| Acts20.com https://acts20.com/ |
|
| A point about about the KJV only believers https://acts20.com/viewtopic.php?t=85140 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Eddie Robbins: A point about about the KJV only believers |
| It seems to me that the reason one only uses the KJV is that they believe that the interpretation is more true to what God has to say and that later translations are infiltrated with man's interpretation. |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | bonnie knox: Re: A point about about the KJV only believers |
| Also, |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | maqqebet: |
| the KJV they use is actually, I believe (without digging into my notes) the KJ Bible used today is the 4th or 5th revision of the original. Why, if they actually read the 1611 they'd find some surprises.When the Anglicans came to a Greek word and didn't agree with its definition, viz., baptize, they coined a new word.The latter part of Revelations was translated from Latin and not Greek.And, they wouldn't recognize Jesus' name.Just a few points of interest The HammerMi kamocah ba'elim AdonaiWho is like you, Adonai, among the mighty? (Exodus 15:11 |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Old Time Country Preacher: |
| Re: A point about about the KJV only believers |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Cojak: |
| A lot of truth here Eddie, I think the 'KJV only' feeling is in its death throes in the COG. It is still here because of us older folk, who were raised before these 'NEW and questionable versions (?)' were read by 'REAL CHRISTIANS'.It is the version we memorized scripture from. It is the words we (old folk) relate to. WE cannot help it, you also probably quote scripture from the KJV.BUT we are dying out. However I don't think one is hell-bound who is KJO, maybe a little mislead. Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/ |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | sheepdogandy: |
| I use the NKJV. I have in-laws who still believe I use some other version. Even when I show them on the cover New King James Version.I tell them, Hey, I got an original 1611 in my office if you want to read it.Makes no difference.I switched because it took too much time interpreting the 47 revision into modern English.I like several of the newer translations and use them to clarify the meaning of the text.It's all about understanding what the scripture is saying, to me at least Charles A. HutchinsSenior Pastor SPWCCongregational Church of Godwww.spwc.church |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | krista: Re: A point about about the KJV only believers |
| Eddie, if the KJV was good enough for Paul, it's good enough for me. |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Cojak: |
| OUCH! Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/ |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Preacher777: KJV Versus Paraphrases |
| I am NOT KJV only only but I would rather use the KJV, NAS or several other translations rather than a paraphrase such as the NIV. I don't know if it is the poetic language but it seems much easier and natural to memorize scripture when one is used to a KJV translation versus a NIV paraphrase. |
| Author: | acts [ Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | bonnie knox: Re: KJV Versus Paraphrases |
| A question for KJV-onlyists: |
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC-05:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited | |