The Validity of the Kings James Bible

[AK4]

First let me say that I am a believer, a believer in the Bible, the King James Bible,
a believer of the word, and what is said in that word. And Jesus said: "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."St. Matthew 16:28. Why? Why where these people selected not to die until the end of the world, until Satan is defeated,and the evils of the world erased? And again Jesus speaks: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass way."St. Matthew 24:35. Now that is a tremendous statement, just think of it, the whole universe, yes and including the earth, will pass away, but the words of Christ will not pass away. Now that is power!
Now I have two questions concerning this statement by Christ: 1: If this be so, that his word will not pass away, do we have access to that word? 2: If we do have access
to that word, where is it? If heaven and earth is passing away, and the words of
Christ are not, can we not rest assured that that word will not be corrupted? Especially by men? All right, where is the word? And who has been put in charge to
write it? Now lets go back to those who will not taste of death until Christ comes in
his kingdom, why were they set aside not to die, what purpose where they to fulfill?
Well this is my idea: Their main job was to write the King James Bible! The flawless
Bible. In all my days of reading this Bible I have found no fault in it, it is perfect,
it has to be, for the word of Christ can not pass away. Is the word of God going to be
corrupted by mere men? Nay I say, nay, nay, nay!

More to come. monomonk

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristianBrother
I completely and utterly disagree with the idea of the Curch being able to change the Bible. The Bible is God's word, and no-one, not even the Pope, who has too much power anyway, should mess with it.

I will not stand for the changing of the scriptures to fit any one particular person, and would start a revolt if it were to be done.

I urge all Christians, whether you're Catholic or Protestant, to make sure that the Bible is not changed in any way.

CB :cross:

Its already been changed throughout the centuries. Here is a list I "stumbled' on to.

