AV1611 Bible Forum Archive

AV1611 Bible Forum Archive (https://av1611.com/forums/index.php)
-   Bible Versions (https://av1611.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Do we need Greek and Hebrew? (https://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=489)

atlas 09-18-2008 10:56 PM

Do we need Greek and Hebrew?
 
Do we need Greek and Hebrew?

I'll say no, we never need Greek or Hebrew.


I hold to the belief that the KJV is the 100% perfect preserved Word of God, therefore I never need Greek or Hebrew.

If you believe that the KJV is God's preserved Word why do you even need Greek or Hebrew?


Atlas

bibleprotector 09-18-2008 11:50 PM

“For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.” (Zephaniah 3:9).

If you look at the context of this verse, you can see that it is set in the latter times. Now, since people were talking Hebrew, the “pure language” to which the people would be turned cannot be Hebrew (they would not be turned from Hebrew to Hebrew, but to another language). Moreover, it cannot be Greek (the New Testament) because the Jews and even Christians to this day, have to yet reached a point of “one consent” in believing, and in their knowledge of what God’s name actually is (i.e. JEHOVAH).

Since English is the global language, the “pure language” must be God’s Word in one form (one Bible version) for all. Thus, the pure language is literally Biblical English.

This being the case, going back to the Hebrew or Greek, both in regards to text (which words belong) and/or translation (the meaning of words) is not consistent with the statement of Zephaniah 3:9.

“For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.” (Isaiah 28:11).

The evangelisation of the Jews (i.e. natural Israel) must be by a different language, not Hebrew, nor Syriack, nor Greek, but English. There has not yet been a full conversion of the Jews or Israel, (even though English is now spoken there), but the Scripture shows that Israel (the Jews) must be converted: “And so all Israel shall be saved” (Rom. 11:26a), “Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.” (Rom. 11:31), “I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.” (Rom. 10:19), etc.

There are plenty of indications in Scripture that the language of the last days conversion of Israel must begin by Gentiles (i.e. a nation of English speakers). “Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.” (Isaiah 45:22, 23).

“Every word of God is pure” (Proverbs 30:5a).

God’s Word is in English. It is a pure version and translation in English. And we even have it pure right down to the details of spelling and so on. Then why would we surrender this great heritage, and think that running to a lexicon etc. is going to be a foundational source for interpretation of the words of Scripture.

Is not God powerful enough to give His Word fully and utterly in English? Is He not powerful enough to give not only sufficiently but fully His revelation in English as much as it was in the Hebrew or Greek? And is not the English Bible superior because it has gathered into one book all the 66 books, and that the language happens to correspond to the one world language, where study of it shows it has the exact and fullness of His written revelation to mankind?

The Authority of Scripture = King James Bible only.

P.S. God did not give the Scripture by inspiration in English, but was powerful enough to cause the preservation and transmission of inspired Scripture to be formed and rendered thus (i.e. given) in the English tongue. In other words, the spirit (inspiration) of the words that were written in Hebrew and Greek are just as powerful today in our King James Bible. While inspiration is a one off process, the product "inspired words" must not diminish in time and space (despite the spirit of antichrist, etc.). In fact, when God was giving the Scripture by inspiration when it was being written, God was fully intending and specifically planning that those words would be all brought together in one volume, one book, that is, one common and standard Bible for the whole world, being the King James Bible. However, God has been faithful, and blessed the Scripture and the users of it at any stage of history, despite persecutions, scattering or impurities (like tiny copying mistakes). God has ensured that all corruptions and even printing errors have, at the last, been eliminated.

Luke 09-19-2008 02:15 AM

I always use that verse in Zephaniah 3:9

It's probably the quickest way to become the laughing stock of any forum :P (except this one)

Scott Simons 09-19-2008 04:46 AM

There is a large group of King James promoters that indicate that they use the Greek and Hebrew to clarify the word of God, (I disagree). I have personally have used the Greek and Hebrew in some word studies, but rarely do it now. However I would have to agree that the Greek and Hebrew no longer carries the word of God. It is strictly contain in the King James Bible, English.
If one would like to read God’s Word they are going to have learn to read English, just like people used to have to learn Hebrew before if they where to read the pure word of God.
The point is that man shall live by every word of God and that is no longer found in the Hebrew.
I do believe that men like Peter Ruckman who have done apologetic for the King James have fulfilled a purpose in time in understanding of its use and application. However now there is so much evidence now that the King James is the Bible, to not except that fact is willfully ignorant. The information is so available and so conclusive that to teach any thing else is deceptive or misleading.
There is now a need to be a growing up into that all others are version perversions and are satanic in use and application, and should not be tolerated as acceptable. Just to read a perversion version is infectious and entirely misleading. There is no word of God in any of it, the context makes it so.
So do we need the Greek and Hebrew no not really.
But as Luke said you will get laugh at by a lot of people, and you will be surprised by whom some of them are.
But then again you may know the old saying, the Pioneers catch the arrows.
The truth is the truth and nothing is truer.

Steve Schwenke 09-20-2008 03:43 PM

Do we need the Greek and Hebrew? No!
Can it be helpful? Yes
I will use Dr. Ruckman as an example.

Several of Dr. Ruckman's sermons have references to the Greek and Hebrew. It is helpful to a small degree, but not to the degree that most fundamentalists carry it.
Using the Greek and Hebrew to clarify a passage is one thing; using it to "correct" a passage is an entirely different thing.
The main thing I use Greek and Hebrew for is to show the superiority of the the King James Bible to the new versions, and to show the gross errors of the Minority Texts. I rarely go into the Greek or Hebrew, but on occasion have found it helpful as a subordinate point (in other words, it is never a main support for whatever I am teaching - always a secondary support.) A working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew also helps silence the mouths of the Bible correctors. If you can start showing them things from Nestle's, they generally turn and run - they don't want to mess around with someone who might know as much or more than they do!

The KJ translators were well versed in several languages, and this was very helpful to them when they translated the Greek/hebrew into English. Having a knowledge of many other languages only helps in the understanding of our Bible, especially in light of the fact that the KJB is written in British English, not American English. Never short yourself on education!

I disagree with the interpretations given above on Zeph. 3:9 - I believe this is a reference to the Millenial kingdom. One thing English is NOT is pure - it is a mongrel conglomeration of many different languages. Hebrew is very much the same as it was in the Biblical era.

My two cents,

joshjefflawn 09-20-2008 05:58 PM

This is my conviction, taket how you will this is what I believe.
I don't know one word in either greek or hebrew. So to try to study the word of God from either wouldn't do me any good. What did Paul say about tounghes,
" Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue." 2 Cor 14:19.
If my preacher Got up sunday to the pulpet and began to preach out of the Recieved Text, what would it protfit me If I understood nothing he said. It would be in vain, same with the Hebrew old Testimat. Like I said I don't know enough hebrew or greek to ax were the bathroom is let alone get saved.

So my conviction is this. If you understand Greek and Hebrew, and you use it to edifie Gods holy word, the KJV then I don't think there is anything wrong with that. But If you are using either hebrew, greek german or anything else to correct and to bring dought to Gods holy word then I think you would be playing a fools game, puting yourself in judgment of Gods Word. The very book (word) that will sit in judgment on all creation.

If you think your smart enough to tell God, that his word has errors, then be my guest, but don't do it if Im within a 5,000,000,000,000 mile distance from you.

stephanos 09-20-2008 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke (Post 7864)
I always use that verse in Zephaniah 3:9

It's probably the quickest way to become the laughing stock of any forum :P (except this one)

Isn't that the truth! But we gotta keep on keeping on brother. I no longer even worry about peoples response to my comments about the KJB. There is one reason for this. When I heard that the KJB was the pure and preserved Word of God, I to mocked the very idea. But that seed eventually bore fruit, and now I am VEHEMENT about the KJB. I LOVE the KJB! I want to share this amazing Book of books with all mankind. For it is both Truth and Spirit. This book is the way my God talks to me. I talk to Him through prayer, and through His Book He talks to me. It is such an amazing relationship, and I am not ashamed of it at all.

Holding the KJB high!

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Will Kinney 09-20-2008 07:30 PM

God's perfect Book - the King James Bible
 
Hi saints. I agree with all of the above. Great posts! I do know biblical Greek pretty well and I have tools to help me out with the Hebrew, but in every case and without exception it is the English language of the King James Holy Bible that is my final written authority. I'm glad that I have been able to learn some Greek solely for the purpose of showing how silly the arguments are of those who would try to discredit The Book. I REALLY believe God was providentially involved in bringing forth the pure words of God as they are found only in the King James Holy Bible and it alone is the Standard by which all others are to be measured.

Will K

Steven Avery 09-20-2008 08:51 PM

Hi Folks,

Amen, Will and all. I even hesitate to spend the time and effort (even if I felt it was available and worthwhile) to do something with Biblical Greek because you can see what a stumbling block it is for the seminarian modern versionists. The stench of arrogance begins to overtake even the lack of Biblical consistency. And the pride of false knowledge overtakes even the petty attempts at weak exegesis and analysis designed to 'correct' the Bible.

Will is one of the few I know who has kept a sound balance, using some Greek savvy only as a tool to help defend the pure Bible. Some others are surely on this forum and a few other forums of Bible defenders. Personally I likely do not have, today, the humility before God and the overall moderation to properly handle the scholastic volatility of trying to integrate Greek expertise with the more basic truth. The simple and true and pure Bible understanding gained by simply accepting and believing the pure and perfect King James Bible. Thank you Lord Jesus for the purity and perfection of the Scriptures.

Oh, and so many times the attempts of the correctors are so weak they can be refuted simply with common sense and a smidgen of research anyway. In a pinch you call on the brethren with a bit more background, only needed occasionally, rarely.

Oh, I have a smidgen of Hebrew background, mostly phonetic stuff, since most of the learning was many years back, and only peripheral to Bible studies. While the situation is similar, at least with modern Hebrew there is a purpose in allowing for conversational Hebrew and reading publications and books in Israel to the folks not English-fluent. That is modern Hebrew, though, not the unnecessary sideline of Biblical Hebrew.

Shalom,
Steven

bibleprotector 09-20-2008 09:44 PM

Can Greek be used as a help to define, understand or clarify a word or passage?

If it could continue to be, then there would be no point of God giving us His Word in English, because it would not have the full conceptual authority in English.

If we cannot know certainly what our Bible says and means in English (because of restrictions, such as further meaning in the Greek), then God is not all powerful, and His providence is a failure.

I know one, who, in the past, on several occasions attempted to understand the Bible and its doctrine by looking up the meaning of Greek or Hebrew words. But I think that this is unnecessary and even wrong.

Has God really failed to get the full import of the Gospel, right down to the jot and tittle, and every meaning perfect in English?

“But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” (1 Peter 1:25).

The full measure of God’s revelation of the Scripture must be fully given to us in English, and must be for the whole world (which has English as the common tongue).

“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matthew 5:18).

We cannot even know what jot and tittles belong, and what exactly is to be fulfilled, if we are yet relying upon the mysterious “authority” of the Hebrew and Greek (where there is no standard edition to the nth degree, and where there is no certain meaning which may be accessed by Christians generally, let alone the world universally). But since we have an accurate English Bible which we can understand, so likewise may we believe and see everything it says fulfilled. (Otherwise how can we know when God brings to pass any promise, since we would not be certain as to what the promises actually are, which is to say, having a perfect Word leads to perfect faith.)

“He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.” (Deuteronomy 32:4).

If God has caused His Word to come forth to the world in English, then the English Bible must be perfect. It must be completely perfect as an entity, which would mean that perfection of knowledge of its meaning would not require or necessitate any knowledge of the Scripture contained in any other language. (However, this should not mean that knowing Scripture in another language is a mark of antichrist, rather, it is to be counted as dung. To do good is not of antichrist, but to do good without Christ is as dung.)

Moreover, whereas the King James Bible translators were well versed in other languages, (and many godly men since), we see that God’s providential outworking was there with their translation. But once they translated, what need had they for further translating? And now, once we have the purified presentation of the King James Bible, agreed and settled, why would we think that interpretation of the Scripture requires or finds any edification in looking into the original languages?

It should be a truth to us that INTERPRETATION IS BASED UPON THE AUTHORITY OF THE ENGLISH SCRIPTURE ALONE, and the Holy Ghost’s use of godly teachers in the true Church of the same.

