preach the prosperity gospel. A few weeks ago my church did a whole series about rejecting the prosperity gospel.
If have to agree that contemporary Christian music is very ecumenical, very little doctrine in the lyrics just about any religion could sing along and not have an issue with them.
Many churches I've visited don't see any issues with jehovahs or Mormons these days aswell.
Modern Bible versions and Contemporary Christian pop music are moving towards the Ecumenical movement, whether we agree or not, Ecumenical movement is already happening
Wait a minute... You absolutely cannot compare modern Christian music an updated translations to PROSPERITY GOSPEL... Prosperity gospel is heresy, contemporary Christian music is worship... Bible translations are a matter of preference. Music is a choice of preference. The gospel is NOT... You cannot say that the prosperity gospel is okay. The gospel is NOT that God will make you wealthy now. In the new earth, we will prosper. But not now. The gospel is NOT supposed to please your ears. I'd think youd agree with me, so please never compare modern music to the prosperity gospel, as one is worship and one is heresy. Biblically you can reject heresy and you should, that is one issue that is not preference.
just personal sharing, as mentioned, it is all about preference, if someone feels modern Bible versions are easier to understand and contemporary pop Christian music & prosperity gospel preaching can please their ears, then please go for it, because that is their human rights to choose their own preference. We will totally respect that although Independent Fundamental Baptists IFB have different preferences.
AlphaOmega, was there supposed to be a point made in the story you told earlier... It was a good story but is there some meaning behind it you were trying to get across
I was a preacher preaching for several decades by using ESV, NASB, NIV, NLT, and whatever modern versions and I was a fool to criticize KJV in the past; At the end of the day, I realize KJV is still the most faithful translation of Textus Receptus. I will never turn back to read those so called modern and latest Bible versions again.
I was a preacher preaching throughout several decades by using ESV, NASB, NIV and whatever modern versions and I was a fool to criticize KJV in the last; At the end of the day, I realize KJV is still the best and I will never turn back to read those modern Bible versions.
Sorry for the typos. I'm not quite sure what the /n is about in my post.
Hi Ava, thanks for the reply.
For years I initially thought the whole kjv only controversy was ridiculous and would have agreed with you until I had a fair bit of time I decided to look into it with an open mind. I am now
convinced that the KJV is a perfect translation and I've spent many hours and still do continue researching the topic because I enjoy it.
Of course that doesn't mean I am right it's just what I personally believe, I don't try to push it onto others nor would I cease fellowship over it.
@Aaron... I have studied up on the topic and if anything it was the KJV with the corrupt manuscripts. If you are interested in facts than I could explain further. We have a lot more manuscripts now and we are closer to the original than the KJV was. News Flash: when ESV removed the parts I assume you are thinking of, it's because they weren't supposed to be there in the first place. There are actual verified facts behind my view, and just misinterpretation behind yours. (Sorry if that sounds rude... I'm not trying to be rude)
I would like to share a meaningful story" “The Cliff”…how close will you go? There once was a rich lord, who was in need of a carriage driver. He interviewed several potential drivers asking them all the same question, “The road which leads to my castle has many dangerous areas. On one stretch of that road there is a steep mountain on one side and a sharp drop-off into a canyon on the other side. If you were to be selected to drive my carriage, just how close to that cliff do you think you could get the carriage without going over the edge?” The first man said timidly, “Well, I am a good driver! I suppose could get your carriage to within 6 feet from the edge!” The second man said more confidently, “I am an excellent driver! I could get your carriage at least 3 feet from the edge!” The third man said boldly, “None surpass me in excellence! I am sure I could get the carriage right up to the edge of the road without going over!”
But for all their professed skill, it was the fourth man who was hired. *The fourth man had said, “Sir, if you would give me the honor and privilege of driving your carriage, I would stay as far away from the edge of the cliff as possible.”*
I would like to share a meaning story: “The Cliff”…how close will you go?
There once was a rich lord, who was in need of a carriage driver. He interviewed several potential drivers asking them all the same question, “The road which leads to my castle has many dangerous areas. On one stretch of that road there is a steep mountain on one side and a sharp drop-off into a canyon on the other side. If you were to be selected to drive my carriage, just how close to that cliff do you think you could get the carriage without going over the edge?”
The first man said timidly, “Well, I am a good driver! I suppose could get your carriage to within 6 feet from the edge!”