SPURIOUS PASSAGES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

Matt. 5:23 without a cause
Matt. 6:13 For thine is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
Matt. 6:25 or what ye shall drink*
Matt. 16:2 When it is evening, ye say, it will be fair weather: for the sky is red.
Matt. 16:3 This entire verse
Matt. 17:21 and fasting
Matt. 18:12 into the mountains
Matt. 2O:7 and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive
Matt. 22:13 and take him away
Matt. 23:35 son of Barachias*
Matt. 24:10 and shall hate one another*
Matt. 24:31 sound of a*
Matt. 24:41 women shall be
Matt. 25:6 cometh
Matt. 27:52 and the graves were opened*
Matt. 27: 53 and went*
Matt. 28:19 therefore
Mark 4:37 so that it was now full*
Mark 6:51 beyond measure and wondered
Mark 7:8 For as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things
as ye do
Mark 7:14 unto me every one of you
Mark 9:24 with tears
Mark 9:29 and fasting
Mark 9:44 This entire verse
Mark 9:45 into the fire that shall never be quenched
Mark 9:46 This entire verse
Mark 9:47 fire
Mark 9:49 and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt
Mark 10:24 for them that trust in riches
Mark 10:30 houses and brethren and sisters and mothers and children and land
with persecutions*
Mark 14:30 twice*
Mark 14:68 and the **** crew
Mark 14:72 the second time* twice*
Mark 16:9-20 All these verses
Luke 2: 40 in spirit
Luke 8: 45 and sayest thou, Who touched me?
Luke 16:16 and every man presseth into it
Luke 17:12 which stood afar off*
Luke 17:35 women
Luke 18:11 with himself*
Luke 22:43 This entire verse
Luke 22:44 This entire verse
Luke 22:68 me, nor let me go
Luke 23:5 teaching*
Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father forgive them; for they know not what they do
Luke 24:42 and of an honeycomb
John 1:25 asked him, and*
John 3:13 which is in heaven
John 4:9 or the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans
John 5:3 waiting for the moving of the water
John 5:4 This entire verse
John 5:25 and now is*
John 8:1-11 all these verses
John 8:59 going through the midst of them and so passed by
John 16:16 because I go to the Father
John 19:23 and also his coat*
John 21:25 This entire verse
Acts 6:3 Holy Ghost and (should read "spirit of")
Acts 6:8 faith (should read "grace")
Acts 8:37 This entire verse
Acts 9:31 churches (should read "church") were (should read "was")
Acts 15:32 and confirmed them*
Acts 18:5 pressed in the spirit (should read "earnestly occupied with the Word")
Acts 18:21 I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: but
Rom. 3:22 and upon all
Rom. 6:12 it in
Rom. 7:6 that being dead (should read "being dead to that")
Rom. 8:26 for us
Rom. 11:6 But if it be of works, then it is no more grace; otherwise work is no more work
Rom. 14:6 and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it
1 Cor. 2:1 testimony (should read "mystery")
1 Cor. 6:20 and in your spirit, which are God's
1 Cor. 7:5 fasting and
1 Cor. 10:28 for the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof
1 Cor. 15:24 cometh
2 Cor. 4:14 by (should read "with")
Gal. 3:1 that ye should not obey the truth
Gal. 3:17 in Christ
Gal. 5:19 adultery
Gal. 5:21 murders
Eph. 5:9 Spirit (should read "light")
Eph. 5:30 of his flesh, and of his bones
2 Thess. 2:9 Even him
1 Tim. 3:16 God (should read "who")*
1 Tim. 4:12 in spirit*
1 Tim. 6:5 from such withdraw thyself*
2 Tim. 3:3 without natural affection*
Heb. 12:18 mount that might be touched and that burned with fire (should
read "fire that might be touched and burned")*
Heb. 12:20 or thrust through with a dart*
James 5:1 Confess your faults (should read "Therefore confess your sins")*
1 Pet. 2:5 spiritual (before the word "sacrifices")
1 Pet. 3:8 courteous (should read "humble")
2 Pet. 1:1 God and our (should read "our Lord and")*
1 John 3:16 of God
1 John 5:7 in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost: and these
three are one
1 John 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth
1 John 5:13 and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God
Rev. 1:17 unto me, Fear not*
Rev. 2:22 their (should read "her")*
Rev. 5:3 neither under the earth*
Rev. 5:9 us (omitted by the Alexandrian Ms., one of the three oldest Mss.
known)
Rev. 5:10 us (should read "them") we (should read "they")
Rev. 5:13 and under the earth*
Rev. 6:2 to conquer (should read "he conquered")*
Rev. 9:4 neither any green thing*
Rev. 9:13 the four horns of*
Rev. 10:6 and the sea, and the things which are therein*
Rev. 11:17 and art to come*
Rev. 12:12 inhabiters of* of (before the words "the sea")
Rev. 14:5 before the throne of God*
Rev. 14:12 here are they*
Rev. 16:5 and shalt be (should read "the holy")*
Rev. 16:7 another out of*
Rev. 16:11 and their sores* of their deeds*
Rev. 16:17 from the throne*
Rev. 18:22 of whatsoever craft he be* and the stone of a millstone shall be
heard no more at all in thee*
Rev. 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years
were finished*
Rev. 21:24 of them which are saved* and honor*
Rev. 21:26 and honor*
Rev. 22:3 more*

* Omitted by the Sinaitic Manuscript. These not thus marked are omitted by both the Sinaitic and Vatican Manuscripts. http://www.bibletoday.com/htstb/spurious.htm

I’m not going to say that this list is etched in stone. Here’s what this is: On authority of Professor C. Tisendorf’s notes on the reading of the two oldest Greek manuscripts, the Sinaitic and the Vatican #1209. The words listed, found in our common King James Version are not found in the oldest manuscripts.

 

[Riverwolf]

He most likely didnt because if he did he ABSOLUTELY wouldnt make that statement.

After all, the language spoken by the common people of King James's kingdom, which was the target audience of his translation, is as different from our English, all the modern dialects of it, as modern "Standard" English is from Ebonic English. They're completely different dialects.

