Bible Versions Questions and discussion about the Bible version issue.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 12-20-2008, 04:06 PM
Forrest's Avatar
Forrest Forrest is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 597
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by avbunyan View Post
A subtle but deadly change –

The bible says in:

Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ,
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

The NKJV (and the rest BTW)changes “faith of” to “faith in”:

Gal. 2:16 - know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ.
Rom. 3:22 - This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference,

The NKJV messes with justification for now the verse teaches it is man’s faith that justifies – can’t happen - man’s faith cannot justify – has no power to justify – only God can justify Rom 8:33.

The above alone is enough for me to flush it down to the septic tank thus polluting an otherwise good septic tank. Origen did not believe in faith alone so his works reflect this.

My two cents worth…

God bless
Just one of those "words" that many disregard.
Proverbs 30:5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Of course, if you do not believe God has preserved every word in the King James Bible...what's the use in teaching it as authoritative instruction?
The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software
  #122  
Old 12-20-2008, 04:11 PM
BrianT
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi avbunyan,

What about all the times the KJV has "faith in", like Rom 3:25, Gal 3:26, etc?

What is your opinion of "we are saved by hope" versus "we are saved in this hope"? Which is better, and why?

God bless,
Brian
  #123  
Old 12-20-2008, 04:26 PM
avbunyan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianT View Post
What about all the times the KJV has "faith in", like Rom 3:25, Gal 3:26, etc?

What is your opinion of "we are saved by hope" versus "we are saved in this hope"? Which is better, and why?

God bless,
Brian
Hi Brian -
There are many aspects of salvation, as we all should know: justification, imputation, glorification, righteousness, redemption, etc.

The issue in the verses you mentioned are not dealing with justification. Rom. 3:25 is dealing with propitiation. Gal. 3:26 is dealing with relationship.

Justification is a different animal - God does the act of declaring one just. Man's faith cannot declare himself just.

Regarding hope - not an expert here - I believe we do not understand the biblical doctrine of hope - This hope is a surety - Not a, "I hope so." But I see that hope as being Christ anyway and we will be saved ultimately by his return or at least this body. Eph 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. Any rate - we are safe!

BTW Brian - do you think your faith in Christ can justify you?

God bless

Last edited by avbunyan; 12-20-2008 at 04:39 PM.
  #124  
Old 12-20-2008, 04:47 PM
BrianT
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi avbunyan,

I think you're splitting hairs. For example, you said Gal 3:26 is about faith dealing with "relationship", but the context (verses 24-26) explicitly says it's about justification.

Quote:
Regarding hope - not an expert here - I believe we do not understand the biblical doctrine of hope - This hope is a surety - Not a, "I hope so."
I agree, but I believe that if the readings were reversed (if the KJV had "we are saved in this hope" and the NKJV had "we are saved by hope"), the only thing I'd be hearing about this difference is that the NKJV is wrong (We are saved by grace, not hope). I find it very interesting how such verse comparisons are always so one-sided, highlighting specific verses but avoiding others (or rationalizing/minimizing them away when raised). This is not an objective and honest approach to textual comparison in my opinion.

God bless,
Brian
  #125  
Old 12-20-2008, 05:12 PM
Bro. Parrish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The "NEW KING JAMES BIBLE."
Is this new version really true to the King James 1611, or is it just another attempt by the Alexandrian Cult, to usurp authority over God's Word? To test this new version, we will compare scripture with scripture, the NEW KING JAMES VERSION, with the OLD KING JAMES BIBLE.

According to the introduction in the New King James Version, there are basically two reasons for the revision:

First, the archaic words in the King James 1611 need to be updated.

Second, the spiritual treasures found uniquely in the King James 1611 need to be unlocked by more easily understood translation.

We will proceed to prove that both premises are unjustified.

First, let us look at the archaic words. All together, there are about eleven words in the New Testament that could be considered archaic in the Old King James Bible. None of the words considered archaic are exceptionally difficult to under stand. The conscientious Bible reader who pays attention to the context in which the archaic words are used, usually will not have any trouble understanding their meaning.

For example, let us briefly examine the phrase "by and by", used in Mark 6:25, which means "at once." The careful student will note that within two verses of where "by and by" is used, the word "immediately" is also used to answer the request which uses the term, "by and by".

No one will take issue with the fact that the Old King James Bible contains a few archaic words. (one will note that the word "minas" is substituted for "pounds" in Lk. 19:11-25 IN THE NEW KJV. Much more up to date. Right?)

However, the difficulties over eleven archaic words gives no one sufficient reason to go and alter hundreds of other words while claiming to be taking care of eleven. Such an issue is a false issue, and is only used by deceived men to cloud the minds of God's people concerning God's Final Authority in their lives.

With a little study, thought, and an occasional trip to a dictionary, the average Bible reader will not have any trouble understanding the "so-called" archaic words. As Mark Twain said, "It's not the things in the Bible I don't understand that bother me, but the things I do understand that bother me." There lies the first reason for the NEW KING JAMES VERSION. Let us bury it where it belongs, in the garbage.

Moving onward, let us look at the second reason for revision, and that is, "To unlock the spiritual treasures found uniquely in the King James Version of the Holy Scriptures". Does it unlock or lock-up the truths of the scriptures? Let the scriptures themselves be the judge.

In John 5:24, the Old King James reads "and shall not come into condemnation." The New King James reads "and shall not come into judgment. The careful Bible student will notice that "condemnation" and "judgment" are not the same words. To use the word "judgment" is to change the meaning of the verse, and it is a change for the worse. The Bible teaches that every person, whether saved or lost, is going to be judged. The lost man will appear at the White Throne Judgment to be judged for his sins and for his rejection of Jesus Christ, Rev. 20:11-15.

The saved man will appear before the Judgment Seat of Christ to be judged for his works, I Cor. 3:11-15; II Cor. 5:10. The Christian is not condemned, but is judged. The rendering in the New King James is false and heretical. One wonders why they did not change condemnation to judgment over in Jude 4? They are not very consistent, are they?

Five verses down from John 5:24, the Revisors changed the word "damnation" to "condemnation". Does it give a better understanding of the verse? No! It is merely an attempt to tone down the harsh, straight forward language of the Old King James. Another example of this can be found in Heb. 12:8, where the New King James changes the word "bastard" to "illegitimate" . The change does not make the meaning more clear, therefore, it must be just another attempt to make the Book more respectable and acceptable so that it will sell better and make more money.

Also check Phil. 3:8, where the revisors changed the word "dung" to "rubbish" Again, these words are not the same. One should also note how the revisors corrupted I Tim. 6:5. Verse 5 in the Old King James reads "supposing that gain is godliness." The New King James reads, "who supposing that godliness is a means of gain." The careful Bible student will notice that the verses do not read the same.

Furthermore, the editors of the New King James completely change the meaning of the verse. By doing this they seek not to offend those brethren in the ministry who believe that their godliness is in direct proportion to the size of their ministry. If this were true, it would not be out of place to say that the Catholic Church is the spiritual leader of all religions, since they have edifices and numbers far above anything we Baptists could ever erect or assemble. However, as we know, the Catholic Church is NOT the spiritual leader of Christianity, but the unspiritual harlot of Rev. 17. The reading in the Old King James is correct, and those who believe that size is spirituality are "destitute of the truth", just as the verse reads. The New King James has not un locked any spiritual treasures, it has obscured the truth!

I Tim. 6:10 in the Old King James reads, "for the love of money is the root of all evil." The New King James reads, "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."

Again, one should observe that "root of all evil" and, "a root of all kinds of evil" are not the same. Quite definitely, here is a direct attack on God's Holy Word. There is no reason, outside of devilment, to change one word in this verse. This is strictly a private interpretation done to change the truth which is found in the Old King James, namely, "THE LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL"!

Something interesting to note is that all the changes mentioned, which supposedly improve the Old King James Bible, are the same changes, if not worse changes, as those made by the Revised Standard Version of the World Council of Churches. One would be tempted to conclude that we are dealing with merely an ultra-revised R.S.V., instead of a corrected K.J.V.!

The editors, to give themselves license for their "corrections", have taken II Cor. 2:17 and changed it sufficiently so as not to be categorized with the corruptors of the other revisions. The verse reads "For we are not as many which corrupt the word of God". The New King James reads "For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God". When one peddles something, he sells it. The word "peddle" here is not a synonym of corrupt, but a corruption in itself!

This is another sly attempt by ungodly revisors to hide from God's people their sin of messing with the Book! This alteration of II Cor. 2:17 does not bring out a more clear meaning in the Old King James, but is just another private interpretation of scripture with no good reason behind it. Only the devil enjoys such confusion as results from this type of tampering with God's Word.

In 11 Cor. 10:5, the Bible reads, "casting down imaginations." The New King James reads "casting down arguments." This alteration changes the correct reading. The context of the verse justifies the Old King James reading. Later in the verse it reads, "bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ." The context is "thoughts" which are in the mind, the same place where one finds "imaginations". "Arguments" has no place in the verse. This is another corruption of the word of God, with no additional spiritual treasure being brought to light.

In Col. 3:2, the Bible reads, "set your affections on things above." The New King James reads, "set your mind on things above." The "mind" is in no way a more clear substitute for "affections". One can set his "mind" to do something, and yet not have his "affections" in it. God would rather have your heart than your mind. As a preacher once said, "Give God your heart, and He will straighten the kinks out of your head."

Again, in I Tim. 6:20, the Bible reads, "and oppositions of science falsely so called." The New King James reads, "and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge." This is a change which is of no value in bringing out any "deeper truths" in the Old King James reading. The fact is, the Revision hides a great spiritual truth, which is that, regardless of what science comes up with, none of its discoveries can nullify any of the truths of the scripture. A good cross reference to this truth is found in I Tim. 1:4. No clarity in the change, just corruption.

Finally, notice in Phil. 2:6 where one finds a very subtle but gross corruption of the doctrine of the deity of Christ. Old King James reads, "who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." The New King James reads, "who being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped." The careful Bible reader will notice that the Old King James magnifies the deity of Jesus Christ, while the New King James demeans the position of Jesus Christ concerning His relationship with God.

It appears as if the Revisors are trying to portray Jesus Christ as a lesser god, who was a created being out in eternity before the world was created. As usual, the changes in the New King James are very subtle, and this is exactly what makes these new revisions so dangerous.

One might also check Matt. 20:20, where they remove the words "worship him." Please note, no change yet discussed has unlocked any previously hidden spiritual treasures found in the Old King James Bible. What this new perversion has done is to do a good job of burying such truths.

Dear Reader, we could go on and on because of the multitude of alterations found in the New King James Version. For the readers who are still in question as to the reliability of this so-called revision of the Old King James Bible, let them also check the following references: Lk. 16:23; Acts 2:38; Acts 17:16-17,22; Rom. 1:28-32; Rom. 2:2; Rom. 4:7; I Cor. 1:22; I Cor. 11:29; II Cor. 5:17; Gal. 4:17; Gal. 5:4; Eph. 6:12; Phil. 2:8; Phil. 3:2; Col. 2:12; Col. 2:14-15; 17-18; I Thess. 5:22; I Thess. 5:23; II Thess. 2:7; II Thess. 2:12; I Tim. 1:4; I Tim. 3:6, I Tim. 4:1; I Tim. 5:1; II Tim. 2:5; II Tim. 2:12-13; II Tim. 2:14-15; II Tim. 4: 2-5; Ja. 5:16; I Jn. 2:2; I Jn. 3:6; I Jn. 3:8- 9; II Jn. 10; Jude 6,8,12,15,19,24; Rev. 1:18; Rev. 6:14.

These verses by no means exhaust the considerable number of errors that are presented in the New King James Version.

You can see by the facts given, that the scholars (Mal. 2:12) have tried to pervert and destroy the authority of God's true Bible. Our prayer is that all who read these words will perceive the subtlety of the Devil's attack on their Bible. Also, we pray that all those who possess the Authorized King James 1611 Bible will believe, now more than ever, that they hold in their hands God's preserved, inerrant, infallible, word to the English people in the English language (Ps. 12:6-7).
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible...kjv-heresy.htm
  #126  
Old 12-20-2008, 08:19 PM
ltpage's Avatar
ltpage ltpage is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Charleston, IL
Posts: 31
Default

I believe Brian, your supporting the NKJV.
  #127  
Old 12-20-2008, 10:23 PM
Steven Avery Steven Avery is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 462
Default faith of Christ - faith in Christ

Hi Folks,

We have some earlier discussion on this on the forum, I just want to share a bit and then the primary point. (Note: even I am truly amazed that the New King James Version actually tampered on these critical verses.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianT
Hi avbunyan, I think you're splitting hairs. For example, you said Gal 3:26 is about faith dealing with "relationship", but the context (verses 24-26) explicitly says it's about justification.
No, there is quite a clear contextual change after verse 24. Try a good commentary, first.

Matthew Henry seems to have a good understanding, e.g. pointing out that due to "The great advantage of the gospel state above the legal" comes forth "our privilege by Christ" so that "we are the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus". All of this is possible only "after faith has come", the "faith of Christ" has manifest.

That should help you out doctrinally, if you read Matthew Henry. You should be able to at least begin to understand that there is a very powerful and real distinction between "faith in Christ" and the "faith of Christ".