Finally, Zephaniah 3:9 is talking about Biblical English. The English of the King James Bible is indeed pure. It is clear that Bible Hebrew was not a “mongrel language”, and that while English may indeed be “a coat of many colours”, nevertheless, by this seemingly foolish notion of a Gentile tongue should God cause His Gospel to be preached in great power and glory, even in this present time (soon at hand). That is the historicist meaning of “for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy.” (Zephaniah 3:8b). Of course, there is also a Millennial meaning of the prophecy, but the Scripture says there are “times of refreshing” (note “times” plural), so the Restitution is not just in the Millennium, but for Christians before even the Great Tribulation, i.e. in this present dispensation. (Peter boldly claimed such promises already for his day, how much more should we, when iniquity does abound!)

Have a read of what the Puritan (Baptist) John Canne wrote in the preface to his Bible with extra margin notes: www.bibleprotector.com/John_Canne.pdf

Steven Avery 09-21-2008 05:08 PM

Hi Folks,

My goal here will be to make a point, yet not rehash a discusions already hashed.

Those most active in King James Bible defense will use many tools at hand. Many will be historic. I like to show the Reformation Bible perspective and how the Reformation Bible defeated the Vulgate and led to the pure and perfect King James Bible. And how the modern versions are the scholastically vapid and rebellious attempt to promote some sort of counter-reformation text, which led to the modern version disaster.

Many may be in realms of consistency, inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible text. Showing the abject corruptions in the various levels of the counter-reformation texts. Logical, geographical, historical, and other direct errors. Also their lack of internal consistency. And their problems in doctrinal and other realms.

We will also counter the hodge-podge of attacks against the King James Bible. These vary from person to person, some are historical, some are translational, some are anti-Reformation Bible (Textus Receptus), some are English language criticisms and there are many others. Often they are thrown out in the "let's throw out a dozen and see if anything sticks mode" without sincerity from the Bible adversaries. Others are thrown out in the "I don't care that this was already powerfully and cogently answered" mode, reflection the "I will repeat it because my conscience is seared" condition of some adversaries.

To be fair, on rare occasions the questions come forth with some sincerity.

In these attacks we often come across those based on a claim that the King James Bible does not represent the source language texts. Will Kinney could give you dozens of examples of such claims, and they range from vapid to silly to insipid to loony to meshugana to a few that at least are interesting and good studies. (Actually, often even the loony ones lead the Bible believers to good studies, as we learn the word of God more excellently. What was meant for ill is turned to good.)

In our upholding the word of God we will use many tools to disassemble the false attacks. And one of these tools will be showing the inconsistent and erroneous ways in which the opponents have abused source language arguments. In so doing it can be 100% proper to reference the Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic or Latin aspects. Either our own understanding, or those of others who have helped share on the way.

This is an auxiliary aspect of King James Bible defense. It is by no means necessary for any individual, defender or otherwise, nor is it necessary for those studying to show themselves approved. This type of defense logic and truth is simply a reasonable service of some Bible defenders.

Shalom,
Steven

Scott Simons 09-21-2008 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Avery (Post 8056)
Hi Folks,

My goal here will be to make a point, yet not rehash a discusions already hashed.

Those most active in King James Bible defense will use many tools at hand. Many will be historic. I like to show the Reformation Bible perspective and how the Reformation Bible defeated the Vulgate and led to the pure and perfect King James Bible. And how the modern versions are the scholastically vapid and rebellious attempt to promote some sort of counter-reformation text, which led to the modern version disaster.

Many may be in realms of consistency, inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible text. Showing the abject corruptions in the various levels of the counter-reformation texts. Logical, geographical, historical, and other direct errors. Also their lack of internal consistency. And their problems in doctrinal and other realms.

We will also counter the hodge-podge of attacks against the King James Bible. These vary from person to person, some are historical, some are translational, some are anti-Reformation Bible (Textus Receptus), some are English language criticisms and there are many others. Often they are thrown out in the "let's throw out a dozen and see if anything sticks mode" without sincerity from the Bible adversaries. Others are thrown out in the "I don't care that this was already powerfully and cogently answered" mode, reflection the "I will repeat it because my conscience is seared" condition of some adversaries.

To be fair, on rare occasions the questions come forth with some sincerity.

In these attacks we often come across those based on a claim that the King James Bible does not represent the source language texts. Will Kinney could give you dozens of examples of such claims, and they range from vapid to silly to insipid to loony to meshugana to a few that at least are interesting and good studies. (Actually, often even the loony ones lead the Bible believers to good studies, as we learn the word of God more excellently. What was meant for ill is turned to good.)

In our upholding the word of God we will use many tools to disassemble the false attacks. And one of these tools will be showing the inconsistent and erroneous ways in which the opponents have abused source language arguments. In so doing it can be 100% proper to reference the Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic or Latin aspects. Either our own understanding, or those of others who have helped share on the way.

This is an auxiliary aspect of King James Bible defense. It is by no means necessary for any individual, defender or otherwise, nor is it necessary for those studying to show themselves approved. This type of defense logic and truth is simply a reasonable service of some Bible defenders.

Shalom,
Steven

That was awesome.:)

bibleprotector 09-21-2008 07:35 PM

Quote:

To be fair, on rare occasions the questions come forth with some sincerity.
This is where things like Burgon, Hills, Grady and Holland are useful, especially in regards to combating the present propaganda regarding issues concerning original text and translation.

Some King James Bible preference writers like to show the weakness of the modernist position from their own lack of consistency (like quoting modern versions that disagree, etc.). This certainly makes a point, but it is not the whole picture: to prove the King James Bible is authority based upon its own self is primary to the foundation for all such dealings with those infected by modernist thinking.

Our authority of Scripture is based upon the advent and perfect content of present (and enduring) Scripture as interpreted spiritually. This means that there is no need to aid interpretation and understanding of the Scripture by relying upon foreign or original languages, since the manifest Scripture in English contains all things which are necessary, so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.

Forrest 09-21-2008 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bibleprotector (Post 8067)
Our authority of Scripture is based upon the advent and perfect content of present (and enduring) Scripture as interpreted spiritually. This means that there is no need to aid interpretation and understanding of the Scripture by relying upon foreign or original languages, since the manifest Scripture in English contains all things which are necessary, so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.

Well said. Personally, I have really come to appreciate the verses in 1 John.

"But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things" (1 John 2:20). (Not suggesting I'm a know-it-all!)

"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him" (1 John 2:27).

PB1789 09-22-2008 03:39 AM

Poll or slanted question?
 