The second man said more confidently, “I am an excellent driver! I could get your carriage at least 3 feet from the edge!”
The third man said boldly, “None surpass me in excellence! I am sure I could get the carriage right up to the edge of the road without going over!”
But for all their professed skill, it was the fourth man who was hired
The fourth man had said, “Sir, if you would give me the honor and privilege of driving your carriage, I would stay as far away from the edge of the cliff as possible.”
Keanna, I believe the the kjv is a perfect translation of the original a d reject the other versions as they are translated from corrupt manuscripts.
No... Like 90% of the people in here don't think that... I completely disagree with the notion that any one translation is perfect. I use ESV
When I saw this group I just had to ask, does everyone on this chat believe that KJV is the only correct translation of the bible? I was looking through your chat and it looked like some people disagreed with that but I wasn't entirely sure.
I was hoping that's what you meant... Just needed to clarify. Some people take it too far and say that it's evil and not just preference... Glad you aren't one of them.
Dear Ava, please don't misunderstand. i am not trying to argue, that is just our preference as Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) to prefer to stick to the fundamental.
We totally respect the modern Bible version and contemporary pop style music preferred by Southern Baptist Convention (S.B.C.) churches.
Do you think modern Christian music is sinful and wrong?
Thanks for sharing about Bible version & contemporary music style similar to modern pop music used by S.B
C.
That was the key reason Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) decided to have Biblical separation and came out from Southern Baptist Convention (SBC)
Ava
Wednesday, Nov 27, 2019 at 10:41 PM
remove
so recap... Southern Baptist churches and southern gospel music have nothing to do with each other
Ava
Wednesday, Nov 27, 2019 at 10:35 PM
remove
Haha... No... Hymns and modern worship are common... My church has both hymns in one venue, and more modern worship like Hillsong, Bethel Music, etc in the other... I've never heard of a southern Baptist church that uses southern gospel all the time, occasionally maybe. Churches in the Southern Baptist Convention choose what worship style they are going to use.
Interesting, Ava. Are majority of Southern Baptists prefer to sing Southern Gospel Musics which are more contemporary and similar to jazz, blues, pop music style ?
Are Conventional Hymns seldom / rarely sung by Southern Baptists ?
Ava
Wednesday, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:21 PM
remove
A lot of southern Baptist churches choose to use the CSB (revised Holman Christian Standard), but unlike a lot of KJV churches, we don't say it's the only translation. A lot of southern Baptists in my church use ESV and some use NASB and some use KJV. But when preaching, CSB is used as our "official" translation. We use it because it's a balanced translation, but no one will care of you use ESV or CSB or KJV. We aren't strict on translation. It's a personal preference, even though many churches decide CSB is best, and the congregation is more likely to use CSB because they are exposed to it more. So it is a choice even though most Southern Baptist churches officially use CSB.
Thanks, I am member of Indepedent Fundamental Baptist (IFB). Thank you Ava, but I thought majority of Southern Baptists don't use KJV because majority of Southern Baptists prefer to read Holman Christian Standard Bible?
I know Marilyn uses KJV... But skyler and Bible Memorizer use NKJV. From that I would say that it's a choice in their denomination as it is in mine. Just to say, Seventh day Adventists believe a lot of things that most evangelicals disagree with, but they believe the main points of Christianity, the Trinity, That Jesus died for them, that they can't earn salvation, etc. I wanted to clarify that, just in case you had the conception that they were a cult. Some may be more like that, but all SDA I've talked to are not cult like at all. They truly believe and are studying for themselves what's in their denomination. I'm Southern Baptist, in case you didn't know.
Seventh-Day Adventist, founded by Ellen White. Does Seventh-Day Adventist also use KJV ?
Thanks for sharing those insights
The Mormons use the KJV, but it still contradicts pretty much every belief they have. The KJV isn't inherently bad, it's just old and uses texts with more errors in them, because we had less manuscripts. If you look back, I explained the manuscript history of the New Testament and the Old Testament.
For New Testament, is Mormon Bible copying from King James Bible?