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc6.Gal.iv.html
Galatians Chap. III - Matthew Henry


=============

Just to be clear here, the primary Bible version/text issue is that there is a clear distinction in the Greek that is properly reflected in the King James Bible. Some verses have "faith in Christ" (with the English pronoun in harmony with the Greek pronoun). And Romans 3:22; Galatians 2:16; 3:22 are "faith of Christ", the English correct, reflecting that there is no Greek pronoun. And it is quite clear that the Greek distinction also reflects a differing context of the verses, which brings forth the discussion of justification as well as all the related doctrinal aspects.

Modern versions generally override this because of their own doctrinal predilections (especially their own difficulty with, stumbling over, the 'faith of Christ', a very difficult concept for them, similar to their difficulty in believing that God's word can be 100% pure and perfect). So to keep it dumb, they like to change 'faith of Christ' to 'faith in Christ'. Obviating the clear Reformation Bible distinction. The Greek text and King James Bible distinction, which you will also see in Tyndale and Geneva. (Apparently there was simply no significant difficulty in the actual translation, simply clarity and agreement.) Yet the New King James Bible has joined the modern version confusion and error (translational apostasy) here, against the Reformation Bible. So of course Brian you would like to find some method to defend this error. Is your favorite musician Muddy Waters ?

=====

Now, one final point. King James Bible defenders will also have wonderful discussions about the exact meanings of 'faith in Christ' and 'faith of Christ'. (And yes, at times we will disagree !) One may understood the 'faith of Christ' as the faith expressed by Jesus Christ another as the doctrine of faith and there may be other possibilities.

Yet we agree on the words of God 100%, pure and preserved. And from that base of agreement in God's pure and perfect word we discuss our understandings --

Iron sharpeneth iron;
so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. (Proverbs 27:17)

Shalom,
Steven

Last edited by Steven Avery; 12-20-2008 at 10:45 PM.
  #128  
Old 12-20-2008, 10:33 PM
Bro. Parrish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The New King James Bible
COUNTERFEIT

Isaiah 14: 14 tells of Satan's ultimate counterfeit:
". . . I will BE LIKE the most High."

"And among his greatest counterfeit's is the New King James Bible (NKJV). Christians that would never touch a New International Version (NIV), New American Standard (NASV), Revised Standard (RSV), the New Revised Standard (NRSV) or other per-versions are being "seduced" by the subtil NKJV.

And though the New King James does indeed bear a "likeness" to the 1611 King James Bible, as you'll soon see, there's something else coiled "underneath the cover" of the NKJV..." full article here:
http://www.av1611.org/nkjv.html
  #129  
Old 12-20-2008, 11:10 PM
George's Avatar
George George is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Posts: 891
Default Re:Re: Steve54 Comments

Quote:
"Wow...I am reeling after reading 12 pages of this debate, so after perusing my Bible (a KJV Thompson...sorry...not the real deal either but as close as I got) I thought I would post this..."

John 1.5 And the light shineth in the darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

"As stated before on this forum, I started out my present walk with a NKJV and after being given a KJV, God led me to leave all other translations (many of them have been on my shelf at one time or another) alone. Whether my KJV is "pure" or not is of no consequence...it is what God has led me to. Let me relay a story that I hope will bring a smile to some faces..."
Aloha brother Steve,

You got it right the first time!

Every single "observation" that you made is true historically. There have been over 200 English "versions" printed since 1881! (That's 200 VERSIONS in only ONE LANGUAGE!) Just "who" do you think is "responsible" for that mess? Hmmm?

You can spend a lifetime digging into all of the details of this debate and never come to a conclusion (as you can see by some of the Posts here), or you can just believe that God has kept His word {Psalms 12:6 & 7} and we have it today as our ONE & ONLY FINAL AUTHORITY.

Or else you can go along with the scholars and the "scribes" of today - who admit that they don't know what God's word is for sure, or where you can find it.

If you want a short overview of this complex issue please check out this Post that I made on the Forum back in May - in answer to an inquiry about "Which Bible". http://av1611.com/forums/showpost.ph...3&postcount=69
  #130  
Old 12-20-2008, 11:24 PM
bibleprotector's Avatar
bibleprotector bibleprotector is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 587
Default

The NKJV already messes up Genesis 1:1, saying that God created the "heavens" in the beginning, when in fact only God's home heaven was made in the beginning, whereas heaven (i.e. firmament) was made on day two, and heaven (i.e. astronomical space) was made on day four. Beginning means the beginning of day one. So God did not make heavens in the beginning, but only heaven.
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®, Copyright 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

 
Contact Us AV1611.Com