The Best Way To BURN A Catholic Bible PerVersion!

[Tim]

Mr. Biblebeliever ... lets say a man walks into your Church. He is saved. He does good deeds. He is holding a NIV.

What would you do?

A) Show him the gospel from your KJV, tell him he must be born again and re-baptized!
B) Show him immediately the error of his Bible preference, but accept his salvation testimony.
C) Accept him as brother.

Tim, I would share with him the Bible Version Issue by showing him the corruptions of the NIV and the other modern versions, and also the Alexandrian philosophy that is behind the modern versions.

Now if he rejects the truth that I show him and chooses to be willfully ignorant regarding the issue, then our fellowship will be hindered. Why? Because he is rejecting the truth of the issue. And he is not willing to submit to the Final Authority of God's holy word, the Authorized King James Holy Bible.

So, if I understand correctly, this man would not be welcomed in your home or Church? Is this based on Galatians 1:8? Assuming his Gospel is cursed? Why exactly would the mans rejection of submitting to the King James Bible create such a hindrance? This man sees your God, believes your Jesus, and accepts your salvation .... right? Are you saying then that the rejection of the final authority of the King James is equal with rejecting the Gospel?

 

[Biblebeliever]

You know these two statements are not related right?
The Bible Version issue is not mentioned at all in the Authorized King James Bible.

Also, you ignored me again.

You don't think that the issue over God's perfect and pure words are in the Holy Scriptures?

Well let's see what the Scriptures say:



Psalm 138:2

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name
for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth:
for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.




John 14:23-26

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me. 25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.




Luke 9:26

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

26 For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father’s, and of the holy angels.




1 Timothy 6:3-6

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself. 6 But godliness with contentment is great gain.



Revelation 22:18-19

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

 

[Biblebeliever]

Stop lying.

I am telling the truth. I would take the time to share the Bible Version Issue with that person. After all, I am aware that there are those who are simply ignorant. They simply don't know about the issue. They don't understand it, so that is why one must bring it to their attention.

 

[Biblebeliever]

So, if I understand correctly, this man would not be welcomed in your home or Church? Is this based on Galatians 1:8? Assuming his Gospel is cursed? Why exactly would the mans rejection of submitting to the King James Bible create such a hindrance? This man sees your God, believes your Jesus, and accepts your salvation .... right? Are you saying then that the rejection of the final authority of the King James is equal with rejecting the Gospel?

What I am saying is that after I have shown him the issue and he decides to utterly reject the truth which I have shown him, then I would need to go a separate way from him. Because he is not consenting to wholesome words. He is not consenting to the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. And that is very serious.

Also, if he continues using the modern versions, then it means he is causing divisions and offences contrary to the Doctrine which I have learned from the pure word of God, which is the Authorized King James Holy Bible.


The modern and new versions do pervert and change vital Doctrine. Therefore, the Bible Version Issue is a Doctrinal Issue. And we as brethen are to separate over Doctrine. The truth does separate and divide.

 

[bgwilkinson]

So, if I understand correctly, this man would not be welcomed in your home or Church? Is this based on Galatians 1:8? Assuming his Gospel is cursed? Why exactly would the mans rejection of submitting to the King James Bible create such a hindrance? This man sees your God, believes your Jesus, and accepts your salvation .... right? Are you saying then that the rejection of the final authority of the King James is equal with rejecting the Gospel?

What I am saying is that after I have shown him the issue and he decides to utterly reject the truth which I have shown him, then I would need to go a separate way from him. Because he is not consenting to wholesome words. He is not consenting to the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. And that is very serious.

Also, if he continues using the modern versions, then it means he is causing divisions and offences contrary to the Doctrine which I have learned from the pure word of God, which is the Authorized King James Holy Bible.


The modern and new versions do pervert and change vital Doctrine. Therefore, the Bible Version Issue is a Doctrinal Issue. And we as brethen are to separate over Doctrine. The truth does separate and divide.

They do not pervert and change vital doctrine.

All versions have imperfections in translation and in the underling texts, but these are in the minority.

Calling out imperfections in one version does not elevate another pet version above the others.

 

[Ransom]

The modern and new versions do pervert and change vital Doctrine.

You're a liar.

Liars go to hell.