Lol, I wouldn't be surprised if people thought we were the same person, on different accounts... We sound a lot alike :)
Hey LBJ, if you handed an unbeliever a KJV, when they already have doubts about the Bible being relevent, then that might make it seem even more to them like an old dusty book. We don't speak Elizabethan English today, so a version with a more modern sounding English would probably be the best for witnessing. I would recommend the NLT, as the most understandable, and the NIV and CSB, which are more literal, but still easy to understand. When they have matured in Christ a little more, I'd say that they should be ready to choose a translation based on what they like. Also, there is a translation called the ERV (Easy Readers Version) and it is set at a 3rd grade reading level, I would recommend this English translation for kids and those with English as a secondary language. What do you think?
Hi LBJ, welcome to the group. I am not the leader... I don't know who is... But if you read my previous statements, I am not KJV only. My church uses the CSB but I personally love the ESV. Feel free to ask questions, give opinions, share knowledge, and just jump in. I love this topic and know quite a bit about it, so please jump in! Glad some new conversation has come to this group... I'm on a partial media fast right now, so I'll only be on about once a week, so when I'm on here I'll try and answer questions if I can, or address comments. Or learn something new! Have fun on here!
Ava
Saturday, Oct 19, 2019 at 11:12 AM
remove
Yeah, so true. Before I joined this group I was sorta anti KJV because of the KJV onlyists. I toned my anti KJV side down when I joined this group. The KJV people are mad because they think the other translations are messing with the Bible and removing verses. As we've discussed though, those verses were added in later manuscripts so when other translations remove verses it's because they weren't there in the first place. But the KJV only people don't like to listen sometimes. I have no problem with their translation as long as they don't tell me mine is wrong.
Very true! Most people that go to my church are KJV onlyists. It kinda gets on my nerves sometimes because I don't think any of them have read other versions to know if they're bad or not!
Hmmm... Wonder what that passage was. Most of the differences between translations aren't major. Normally they mean the same exact thing, except you either understand it less or more. There are some pretty big differences though, which is why when teaching a text, you should look at multiple translations and the original languages, so you aren't building a theology off of an element only found in one translation. That can get dangerous if your translation has an error in the one spot you're choosing to teach from and you won't realize it if you don't read multiple translations and original languages.
Um........well......I know that translation matters in the grand scheme of things. My grandpa was reading one Bible version (either NLT or NIV), and he said one verse in KJV said to do something, but the (NLT or NIV) said not to do it. I don't use either of those versions very often, and he didn't remember the verse where he read it, so I have to take his word for it.
Ava
Wednesday, Oct 16, 2019 at 8:59 PM
remove
Ok, anyone have something to say relating to translations, manuscripts, or any questions on any of this, or why this even matters in the grand scheme of things?
Sooooo... Anyone want to start the conversation up again plz????!!!???!!
Hi Susanna, we're glad to have you here.
👋hello, I am new to this group. I am in 7th grade and use this app mostly for memorizing passages for school. I hope I can memorize some of the group verses. I will try my best!
Ava
Wednesday, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:20 PM
remove
Hahaha... Aw, I thought we could get away from adds. I guess I was wrong. But then again how many times do people advertise their groups on here 😁
adds do pop up on the message wall I guess.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgnvXUot2OhFlxaQBC-sE4w?view_as=subscriber
please hit his channel up, i need a thousand subs!!!!
Btw it's called former Seventh-Day Adventists: renewing our minds. So if you want to see our conversation and chime in you're welcome to. I know you left the group early on but it's become a more fair debate now then it was when you were there. So far 5 people are mostly commenting 2 non SDA (including me) and 3 SDA. The SDA have taught me a lot about what SDA believes and have done a good job. We ask each other questions and respond to each other's answers. It helps us all better understand each others beliefs
Thanks for understanding, Ava. 😄
So it's not just saying the bad things. Whenever I've had a question about a rumor I've heard they believe, we have the former SDA who gives her perspective but also current SDA who have the more updated info. Thanks for your concern.
I joined the recovering one because I understand why you don't tolerate debate on there. There are current SDA on there who are doing a very good job at cutting through the rumors about the SDA and are doing good about defending their beliefs. I will join your group to see from all SDA how you interact and what you believe but will maintain the other group because I can ask questions and get an interactive debate. Thank you for the recommendation and I will not debate there, I understand that children might get confused and leave the Christian faith altogether if they hear too much debate. That's why I like the group I'm in. There are not just anti SDA people on there but current ones who can explain from there perspective so I don't just hear the bad things. It's not a hate group.