Atlas:--- If you are going to ask an opinion poll question, then please do.

If you answer your own question and then post a statement/thought which thwarts any actual discussion/input/thought, ... you are not encouraging anyone to post unless they have your team's pom-poms and colors.

{ You might get an autographed 8x10 glossy of someone from Pennsacola, Florida though. }

bibleprotector 09-22-2008 11:21 PM

PB1789, do you think there is a perfect Greek text edition of the New Testament? Do you think there is a perfect English text and translation Bible?

Steven Avery 09-23-2008 03:06 PM

the textual analysis history
 
Hi Folks,

Thanks, Scott.
Glad those thoughts helped.

I omitted one part in that overview that I would like to mention, related to the thread questions.

In understanding the purity of the Reformation Bible (the foundation of the King James Bible -- the King James Bible is the Reformation Bible unto perfection) and the decrepit state of the counter-reformation modern versions, it can help to understand the truth of the Bible analysis of the Reformation giants, with the history including Erasmus, Stephanus, Calvin, Beza and others. Augmented by the theorists like Whitaker and Turretin and Fulke who helped win the battle over the Vulgate The Reformation textual analysis was based on true insight into Bible inspiration and preservation and text, and the men realized fully that God had providentially worked through the Greek line , and also the Latin texts, to preserve his word. That a little had in fact dropped out of the Greek line, and they worked with sound and solid concepts of textual history. You can see this clearly in many places, I like to use Acts 8:37 as a textbook example.

Today's modern textual "science", by contrast, is a total disaster. The paradigms are both false and unbelieving. The texts are designed to be correct, this is forced by the paradigms. This is a story that is rather amazing.

Thus it can be a good thing for a Bible believer to understand these distinctions, to read some sound history, including some of the early church writers, especially their scriptural references. This is generally not requiring any Greek or Latin or Hebrew or Aramaic at all. And none of this is at all a necessity, or even a need, for the King James Bible believer. This is extra-curricula material.

For many King James Bible defenders getting up-to-speed on these issues can also be a reasonable service, and it can be a fun study and learning experience and can make the defense of the word of God more of a joy and an ease. As you understand and attempt to share with others more excellently the super-solid base, textually and historically, of the pure and perfect word of God, the King James Bible.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

PB1789 09-24-2008 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bibleprotector (Post 8137)
PB1789, do you think there is a perfect Greek text edition of the New Testament? Do you think there is a perfect English text and translation Bible?

Hello. Pardon the delay in posting a reply, but I was on another website giving a lengthy reply to a jewish woman who likes to try and trip/trick Christians with her posts. She is afraid that we ( Christians/evangelicals-etc..) want to either convert and save her or kill her...:rolleyes: I hope that The Holy Spirit can use my Post over there to "plant a seed".

Okay--- Well It was Atlas that started this Thread with a good question. BUT, he then went on to give us his opinion... (kinda like watching most of the big News Networks here in the States.)...That was my thought. The two posts above by Steven Avery have some good information in them, and he even has the integrity to mention that there are/were other Bibles. That is good Discussion.

I'm not against "Atlas" either,,,matter of fact I think I gave him an "Amen" and a smiley face a while back for one of his previous posts.

To the Thread Question:--- Do we need Greek and Hebrew?

My answer is: Yes, Affirmative.

Why would I say that ? Several Reasons. The gents who were at Cambridge and Oxford who were appointed to the Translation work in 1604 consulted Greek and Hebrew and Latin and I think they also consulted other languages. {Both Dr. John Gill and Dr. Adam Clarke in their Commentaries on the whole Bible often site/quote verses in the Syriac/Arabic and others to help explain things to the readers.}

Martin Luther (and the other Reformers ) used Greek and Hebrew, and translated Bibles into the native tongues of their people so that they could hear/read the Word of our God in their own tongue(s). They also used the Greek and Hebrew to confound and confuse and clobber the big-wigs of the Vatican...who limited themselves to the Latin.

If you were a Botanist or Biologist would you not consult Latin sources while doing your studies ? If you hire a man who says in the Telephone book that he does Carpentry, and when he gets to your house he only has a hammer or a saw...would you let him in the front door or say to yourself;--"This guy (bloke) ain't packin' a full toolbox!" ?..?

Bible Protector-- You are in Australia and I'm quite certain that you have two American exports which you don't need, and which we (U.S.) should never have sent Down Under: Mormons (LDS) and the J.W.'s of the WatchTower. Both of those groups use and print and OK for use the King James Version of the Bible. If anyone reading this has talked with a J.W. or a Mormon on your doorstep, you know they like to quote from certain verses.

If the average Joe or Jane Public tries to talk to them (or give them a gospel message with the A.V./K.J. they very often get tangled in knots both by the J.W.'s trying to use the Bible to prove that Jesus is a secondary God, and the Mormons who (using the same Bible as you and I use) will try and get you to believe that there are many Gods and The Father , The Son and The Holy Ghost are three (3) Gods. If a regular average person has some knowledge of certain Greek and Hebrew words they can at least put up a shield against the fiery darts.

I must get some sleep, so I'll end soon here. I don't like the many publishing house/groups that have to come out with a "New"/"Improved" Version each year, but I also find the screaming-meemies who stand near the door of a Christian book store and yell at customers entering that if they don't buy a King James version,,,then they will go to Hell..:( That is just plain weird and makes us folks that use and prefer the A.V. a tad "kooky" in the eyes of the public...IMO.

I stand with the statement found at the front of some A.V./K.J. Bibles---called the "Translators to the Reader." They Translated and our God has preserved His word as it says on my signature on this post.

bibleprotector 09-24-2008 07:52 AM

PB1789,

You seem to be a "KJB preference" type of person, because you said, “us folks that use and prefer the A.V.”

You talk about how godly men of old, and of more recently, were learned in the Biblical and classical languages, and what they have wrought for the furtherance of Christian knowledge.

But the issue is not the past, the issue is the present and future. Is it vital right now to know Bible Hebrew and Bible Greek? Is it vital today to consult Strong's or other such lexicon? Is it vital to keep some edition of the Textus Receptus in print? etc.

It is one thing to acknowledge the existence of good original language editions and good Protestant Bibles, whether in English or a foreign tongue. But none of these are vital for
English speakers today: we would not be limited in our revelation or in our knowledge if the only Bible we ever had was the King James Bible.

To claim that knowledge of certain Greek or Hebrew is somehow a great aid or even needful in combating cultist doctrine is misdirected in the least. I have confounded Russelites by using the King James Bible to directly to answer their doctrines about Christ, including that Jesus is “the firstborn from the dead”. To refute error and to instruct in truth now does not require Hebrew or Greek, but the English Bible: if it really is the Word of God given perfectly in English. (And it is, for it is self-authenticating.)

Thus, we come to issue of whether you believe that the King James Bible is perfect, and exact, conceptually accurate, sense-for-sense translation. So besides having yet a reliance upon the idea of the continuing Hebrew and Greek (where did God limit preservation to the original languages only?) there is the issue of whether the King James Bible is immaculate or not.

I am not saying that if you didn’t use the King James Bible you would have gone to hell, in that millions of Christians have not used the King James Bible. But I am indicating that it should be the authority for us to the uttermost.

If you really agree with “The Translators to the Reader”, you should agree that the King James Bible is the “one more exact Translation of the holy Scriptures into the English Tongue”, which means there is no need for the originals since it is the originals now in English, and there is no need for correcting anything, because it is exact.

Finally, there is a great problem with the original language evidence, in that there is no final settled text that exists extant today in either Hebrew or Greek (various editions of the Textus Receptus differ one to another), and there is no set or certain source as to what exactly is a correct meaning for any word, or for every last word in its exact proper meaning, unless we are to rely upon one source as a perfect text and translation: the King James Bible only.

strongmeat 09-24-2008 01:45 PM

bibleprotector said:
Quote:

I am not saying that if you didnít use the King James Bible you would have gone to hell, in that millions of Christians have not used the King James Bible. But I am indicating that it should be the authority for us to the uttermost.
An interesting statement! Now the bible says that 'So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.' Rom.10:17. In order to become a Christian one must have heard the word. Which word did these millions of Christians hear? If it is not the KJV, then is/are there other Bibles that contain the word of God that the Holy Spirit used in their conversion?

strongmeat

atlas 09-24-2008 01:48 PM

Strongmeat,


What is your final authority in all matters of faith and practice?



Atlas

Forrest 09-24-2008 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strongmeat (Post 8358)
In order to become a Christian one must have heard the word. Which word did these millions of Christians hear? If it is not the KJV, then is/are there other Bibles that contain the word of God that the Holy Spirit used in their conversion?

strongmeat


bibleprotector said:

"I am not saying that if you didnít use the King James Bible you would have gone to hell, in that millions of Christians have not used the King James Bible. But I am indicating that it should be the authority for us to the uttermost."


Strongmeat, Can a person be saved by reading John 3:16-18 in the NIV for example? (Personally, I'm a KJB only person, but I think he can.)

Even the av1611 site we've all benefited from agrees with that. People are saved the same way, believe in and receive the Lord Jesus Christ.

Luke 09-24-2008 04:07 PM

Here is the Romans Road - NIV Vs KJB

NIV first

As it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one;
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.
But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

KJB
Romans 3:23 (KJV) For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Romans 6:23 (KJV) For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Romans 5:8 (KJV) But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Romans 10:13 (KJV) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.


Now, the words are different to some extent. The KJB is perfect, but in here, the gospel is the same, IN THESE VERSES. It makes no difference whether someone hears the gospel from a KJB, from an NIV, in chinese, english, german, japanese. What matters is if the word pricks their heart, and they believe it.

There is a small remnant of old Hylesites from the 80's that still agree with Dr Hyles and Al Lacey that one can only be saved through the King James Bible. Hyles apparently later rejected this view, but it is still evident in his book "enemies of soulwinning".

We are not saved by a Bible. We are not saved by the word, but by the Word.

Brother Tim 09-24-2008 04:19 PM

Amen, Luke. Or else, what is the use of passing out tracts? Or preach?

strongmeat 09-24-2008 05:39 PM

Hello Forrest, Luke, Brother Tim

I fully agree. I hope I didnít give the impression by my question to bibleprotector that I feel that one can only be saved through the KJV. On the contrary I think otherwise. The statement I quoted from bibleprotector implies that he also believes that one can be saved other than through the KJV. There were conversions to Christ before 1611 and there are many conversions today in non-English speaking countries that certainly do not use the KJV. Also there are conversions today other than through the KJV even in English speaking countries.

However, this leads on to something else. If the Holy Spirit can use the words and the gospel message in the NIV, etc and save people (and I am convinced that this does happen), then does this not mean that such versions also contain the word of God, even if not all of it? Will the Holy Spirit use words found in versions that are perverse and corrupt to save souls?

Let me make it clear (as I did in my opening introductory post in Chit-chat) that though I have read other versions, the Holy Spirit always leads me back to the KJV. It remains the only English translation that I am comfortable with. For me the KJV is the word of God in English. The modern translations clearly are inferior to the KJV. But donít they also have truth, even if it is missing some of the truth and have garbled it in many verses.

The point I am driving at is that while I uphold the KJV above all other English translations, would I be legalistic if I state that all other English versions are not the word of God or do not contain the word of God? I do not wish to be legalistic. I do not wish to pigeon-hole or limit the working of the Holy Spirit by an extreme KJV only position. I know people who do not and will not read the King James Bible because of the old English. They read the NIV and other modern versions. I would rather they read the KJV. However, I would rather they read the NIV or another version than not read a Bible at all. Let us be careful that we do not drive people away from the Lord by an extremist or exclusive spirit.

strongmeat

Luke 09-24-2008 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strongmeat (Post 8373)
then does this not mean that such versions also contain the word of God, even if not all of it? Will the Holy Spirit use words found in versions that are perverse and corrupt to save souls?

Yes.

NIV - For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life
KJB - For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life

That is the word of God isn't it?

The NIV and modern perversions still have uncorrupted portions of the word of God in them, but the KJB IS the word of God. Every single word of it is God breathed, inspired and innerrant.

The reason we use the KJB is that Jesus said man must live BY every word of God. So we better have every word of God to live by them.

Brother Tim 09-24-2008 08:38 PM

A big distinction needs to be made here. Most modern versions CONTAIN the Word of God to various degrees. The KJB IS the Word of God in completeness. A person can read the MVs and still have the message of the Gospel presented (at this point ... future versions may not be useable) What will be hindered is the growth of the believer once he is saved. Because doctrines are distorted, and truth is compromised in the MVs, the meat necessary for spiritual growth will not be there.