And when you do, I will rejoice at the throne of God with the angels and the elders.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

You know these two statements are not related right?
The Bible Version issue is not mentioned at all in the Authorized King James Bible.

Also, you ignored me again.

You don't think that the issue over God's perfect and pure words are in the Holy Scriptures?

Well let's see what the Scriptures say:



Psalm 138:2

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name
for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth:
for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.




John 14:23-26

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me. 25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.




Luke 9:26

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

26 For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father’s, and of the holy angels.




1 Timothy 6:3-6

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself. 6 But godliness with contentment is great gain.



Revelation 22:18-19

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Right. No verses relating to which version is correct.

 

[Tim]

So, if I understand correctly, this man would not be welcomed in your home or Church? Is this based on Galatians 1:8? Assuming his Gospel is cursed? Why exactly would the mans rejection of submitting to the King James Bible create such a hindrance? This man sees your God, believes your Jesus, and accepts your salvation .... right? Are you saying then that the rejection of the final authority of the King James is equal with rejecting the Gospel?

What I am saying is that after I have shown him the issue and he decides to utterly reject the truth which I have shown him, then I would need to go a separate way from him. Because he is not consenting to wholesome words. He is not consenting to the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. And that is very serious.

Also, if he continues using the modern versions, then it means he is causing divisions and offences contrary to the Doctrine which I have learned from the pure word of God, which is the Authorized King James Holy Bible.


The modern and new versions do pervert and change vital Doctrine. Therefore, the Bible Version Issue is a Doctrinal Issue. And we as brethen are to separate over Doctrine. The truth does separate and divide.

I would like to study one or more of the vital doctrines changed from a new translation (other than your believing the Bible version issue as doctrine). You see, if I was this man visiting your Church, say holding an ESV translation, I would like to see for myself, from my Bible next to the KJV, what doctrines we are separating over?

 

[Tim]

You know these two statements are not related right?
The Bible Version issue is not mentioned at all in the Authorized King James Bible.

Also, you ignored me again.

You don't think that the issue over God's perfect and pure words are in the Holy Scriptures?

Well let's see what the Scriptures say:

But the man who uses the NIV or ESV believe that what they hold, read, and study are the Words of God. They are the translated into English Words of God. I believe what people are seeking from you are clear scripture references that teach the King James Version is the ONLY existing printed Words of God here on earth right now in history.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=Tim]I would like to study one or more of the vital doctrines changed from a new translation (other than your believing the Bible version issue as doctrine). You see, if I was this man visiting your Church, say holding an ESV translation, I would like to see for myself, from my Bible next to the KJV, what doctrines we are separating over?
[/quote]

The KJV states that the love of money is the root of all evil. Alternative translations state that the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil.

The KJV gives one of the commandments as follows: "Thou shalt not kill." Alternative translations state it thusly: "Thou shalt not murder".

 

[Biblebeliever]

They do not pervert and change vital doctrine.

Yes they do Wilkinson. Check Micah 5:2 in the King James Bible and then compare it to Micah 5:2 as found in the NIV, NLT, and ESV. All three of those modern perversions give the Lord Jesus Christ an origin.

God's pure word, The King James Bible teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ is from everlasting.


And I will give you just one more example; in Titus 3:10, the Authorized King James Bible tells us that we are to reject an heretick after the first and second admonition.


Now guess what many of the modern perversions say? They tell us to reject a DIVISIVE person.


And you are going to seriously tell me that Doctrine is not changed in the modern Vatican versions?


And I just gave you two examples. There are others I could point out. But since I am strapped for time today, I will just leave it at those two for right now.

All versions have imperfections in translation and in the underling texts, but these are in the minority.

Calling out imperfections in one version does not elevate another pet version above the others.

All of the modern Vatican versions have errors and imperfections. The modern versions are perversions because they come from two corrupt Greek texts (Siniaticus and Vaticanus).

But there is one Bible that is the perfect, pure, and inerrant word of God. And that is the Authorized King James Bible. The Authorized Version come from the right Hebrew and Greek texts, it is the text of the English Reformation, and it can be traced all the way back to Antioch. 

 

[Ransom]

Yes they do Wilkinson. Check Micah 5:2 in the King James Bible and then compare it to Micah 5:2 as found in the NIV, NLT, and ESV. All three of those modern perversions give the Lord Jesus Christ an origin.