@Ava: If you want to understand what Seventh-Day Adventists believe, join my group called FINAL EVENTS SDA. You will find many explanations on there. However, be informed that there are also children in my group. It is a safe place for them to learn and grow about the Bible. I will not tolerate argument or debate. The information is there for you to learn more about Seventh Day Adventists. I would caution you about going to the other group as you would only hear the things that they don't like about us. If you want the truth about us, go to a group proclaiming the truth. Don't waste your time trying to get the right information from the wrong source. That's compared to a dog going to his vomit to get nourishment. I know that sounds gross, but it's a pretty good depiction of what some people do to find out information about something they don't understand.
@Ava: Now that you have explained what the group called Recovering Adventists is all about, that gives me some hope that they may come back to the Truth. I always wondered why people went to negative groups or websites to find info about a group they disagree with. It seems to me it is more sensible to go to the original source rather than people in opposition about something. But if you are witnessing to help them have more faith in Christ, that's great. Many times, people who have a problem with SDA doctrine create groups like theirs. Often they have a conflict with our observances that go against their lifestyle and habits. They prefer to follow the practices of the majority of Christians in the world. That is one major reason they leave the Adventist faith.
Marilyn as an SDA, what does your denomination say about translations and what do you personally prefer?
Marilyn, I understand you are a 7th day Adventist, I am now in the group for recovering SDA's, I've always been Southern Baptist, but I was curious about what you believe. I looked at your other SDA groups and saw you telling Skyler we were trying to discourage her faith, I assure you that is not our motive. We want her to be strengthened in her faith as a Christian, and if that means that she stays with all her SDA beliefs, then good, she should be strengthened by being able to refute our arguments. But if she were to change her mind on some beliefs then she shouldn't be weakened in faith in Jesus but strengthened in faith as a Christian even if she didn't have all the answers. If I'm being confusing, sorry. I just want you to know that we don't want to discourage her. In fact the group is for people who left the SDA, not trying to get people out of it. It's also for people who want to know what SDA believes without being cornered by SDA's. Sorry for going off topic but this is the only place I can reach you.
Marilyn, can you explain what you mean by the KJV being the only bible you can clearly follow the prophesies about Jesus in?
The reason the new testament manuscripts that we have have errors in them is because of Diocletion, the Roman Emperor, he persecuted Christians and he burned new testament manuscripts, which created a scarcity of manuscripts. So when it was legal again manuscripts were frantically copied. So one manuscript with let's say 10 errors was dispersed in one area and copied many times, so then those errors are standard in all the manuscripts we find of the texts in one area. And so on for the whole Roman Empire. With Erasmus, he found a lot of manuscripts and compiled the Greek New Testament. But the only problem is, we now know that he found a lot of the same area ones. So he got pretty much all the same errors. I posted which manuscripts the ESV used, and they compiled their own Greek New Testament, so they're avoiding having Erasmus's problem of having the same area with the same errors because they looked at most of the Greek manuscripts that we have
I don't, I use ESV 75% of the time
just to ask why do you think KJV is the only true version
Yeah, I know more than I did, but Tim Mackie did his dissertation on the Hebrew that the Septuagint was translated from. He looked line by line on the Septuagint and the Masoretic texts and he found the thin layer of errors in the Masoretic text. He did the book of Ezekiel. So he knows what he's talking about here.
I would have to agree with Marilyn on this one! I thought I knew a lot about Bible history and manuscripts until I read this. I'll try to look into the podcasts. I didn't recognize his name at first, but I know who you're talking about, and this sounds quite interesting!
This is a question for the Administrator. I've got a question about your group verses available under "Refuting Jehovah's Witnesses." One of them says Rev 1:1-23. There are only 21 verses in Revelation 1. Does the 23 stand for some code?
@Ava: Sounds like your parents are raising a genius! They say that homeschooled children become very smart. We homeschooled our son for a while, and I tested his IQ at one point. That may have been a mistake... He seems to have acquired a chip on his shoulder ever after. His IQ was 146 at the time. 😄
Yeah, I'm just saying that I would like the discuss the whole canon before we go back and point it to Jesus. If you did start a group focusing on the gospels and life of Jesus I would join and would love to discuss it. The only translation I can think of that is inherently wrong is the New World Translation. The Jehovah's witnesses actually did corrupt the text on purpose to less contradict their beliefs
No offense taken. Just remember that many of your followers are children and youth. You and I may have a solid understanding and foundation about Jesus's life and ministry in His word, but we must always direct people's thoughts back to Jesus. After all, He is the author of the Bible. He has told us how to live and what we need to believe that will save us. Any version out there that speaks contrary to what He has already said, is in error. There are many false prophets and apostles. Even interpreters of the Bible can be gravely mistaken. ☺
I'm sorry if I sound a little mad, I promise I'm not. I just tend to get over-zealous about Bible topics. As you may or may not see from my posts I'm a huge bible nerd.
When preaching a bible passage from the old testament I find that most often pastors take the passage for itself and give what the passage means, then at the end they show how it fits into the bigger story and how it points is to Jesus. The same could be said of my view about how this discussion should go. We should finish our conversation about translations and manuscripts and then show how all we've learned points to Jesus
I agree the point of the Bible is Jesus, we are talking about the earthly history of the Bible. These are important discussions to be having, not useless. If you're implying that what we are discussing is wrong and we should focus more on how it points to Jesus right now I think you are wrong. I think the conversation definitely should come back to that. But I don't think this is the time. We haven't discussed new testament manuscripts much and when we do we'll obviously talk about Jesus. I feel like when we talk about the new testament after that would be more appropriate to talk about Jesus's part in this. Because then we will have seen the whole canon of scripture's history and then we'll be able to better see how it points to jesus. I want to talk about Jesus, don't misinterpret. But I just think we could talk about it better when we see the whole canon together.
I read the ESV and I can clearly follow the prophesies. In fact I find it must harder to find them in the KJV. The fact is the prophesies aren't always clear, no matter what translation. I have no idea what you mean when you say it may be the only version that's clear. I hate to break it to you but it is not the only one. If you could show/further explain what you mean by that maybe I could be a little more sympathetic to your statement but from all you've said I find that true of the ESV and of the CSB. And probably other translations. So can you explain please?
I don't think we're forgetting about Jesus. Jesus is the center of the Bible, so when talking about the Bible you clearly end up coming back to Jesus. Whenever I'm thinking about how the Bible came into being, it is a clear God-led thing. The Bible is the story about Jesus. We cannot just discuss Jesus all the time. Here's what I mean, we as people can't just talk about the life crucifixion resurrection and the second coming all the time. We definitely need to talk about that, but we also need to go deeper. We need to see how things point to Jesus and his work in his life, death, resurrection and ultimately his second coming. And I have mentioned Jesus. Read again my opening statements when I first joined the group. I've said several times that I love Jesus. We all do, that is why we are discussing this. We are seeing how Jesus preserved his word. So if you're looking for us to just talk about Jesus's life, this is not the group to join. Thank you for trying to bring us back to Jesus but I would encourage you to think about what I'm saying.
Here is one important point about the King James Version Bible that I think people should know. It may be the only version that you can clearly follow the prophecies about Jesus. His first coming is prophesied throughout the Old Testament. That's one reason that He knew that He was the Messiah. He read about all the signs of His birth and life in the Old Testament manuscripts that His mother shared with Him while he grew to be a man. His 2nd coming is prophesied throughout the New Testament.
I recently joined your group. There are some very intelligent people on here, but it's disappointing that you are missing the most important subject you should be discussing. You are so involved in explaining the translations in your discussion, that there is no mention of our Savior, Jesus Christ. He has gotten lost in your discussion of the Bible translations and the work of the scribes. I would urge everyone to be careful that you don't become entrapped in anything that takes you away from your relationship with God, and abiding in Jesus. Satan has so many tactics to get people caught up in things so that they lose sight of the reason WHY we read the Bible. It's to learn about Jesus, to become His friend, to understand God's dealings with mankind, and to prepare for heaven. And so much more! All those other things are just discussions. Debate topics. Useless information after a while. Don't be fooled. Satan is a sly fox, a wiley old serpent, and smart enough to get us sidetracked long enough to destroy us. 😳
This is what the ESV was translated from. "The ESV is based on the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible as found in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (5th ed., 1997), and on the Greek text in the 2014 editions of the Greek New Testament (5th corrected ed.), published by the United Bible Societies (UBS), and Novum Testamentum Graece (28th ed., 2012), edited by Nestle and Aland. The currently renewed respect among Old Testament scholars for the Masoretic text is reflected in the ESV’s attempt, wherever possible, to translate difficult Hebrew passages as they stand in the Masoretic text rather than resorting to emendations or to finding an alternative reading in the ancient versions. In exceptional, difficult cases, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, the Latin Vulgate, and other sources were consulted to shed possible light on the text, or, if necessary, to support a divergence from the Masoretic text. Similarly, in a few difficult cases in the New Testament, the ESV has followed a Greek text different from the text given preference in the UBS/Nestle-Aland 28th edition. Throughout, the translation team has benefited greatly from the massive textual resources that have become readily available recently, from new insights into biblical laws and culture, and from current advances in Hebrew and Greek lexicography and grammatical understanding.