Steven Avery 09-25-2008 01:48 AM

Hi Folks,

Quote:

Originally Posted by strongmeat
The point I am driving at is that while I uphold the KJV above all other English translations, would I be legalistic if I state that all other English versions are not the word of God or do not contain the word of God? ... I know people who do not and will not read the King James Bible because of the old English. They read the NIV and other modern versions. I would rather they read the KJV. However, I would rather they read the NIV or another version than not read a Bible at all.

There is a false dichotomy at work in this view. If a person were to not read the King James Bible, and they were to read an inferior version instead (as I did in a transitional period) the NIV and other alexandrian modern versions are by no means a possible solution. The reader would have to at least go to a version based on the Received Text, lest they are reading a horribly corrupt version. There is simply no excuse whatsoever for reading an alexandrian corrupt version from the Critical Text. Ignorance may be the only understandable cause -- whether it counts as an excuse is a question before God for the individual. We should never allow the simple fact that the King James Bible and the alphabet soup (NIV, HCSB, RSV, NWT, etc) are from radically differing underlying Greek texts, one pure, the Reformation Bible, the other corrupt, to be obscured by references to "English translations".

Switching to another aspect.

Many err in ignorance, that is understood. However those who consciously and actively promote attacks on the pure King James Bible must be impelled by a very deep rebellion against God, even more so if they have had brethren present them with the basic truths. Can we talk about the Christianity and the salvation of those whose primary purpose in study is to attack the word of God ? If there so much bondage, if they are the tool used by spiritual principalities to fight the word of God, I believe we should be slow to talk about their lining up as Christians or commending their salvation based upon some particular doctrinal bar. If their primary writings and efforts are against the pure and perfect word of God, something is deeply awry on a very fundamental level.

Shalom,
Steven

atlas 09-25-2008 08:36 AM

Steven & Strong,

Quote:

Many err in ignorance, that is understood. However those who consciously and actively promote attacks on the pure King James Bible must be impelled by a very deep rebellion against God, even more so if they have had brethren present them with the basic truths. Can we talk about the Christianity and the salvation of those whose primary purpose in study is to attack the word of God ? If there so much bondage, if they are the tool used by spiritual principalities to fight the word of God, I believe we should be slow to talk about their lining up as Christians or commending their salvation based upon some particular doctrinal bar. If their primary writings and efforts are against the pure and perfect word of God, something is deeply awry on a very fundamental level.
This is a very good post my friend also very true. Most of the folks I know that read MV's always attack the AV. They also almost always will tell you that we do not have the perfect Word God in translation. They are always taught this by their " Godly Pastors and college professors. "

Quote:

I know people who do not and will not read the King James Bible because of the old English.
Many of these same people that " will not read the King James Bible because of the old English " will read Shakespeare in spite of it's Old English. Maybe we need to revise Shakespeare and bring Shakespeare " up to date. " Many children in schools in all English speaking nations are being forced to read this " out dated " set of plays in schools all over the world. I have yet to hear of anyone that would not read Shakespeare because of the Old English have you? I have also yet to hear anyone say they could not understand Shakespeare because of it's Old English words. All of the libs that say we must update the AV would cry foul if we ever tried to touch Shakespeare and bring it up to date. I can almost hear the libs and high society types now saying, " how dare you try to revise Shakespeare? " Many times these are the same folks demanding the AV be revised and updated. If you defend the AV you are some kind of nut. It's a little ironic don't you think?


Atlas

Scott Simons 09-26-2008 04:12 AM

Does deception have consequences?
If content is the bases for truth, how can any MV (or rather PV Ė Perversion Versions), that are deceptive in that they teach another gospel with corrupted words, spirit and intent have any pure words in it let alone very pure words, how can they lead to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.

Many so called believers have so called received Jesus Christ as their Saviour then along comes wolf in sheep clothing, ie Mormons and leads them into a false religion and then they go along and teach a false gospel themselves.
What are the consequences and the reality?

So called preachers of the Gospel have received Jesus Christ as their Saviour, ie John Hagee, and then start teaching and writing books that Jesus Christ is not the Messiah.
What are the consequences and the reality?

If PVís have any of the word of God in them how can ;
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
How does this verse apply to you?

Are the words of PVs spirit? Do they quickeneth your spirit or your flesh? Do they bring life? Is there really any of Godís words in them?

When a preacher preaches does he preach to the spirit or the flesh, do tract minister to the spirit or to the flesh, these are questions we must be answered if we are going to judge PVís as containing part of Godís words.
If you are receiving the gospel by the flesh rather than by the spirit are you saved? Do you begin in the flesh or in the spirit?
If Perversion Versions are not spirit (and they arenít) how can they lead anyone to Jesus Christ of God?

There is no word of God in Perversion Version even when they quote the word of God exactly in places.

Steven Avery 09-26-2008 08:27 AM

Hi Folks,

One problem with this view, especially when expressed very stridently, is that many of us became believers in the Lord Jesus Christ when we only knew and and read deficient versions. We simply did not know any better, and in fact often the spirit did quickeneth. I certainly will not say about the deficient versions I was using at that time that there was "no word of God". I did learn some about God through those versions, and more so when I moved from the alexandrian versions to Received Text versions. Later still came the fully correct move to the King James Bible. Precept upon precept, line upon line.

Clearly, I will agree that sincere believers will be drawn to the pure Bible, recognizing their need for the consistent and true and pure and perfect representation of God's word, the King James Bible. Much as sincere seekers of truth are drawn to the Lord Jesus Christ, recognizing their need to be covered by the blood of the lamb. However I do not find it purposeful to disown and attack those aspects of the deficient versions that are actually reasonable. Especially when sharing with those in the same type of ignorance as was I when I learned about the Bible question.

I realize there is little give-way in these discussions. Folks who want to emphasize the perversion terminology and the no-good view will do so. Their views are understandable, however I personally do not find that expressing that view as the end-all of the matter is helpful.
Shalom,
Steven

bibleprotector 09-26-2008 08:31 AM

My view is that expressed by Brother Tim:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother Tim
A big distinction needs to be made here. Most modern versions CONTAIN the Word of God to various degrees. The KJB IS the Word of God in completeness. A person can read the MVs and still have the message of the Gospel presented (at this point ... future versions may not be useable) What will be hindered is the growth of the believer once he is saved. Because doctrines are distorted, and truth is compromised in the MVs, the meat necessary for spiritual growth will not be there.


Scott Simons 09-26-2008 09:56 AM

Bewitched or not to bewitched?
 
A question would be are (deficient versions) DV are for Jesus Christ or are they against him.
I would have to say they are not for Jesus Christ rather they are against him.
Does the words of God equivocate the Spirit of God?
Why was Paul so concern with [KJ] Galatians 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
What untold damage these Perversion Version ĖPV have done, if they are just deficient then maybe not so much, huh.
As believers we have been way to tolerate of the perversion of the word of God.
If perversion versions are just deficient then that is a deferent story. I would have to say no harm no foul. Then you would have to say the diluting of the word of God is not a diminishing of the word rather well intended men, just made some a mistake or oops a few errors. I donít think so rather it is an intentional operation to bewitch people.
Perversion versions are divinations and sorceries not just deficient.
If one begins in the flesh or an emotional reaction to manipulation of the word of God, does one really believe in there heart?
So to say the perversion of Godís words is to bewitch one, by a divination; through the sorceries of those that hate God is just deficient may be a little to passive to a major problem.
Or you can say that the perversion is not a bewitching, or a divination, to work the sorceries of the enemy.
How serious is the enemy and how serious are we?

What say you?

bibleprotector 09-27-2008 08:04 AM

If we are to have our conscience in order, and do properly, we should obey the instruction not to touch the unclean thing, but to depart from evil. However, the issue is that God's people (sincere born again Christians) were touching the unclean thing, or in Babylon by default at this time, which means that they must “come out”. Thus, rather than to write the “offenders” off, God in His mercy is outworking things so that of the multitudes of those connected to modern versions, some, even many, can be delivered and freed.

The issue is whether or not the power of God is greater than the bewitching which has affected Christianity. Even though very few people seem to be not bewitched does not mean that God’s power is limited. Remember, "Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts."

joshjefflawn 09-27-2008 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bibleprotector (Post 8004)
Can Greek be used as a help to define, understand or clarify a word or passage?[/url]

There are sertintly things in the Bible that arent easily understood, like the parables for example. But greek couldn't help at all because they are things that are spiritually discerned.
Just because you can't get something from a verse in the Bible, doesn't meen that there is something wrong with that verse. It could be that that verse, what ever it may be that your having trouble with, is a verse that God wants us to seek him directly with, he may want us to pray, to spend time studying it.
The bible is the most amazing book ever written. How else can you explane finding something speacial from say romans that you never saw before, even though you have read romans 900,000 times.
I don't see anything wrong with using Greek or hebrew, or a Concorance, as long as you remember that the best source for understanding something is the Lord himself, the author of the Bible.:)

Scott Simons 09-27-2008 09:37 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bibleprotector (Post 8498)
If we are to have our conscience in order, and do properly, we should obey the instruction not to touch the unclean thing, but to depart from evil. However, the issue is that God's people (sincere born again Christians) were touching the unclean thing, or in Babylon by default at this time, which means that they must “come out”. Thus, rather than to write the “offenders” off, God in His mercy is outworking things so that of the multitudes of those connected to modern versions, some, even many, can be delivered and freed.

The issue is whether or not the power of God is greater than the bewitching which has affected Christianity. Even though very few people seem to be not bewitched does not mean that God’s power is limited. Remember, "Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts."


I certainly think God’s powers is greater than anything, God however choices to do certain things certain ways. I do happen to agree with your PCE position and sincerely have accepted that there should be a standard, and that your comments would better fit those not using the PCE yet.
Although, I think you may have not got the point I am making about perversion versions (PV). That the danger is more than superficial, and is more diabolical than we may have first thought, therefore the point of sorceries, divinations and the really the out right witchcraft that these PV induce is more hideous than imaged.
We have looked at the Gospel in away that seem simple enough, however cults and non-christian sects have presented a different or another Jesus. Wherein PV also present another Jesus, ie John Hagee Jesus is not the Messiah, the Mormon Jesus blood did not save us, the PV Jesus did not pour out his soul unto death.
What we can look for is just as the Christians of Germany sold out Jesus for the Nazi, the false or deceived believer will worship and follow the Anti-Christ or a anit-christ just as they followed Hitler.

By the way I don’t think a very few people are bewitch but rather a very large amount are bewitched, and certainly the verse indicates such and well as it is by the spirit and not by the flesh.

The mystery of iniquity does work, and ~The Narrow and Wide Gates
Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

The problem is way bigger that we are giving it credit for and we are the few that even recognizes it as a problem.

bibleprotector 09-27-2008 11:05 PM

You seem to doubt the salvation of those who have modern versions. I say that if the light shines to them and they reject the light, then they are in danger of hellfire. In fact, I think that quite a few are not saved to begin with, though they began their christian walk/ministries with "good intentions". What you are talking about is people who actually love darkness and error, that is, they make a choice to decieve themselves. I am certain there are still many who are trapped into modern versions rather than this being an overt (though deceptive) choice.

I am glad you agree on the PCE.

Finally, it may be that there is to be a kind of civil war on the KJB issue, because in the end, those who are willing to "die" for modern versions must be not of Christ, and thus, it would not be a civil war, but one of darkness versus light, but with both sides invoking the name "Christ" and the notion of "Scripture". (Two different "Christs" and two different kinds of "Bibles".)

It is important not to think that just because there are "few" right, and "many" on the broad path to destruction that this is to continue in this same way: the few are impowered to make a difference, and make inroads: see Isaiah 41:15, Isaiah 60:22, Daniel 12:3, Acts 12:24, Acts 19:20, etc.

Scott Simons 09-28-2008 08:13 PM

[QUOTE]
Quote:

Originally Posted by bibleprotector (Post 8532)
You seem to doubt the salvation of those who have modern versions.

What is curious to me is how we delineate perversions of God’s word to a modern version or deficient versions. What is going on, if there are corruptions in the word of God does that make it a version? I would say that the Geneva Bible was a version, and several others before the King James was translated and edited to the Bible God has promised and we now handle. Perversion Versions (PV) certainly is more definitive to the reality we now face with this attack on the word of God. If we are born again of an incorruptible seed, being the word of God, and not another Gospel, which is not another gospel any more that so called versions of the bible are a bibles or versions of the bible. We give creditability to perversions of God’s words when we call them modern or deficient.