Why do KJV-onlyists always play the unbeliever, trying to make Scripture contradict itself?

And, as always, trying to persuade us Bible believers that we can't trust the word of God.

Sheesh. Who needs Satan, when you have Ruckman and his cast of clowns?

 

[Timotheos]

Check Micah 5:2 in the King James Bible and then compare it to Micah 5:2 as found in the NIV, NLT, and ESV. All three of those modern perversions give the Lord Jesus Christ an origin.

You mean Jesus being born or the 2 genealogies of Jesus didn't do that?

 

[Tim]

Biblebeliever, do you only use a Cambridge Edition KJV?

 

[bgwilkinson]

They do not pervert and change vital doctrine.

Yes they do Wilkinson. Check Micah 5:2 in the King James Bible and then compare it to Micah 5:2 as found in the NIV, NLT, and ESV. All three of those modern perversions give the Lord Jesus Christ an origin.

God's pure word, The King James Bible teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ is from everlasting.


And I will give you just one more example; in Titus 3:10, the Authorized King James Bible tells us that we are to reject an heretick after the first and second admonition.


Now guess what many of the modern perversions say? They tell us to reject a DIVISIVE person.


And you are going to seriously tell me that Doctrine is not changed in the modern Vatican versions?


And I just gave you two examples. There are others I could point out. But since I am strapped for time today, I will just leave it at those two for right now.

All versions have imperfections in translation and in the underling texts, but these are in the minority.

Calling out imperfections in one version does not elevate another pet version above the others.

All of the modern Vatican versions have errors and imperfections. The modern versions are perversions because they come from two corrupt Greek texts (Siniaticus and Vaticanus).

But there is one Bible that is the perfect, pure, and inerrant word of God. And that is the Authorized King James Bible. The Authorized Version come from the right Hebrew and Greek texts, it is the text of the English Reformation, and it can be traced all the way back to Antioch. 

Modern versions do not present false doctrine.

You are totally wrong. Your accusations are denied. You offer no convincing evidence.

The 1611 KJV is not the standard against which all others are compared.

The standard is all of the extant manuscripts in their totality.

No one translation can lay claim to being the standard.

If you want to advocate for a standard you would have more weight on the side of advocating for

the LXX being the standard or possibly Jerome's Vulgate. Certainly nothing so recently made as the

KJV1611 can claim the title of standard.

You have not shown that the KJV1611 is the standard. You have not shown that in any way.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Modern versions do not present false doctrine.

You are totally wrong. Your accusations are denied. You offer no convincing evidence.

The 1611 KJV is not the standard against which all others are compared.

The standard is all of the extant manuscripts in their totality.

No one translation can lay claim to being the standard.

If you want to advocate for a standard you would have more weight on the side of advocating for the LXX

being the standard or possible Jerome's Vulgate. Certainly nothing so recently made as the KJV1611 can claim

the title of standard.

You have not shown that the KJV1611 is the standard. You have not shown that in any way.

One of the primary measurements of accurate historicity of any ancient document is "how close is the writing of the document to the actual events that happened?"  The closer, the more likely it is to be accurate.  There are other good measurements, but none of them trump time. 

Obviously, the "Authorized" KJV is pretty far removed from the events, and we have extant manuscripts that are much closer to the time of the events.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=The Rogue Tomato]One of the primary measurements of accurate historicity of any ancient document is "how close is the writing of the document to the actual events that happened?"  The closer, the more likely it is to be accurate.  There are other good measurements, but none of them trump time. 

Obviously, the "Authorized" KJV is pretty far removed from the events, and we have extant manuscripts that are much closer to the time of the events.[/quote]

Now you know the only reason we don't have ancient Scriptural documents that are written in Elizabethan English is because people recognized how superior they were and wore them all out from constant use...or something.

 

[bgwilkinson]

BB said

"All of the modern Vatican versions have errors and imperfections. The modern versions are perversions because they come from two corrupt Greek texts (Siniaticus and Vaticanus).

But there is one Bible that is the perfect, pure, and inerrant word of God. And that is the Authorized King James Bible. The Authorized Version come from the right Hebrew and Greek texts, it is the text of the English Reformation, and it can be traced all the way back to Antioch."



Your presuppositions are denied.


BB said, "All of the modern Vatican versions have errors and imperfections." I can agree that all versions

have errors and imperfections. You must show evidence that the modern versions are Vatican versions.