Often though we see additions to the Masoretic texts that aren't in the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint. What happens there is that the Masorites had notes on the text written in the margins and sometimes those texts accidentally were put into the text.
Often though we see additions to the Masoretic texts that aren't in the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint. What happens there is that the Masorites had notes on the text written in the margins and sometimes those texts accidentally were put into the text.
Often though we see additions to the Masoretic texts that aren't in the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint. What happens there is that the Masorites had notes on the text written in the margins and sometimes those texts accidentally were put into the text.
For instance, in Genesis 4:8 The Masoretic reads like this, "Cain spoke to Abel his brother. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and killed him." But in the Septuagint it reads like this, "Cain spoke to Abel his brother saying, 'Let us go into the field.' And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel and *killed him." So most Bible Scholars think what happened here is that the Masorites didn't have that phrase because sometime before a scribe missed that phrase and that's the text the Masorites got. Because the phrase in the Septuagint didn't come from nowhere.
Very accurate, because it's older it is often trusted more. But sometimes the Hebrew is still trusted. By reading line by line the Masoretic texts and then the dead sea scrolls and then the Septuagint you can see the Hebrew behind the Septuagint and where things have been added to the Hebrew or omitted.
How accurate do you think the Septuagint is.
I have a small correction to my previous statements: the dead sea scrolls and the Septuagint are from around the same time period. The Septuagint dates slightly older by maybe 50-100 years. But they are very close in date. Sorry for any confusion. I'm still learning on this topic.
I'm relistening to the making of the Bible and Tim Mackie said an interesting fact to show you how meticulous the Masoretic scribes were. They kept a tally of how many letters were in the Hebrew Bible. So if you turn to Leviticus 11:42 you will see a word translated belly or stomach. In Hebrew it is spelled with four letters and the third one in the text is enlarged because that letter is the middle letter of the Torah. So you can see what kind of strange facts you will learn by listening to the podcast and what kind of meticulous attention they paid to the copying of the text
Nice to have you back Crimson Dawn. If you want to learn more, Tim Mackie's podcast Exploring My Strange Bible has about 3 hours of podcast on this called Making of the Bible. I learned most of what I know I'm the subject through this. I really think you will enjoy it. So if you get a chance I would recommend it. Tim Mackie is the cofounder of the Bible Project, who's videos are amazing. I can't at agree with everything they say in their videos but I love their Read Scripture series where they have videos explaining the different books and walking through the major events
Yeah, the Jewish scribes, particularly the Masoretic scribes, took extreme precautions to protect the text from errors. They would take the previously copied scroll and count the letters and compare. If a letter was different they would see how they messed up and scratch it out and rewrite whatever was wrong. If the name of God was messed up then they would destroy the scroll. This is why we see the Masoretic texts having practically no errors in comparison to other Masoretic texts. When compared to the Septuagint and the dead sea scrolls however, they have some errors in them. We know the Masoretic texts are most likely having the errors because the dead sea scrolls are older and the Septuagint is older than both.
So, there is one interesting fact I would like to share. When the Old Testament was copied (and the same rule probably applies for the New Testament.), a scribe could not write the name of God if he had freshly dipped his writing utensil in ink. It may sound odd, but it's actually quite smart. If the pen (or whatever they used) had been freshly dipped, the next word they wrote would be splotchy, which would be considered irreverential to God's name. You can imagine that if they are so careful about little details like that, their copying was extremely accurate! With standards any lower, God's Word may have been mistranslated severely over the years! Sorry if I'm going on to long, but this topic interests me!