Quote:

I am certain there are still many who are trapped into modern versions rather than this being an overt (though deceptive) choice.
If we are born again by this seed that is not corrupt how can we be born again another way? For it would be better that we had not know the way of righteousness, for the later is worse.

Quote:

It is important not to think that just because there are "few" right, and "many" on the broad path to destruction that this is to continue in this same way: the few are impowered to make a difference, and make inroads:
I not sure what you where getting at with the few I would certainly not oppose of the Jonathan view point.
1 Samuel 14:6 And Jonathan said to the young man that bare his armour, Come, and let us go over unto the garrison of these uncircumcised: it may be that the LORD will work for us: for there is no restraint to the LORD to save by many or by few.
I thought we where talking about how many are bewitched.



The point may be, are people really born again when they believe, or rather they fall away after they are born again and then are twice dead. I really don’t know for sure, I know all arguments and have never been convinced one way or the other. I know the word of God is definitive on not adding or taking away the words of God and the doctrines of men diminish the word of God making the word of none affect.


How long is “a while”, if you believe do you believe, if you fall away where do you fall away from, if you are unable to attain repentance or be renewed unto repentance, if you say Lord Lord what are you, if you preach the Gospel of Christ on TV for years and years later deny Jesus is the Messiah what is that, if you have grand crusades where millions come to the alter and are lead in a born again praying with the preaching of versions of the bible what is that, what is a great falling away, should I go on?

Eternal security is a promise, he will never forsake us, and no man is able to pluck us out of his hand, and nothing is able to separate us from his love, and a smoldering reed he will not be put out. How much more secure can we be, we have the promise of God.

Going on to the main point if God’s words are spirit; are perversions of his words spirit also and if so what spirit? Can we be born again with the preaching of another gospel? Do not these versions preach another gospel, I think so.
We should heed that the light is not darkness.
Indeed they are not versions of God’s word neither in spirit or intent, rather are the very word of the devil, Satan himself, and we should bear against them, not give them legitimacy in calling them modern of deficient.

I can not change what God said, why should we diminish from it, after all we have received the love of the truth, and they obviously have not or have fallen away.

Again to further literate what I have said before there is “No words of God in Perversion Version” until you understand with your heart, and believe in your heart you will not be converted, and healed.

Your testimony may be you began in a version that had a semblance of God words, but that does not make it in anyway God’s word, the devil play a dangerous game with our lives, cunning and deceitful. Coprointel is what it is and we need not be ignorant of the devises of the devil.

You begin in the Spirit if you where drawn and called, it was the Spirit of God and not perversion versions, great is God’s mercy, wherein he has overcome the world, not by might, or by power, but rather by his Spirit.
That is why our calling to expose this great evil is so important; we should get closer to being on the same page, and call them Perversion Versions.

A pound of wheat with an ounce of poison becomes all poison.

Previous examples how the German Christian Church followed an antichrist, Hitler, should be amp warning where we are heading, being Pre-Trib or Post may matters little, judgment begins in the house of God.

PB1789 09-29-2008 03:29 AM

Thread Topic ?!?
 
:confused: Well folks,,,seems another Thread has gone off the tracks...

...and it seems to me that the guy who has derailed it started another thread about "Perversion Versions",,,but not enough folks wanted to play over there so he decided to "shoehorn' into this thread. :(

Since the subject of salvation via anything else than using the A.V./K.J. has come up on this thread... {BTW- Steven Avery and Bible Protector said some rational things.} I thought that I would mention something that I heard just the other day while driving and listening to the Moody Bible Institute Radio Station up here-(sponsored by Alaska Village missions)- an interview with Anne Graham Lotz---(a daughter of Billy and Ruth Graham) ---

She told the interviewer that she had been watching a movie titled: "King of Kings" when she about 7 or 8 years of age. When the part of the crucifixion was shown, she realized that she was a sinner and needed a Saviour..! :)

The Holy Spirit used a movie about Jesus Christ to work upon this girl's soul...even though she grew up under the roof of a house with a famous Evangelist, The Lord used something else to convict her.

BTW--- If any of you folks are looking for a nice gift for someone, or yourself, I would suggest that next time you are at the bookstore you take a look-see at Anne's Devotional book. Unlike some (most) Devotionals, her book is laden with scripture.

Scott Simons 09-29-2008 07:42 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by PB1789 (Post 8549)
:confused: Well folks,,,seems another Thread has gone off the tracks...

...and it seems to me that the guy who has derailed it started another thread about "Perversion Versions",,,but not enough folks wanted to play over there so he decided to "shoehorn' into this thread. :(

Sorry this does not fit into your thinking, maybe you should re read Which Bible, there is more in there that first meets your mind.

Quote:

Since the subject of salvation via anything else than using the A.V./K.J. has come up on this thread... {BTW- Steven Avery and Bible Protector said some rational things.} I thought that I would mention something that I heard just the other day while driving and listening to the Moody Bible Institute Radio Station up here-(sponsored by Alaska Village missions)- an interview with Anne Graham Lotz---(a daughter of Billy and Ruth Graham) ---
Wow, now Billy Grahman, does he use the King James or promote perversion version, I praise not Billy Graham the real gospel of Jesus Christ is ministered by the Holy Ghost.



Quote:

She told the interviewer that she had been watching a movie titled: "King of Kings" when she about 7 or 8 years of age. When the part of the crucifixion was shown, she realized that she was a sinner and needed a Saviour..! :)
Lots of people realized they are sinner and need a Saviour.

Quote:

The Holy Spirit used a movie about Jesus Christ to work upon this girl's soul...even though she grew up under the roof of a house with a famous Evangelist, The Lord used something else to convict her.
It not Holy Spirit it is the Holy Ghost that uses what is available to work on the soul. I am sure that the Holy Ghost had to do something odd seeing that see may never be able to hear the gospel from her famous evangelist father.

Quote:

BTW--- If any of you folks are looking for a nice gift for someone, or yourself, I would suggest that next time you are at the bookstore you take a look-see at Anne's Devotional book. Unlike some (most) Devotionals, her book is laden with scripture.

I wonder what bible she using today in that book?

Sorry to seem to be so harsh with you but you are not walking on water.
And I really mean it about re-reading "Which Bible"


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

Website © AV1611.Com.
Posts represent only the opinions of users of this forum and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the webmaster.

Software for Believing Bible Study