You have not shown that evidence. The burden of proof is on you BB.


BB said, "The modern versions are perversions because they come from two corrupt Greek texts (Siniaticus

and Vaticanus)." You must provide evidence that using Siniaticus or Vaticanus would make a version a

Vatican version. You did not. Your Assertion is denied. You have provided no evidenced whatsoever.


BB said, "But there is one Bible that is the perfect, pure, and inerrant word of God. And that is the Authorized

King James Bible." You have once again made a completely unsubstantiated assertion. You must show that

what you have claimed is a fact. You have not provided any evidence to support your claim. Claim denied.


BB said, "The Authorized Version come from the right Hebrew and Greek texts, it is the text of the English

Reformation". To substantiate this unsupported claim you will need to prove which Hebrew and Greek texts

are the right ones. You will need to explain how you are able to make that determination. Unsupported claim

is hereby denied.


BB said, "and it can be traced all the way back to Antioch."  You will need show how the Hebrew text that you

consider right can be traced back to Antioch. You will also need to show how the Greek text you consider right

can be traced back to Antioch. By Antioch do you mean the Greek speaking Church that was located there in

the first few centuries? Are you going to say that the critical text type known commonly as TR is the

right text type?


Are you going to try to prove that the Greek Church did not use the LXX Greek OT but instead used

a Hebrew text? I'd sure like to see the evidence for that. I think many would be interested in that

proof.



Until you can offer proof of all your assertions, they are all categorically denied.

 

[Biblebeliever]

Modern versions do not present false doctrine.

Yes they do. A lot of the modern perversions say that Jesus lied in John 7:8

http://www.chick.com/bc/2009/lied.asp



The modern versions tell a lie in Heb. 3:16. In that they say that every Israelite who came out of Egypt rebelled.

New International Version
Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt?


English Standard Version
For who were those who heard and yet rebelled? Was it not all those who left Egypt led by Moses?


New American Standard Bible
For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?



Holman Christian Standard Bible
For who heard and rebelled? Wasn't it really all who came out of Egypt under Moses?


NET Bible
For which ones heard and rebelled? Was it not all who came out of Egypt under Moses' leadership?


Aramaic Bible in Plain English
For who were those who heard and angered him? Was it not all of these who went out from Egypt by Moses?


GOD'S WORD® Translation
Who heard God and rebelled? All those whom Moses led out of Egypt rebelled.


While God's pure and perfect word, the King James Bible clearly teaches us that not every Isrealite who came out of Egypt rebelled. For there was Joshua, Caleb, Eliezer, and several others who did not rebel against God.


Hebrews 3:16
Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.



Therefore, the modern Vatican versions also teach false doctrine in Heb. 3:16.

Forsake the modern Catholic perversions and simply Stick with God's perfect and inerrant word, the King James Bible.

You are totally wrong. Your accusations are denied. You offer no convincing evidence.

I just offered evidence, now are you going to look it up? Or are you just going to shrug your shoulders in a non-chalant way and continue in your willful ignorance?

The 1611 KJV is not the standard against which all others are compared.

The King James Holy Bible is the Absolute Standard in which we are to judge all others. The King James Holy Bible is the Absolute Final Authority.

The standard is all of the extant manuscripts in their totality.

Wrong.

No one translation can lay claim to being the standard.

Wrong again.

Question for you? The Holy Scriptures which Timothy had in his possession as a child while growing up; were those Holy Scriptures a translation?

If you want to advocate for a standard you would have more weight on the side of advocating for

the LXX being the standard or possibly Jerome's Vulgate. Certainly nothing so recently made as the

KJV1611 can claim the title of standard.

The Standard is the King James Holy Bible.

You have not shown that the KJV1611 is the standard. You have not shown that in any way.

It already is the Standard. It has been the standard for 403 years now. And it will continue to be the Absolute Standard.

 

[Biblebeliever]

Biblebeliever, do you only use a Cambridge Edition KJV?

Tim, I read and study from two Local Church Bible Publishers' Editions of the King James Bible. Both King James Bibles are the 1611 Edition. One of them has no notes or commentary in it, but it does contain the Preface to the King James Version 1611: "The Translators To The Reader."

And the second King James Bible that I have has the 1917 C.I. Scofield notes with center coloumn references.