(...you know, I'd love to read a Bible in Ebonic English. That'd be awesome!)

 

[AK4]

After all, the language spoken by the common people of King James's kingdom, which was the target audience of his translation, is as different from our English, all the modern dialects of it, as modern "Standard" English is from Ebonic English. They're completely different dialects.

(...you know, I'd love to read a Bible in Ebonic English. That'd be awesome!)

LOL, that was funny

 

[Monomonk]

I agree that the only bible to be reading is the KJV. That being said there are things found there that should not. Such as easter. I found it once in the kjv and went and looked up original word. The same exact word that was translated easter was translated passover everywhere else it was found. Any of the newer versions are written with a denomination at the helm. A word added here or a word left out there altars the whole meaning of a passage. As for your 2 guys not seeing death till they see the kingdom. They already have seen the kingdom in a vision. They are dead, gone, and buried.

You say they are dead, gone, and buried. I say prove it.

monomonk

 

[Monomonk]

Out of curiousity, is this different from what you've found with any other version of the Bible?

For example, how many faults have you found in your study of the Vulgate? Please be specific.

You did study other versions of the Bible before deciding that the KJV is the best of all of them, right?

What I need to do here is write another blog to show how corrupted other bibles are v.s.the King James, this will however take some time. And I did say, from the very
beginning of these blogs, that I was going to cause as much trouble as possible, I hope I succeed.

monomonk

 

[Riverwolf]

What I need to do here is write another blog to show how corrupted other bibles are v.s.the King James, this will however take some time. And I did say, from the very
beginning of these blogs, that I was going to cause as much trouble as possible, I hope I succeed.

monomonk

Uh...

That's strictly not allowed here, and if you keep that attitude up, you'll be banned faster than you can say "proselytizing", and whatever you hoped to accomplish will be for naught. These threads will pass into obscurity and forgotten completely, if not outright deleted by the mods.

Besides, you're not stirring up trouble at all. I'm sorry to say that many of us are not taking your posts seriously at all. Personally, I don't care if you feel the King James Bible to be the end-all Word of God(a role that was written for Jesus, not a codex), but some of us don't. If you hope to make any kind of stamp here, you first need to learn how to respect our beliefs and accept that nothing you say will quickly change them.

 

[AK4]

You say they are dead, gone, and buried. I say prove it.

monomonk

I say prove that they are still alive.

This proves that there dead...

Heb 9:27 - Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,

And besides John didnt die until he saw Jesus in His kingdom----Uuuh didnt he write the book of Revelations

But you dont wanna believe that now do you? :no:

 

[Riverwolf]

And besides John didnt die until he saw Jesus in His kingdom----Uuuh didnt he write the book of Revelations

It's unlikely John who wrote the Apocalypse bearing his name is the same John who wrote the fourth canonical gospel and subsequent letters.

 

[Mister Emu]

I find it disturbing that you list your religion as "King James Bible"...

While I really enjoy the KJV, I love the language, it is not perfect, it is a translation over a thousand years after the fact...

 

[AK4]

I find it disturbing that you list your religion as "King James Bible"...

While I really enjoy the KJV, I love the language, it is not perfect, it is a translation over a thousand years after the fact...

Me too!

 

[Jehonadab]

First let me say that I am a believer, a believer in the Bible, the King James Bible,
a believer of the word, and what is said in that word. And Jesus said: "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."St. Matthew 16:28. Why? Why where these people selected not to die until the end of the world, until Satan is defeated,and the evils of the world erased? And again Jesus speaks: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass way."St. Matthew 24:35. Now that is a tremendous statement, just think of it, the whole universe, yes and including the earth, will pass away, but the words of Christ will not pass away. Now that is power!
Now I have two questions concerning this statement by Christ: 1: If this be so, that his word will not pass away, do we have access to that word? 2: If we do have access
to that word, where is it? If heaven and earth is passing away, and the words of
Christ are not, can we not rest assured that that word will not be corrupted? Especially by men? All right, where is the word? And who has been put in charge to
write it? Now lets go back to those who will not taste of death until Christ comes in
his kingdom, why were they set aside not to die, what purpose where they to fulfill?
Well this is my idea: Their main job was to write the King James Bible! The flawless
Bible. In all my days of reading this Bible I have found no fault in it, it is perfect,
it has to be, for the word of Christ can not pass away. Is the word of God going to be
corrupted by mere men? Nay I say, nay, nay, nay!

More to come. monomonk

Matthew 16:28 refers to the occurrence in Matthew 17 regarding the transfiguration. Three apostles witnessed ademonstration of Jesus "coming into his kingdom". THis is verified by Peter at 2 Peter 1:16-18

 

[Jehonadab]

You are very right about Matthew 24:35... it is a very powerful scripture. especially when you consider Psalms 104:5 (Who laid the foundation of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever KJV), Psalms 78:69 or Ecclesiates 1:4 (the earth abideth for ever KJV). Jesus was using an statement similiar to "I'll eat my own shoe" to demonstrate the things he speaks of will occur.

 

[Jehonadab]

It's unlikely John who wrote the Apocalypse bearing his name is the same John who wrote the fourth canonical gospel and subsequent letters.

Actually it was the very same John. Although listed last in bible Revelation was not the last book written. It was completed around 96 C.E while the Gospel of John and his 3 letters where completed 2 yrs later.

 

[Riverwolf]

Actually it was the very same John. Although listed last in bible Revelation was not the last book written. It was completed around 96 C.E while the Gospel of John and his 3 letters where completed 2 yrs later.

There is no evidence for that, I'm afraid, and what evidence there is, like writing style and subject matter, points to them being different people. After all, the name John was as common then as it is now.

 

[Jehonadab]

There is no evidence for that, I'm afraid, and what evidence there is, like writing style and subject matter, points to them being different people. After all, the name John was as common then as it is now.

Papias, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Justin Martyr all referred to Revelation as the writing of the apostle John. Abd the writing styles of the Gospel and 1 John are similiar. His position as the "older man" (last living apostle) must have been commom knowledge to his audience therefore leaving no reason for him to explain himself.

Jesus was also a common name during biblical times. And if The Apostle John was not the writer who was?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

His position as the "older man" (last living apostle) must have been commom knowledge ...

There is no consensus (much less proof) that the author was the "last living apostle." See, for example ...

Particularly pages 519 through 524.

 

[Jehonadab]

I agree that there is no consensus. Although that argument (consensus) could be used for 110% of the bible.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I agree that there is no consensus. Although that argument (consensus) could be used for 110% of the bible.

I suggest you read the available scholarship - something that you've clearly (and, perhaps, dogmatically) avoided. The text referenced above is widely respected and would be a good place to start.

 

[Riverwolf]

Papias, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Justin Martyr all referred to Revelation as the writing of the apostle John. Abd the writing styles of the Gospel and 1 John are similiar. His position as the "older man" (last living apostle) must have been commom knowledge to his audience therefore leaving no reason for him to explain himself.

Jesus was also a common name during biblical times. And if The Apostle John was not the writer who was?

So some people all agreed that John who wrote his namesake Apocalypse was the same as the Apostle John, who is attributed to the fourth canonical Gospel and subsequent letters. These are people who lived centuries after the fact, so I don't think they have any authority on this issue.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying that the Apostle John was not the same John who wrote his namesake Apocalypse, they very well could be the same person. It's just that there is no real evidence to support that and we already have two Johns in the Jesus story: the Apostle and the Baptist. Why can't we have a third?

And I know Jesus was a common name at the time; the author of Ecclesiasticus(one of the Apocryphal books) was named Jesus.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

..., they very well could be the same person.

Why do you think so?