Mistakes in the A.V. 1611 are Advanced Revelation

Askjo, sure I'll compare them. In another thread. This thread is for discussing the claim of advanced revelation in the KJV. Some people seem incapable of staying on topic.

 

Amen, Brother Natters!

Thank you for refreshing my bowels in
the Lord today! May God be liberal with blessing
toward you, your family, and your ministy today. Amen.

OBTW, I believe that general revelation
from the Holy Spirit ended the day
John the Revealator died. I still believe
that the Holy Spirit works within each
of us who belong to him for specific
revelation in light of the Holy Scripture
(which Holy Scripture survives to this
day in the three King James Versions
and multiple Modern Versions (MVs).
In fact, the common KJV, the KJV1769,
is a Modern Version

\O/ Praise Iesus, Sonne of God \O/

 

Disagree, Michelle is correct because I researched and found that MVs weakened any doctrines and defend the homosexuals who used the NIV. Those double homosexuals bought the NIV business in NY. If you are against homosexuality, ask yourself why MOST homosexuals favor NIV rather than the KJV. That explains MVs weakened the homosexuality. Therefore the homosexuality is OK!

Let's see how the NIV translated homsexuality:

New International Version replaces the word "sodomite" with "male temple prostitutes."

Does the NIV WEAKEN the Sodomy? Yes, of course! Some modern translations do that.

 

Askjo said "Disagree, Michelle is correct because I researched and found that MVs weakened any doctrines"

Disagree, michelle is wrong because I researched and found that the MVs did not weaken any doctrines. So there.

Askjo said "defend the homosexuals who used the NIV".

I am in full support of homosexuals using the NIV, or any other version.

Askjo said "Those double homosexuals bought the NIV business in NY."

I have no idea what you are talking about, nor its relevance to advanced revelation in the AV 1611.

Askjo said "If you are against homosexuality, ask yourself why MOST homosexuals favor NIV rather than the KJV. That explains MVs weakened the homosexuality. Therefore the homosexuality is OK!"

Your logic escapes me, as do your claims. Did you do some kind of survey or something to determine what homosexuals favor?

Hey, I have to ask - have you ever heard of "staying on topic"? Look at the title of this thread. Then look at the contents of your post. Then at the title of this thread again.

 

Brother Askjo,
you need to check your sources, they are
known liars. They lied to you here.
Check it and you will find out how they
lied to you.

BTW, please give the verse of which you
speak. Thank you.

 

Natters,

Askjo was responding to your statement:

Originally posted by natters:
Michelle said "The MV's have weakened that strong testimony"

No they haven't , and don't think we're not noticing that you are still trying to change the subject from what Dr. Bob started this thread with.


The bold reply is to what he was responding to. What Askjo says is the truth, to which may be off the topic of this thread slightly, but he was responding to your above statement to which I have put in bold.

As to my post, I was showing the comparison to what Dr. Bob posted to show the falseness of his accusation in light of the truth. He asked for it and it needed to be pointed out, and I will not, nor need to apologize for it.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Enjoying your new bolding abilities? Askjo was wrong. If he wants to discuss it, no one is stopping him from starting a new thread.

Any actual comments about the claim by some (or the implication by others) of advanced revelation in the AV 1611?

 

There was no advanced revelation in the KJB. And as I have pointed out to you in another post, those who are most likely guilty of believing advanced revelation are coming from the mv camp, not the KJBD camp (although there might be some who do believe this, however I do not).

I didn't want many here to think I was yelling, and did not realize that many did, until the other day, that the way I was stressing my point, was being taken the wrong way. So yes, I am for the benefit of others understanding me properly, and thank you for providing that information to help me to learn how to do this. Thanks a bunch.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

I agree, there was no advanced revelation in the KJV. How do you then account for where it differs from other, prior Bibles? Earlier you said God "corrected" them - wouldn't this direct involvement of God in correcting the scriptures count as advanced revelation? If not, why not?

 

--------------------------------------------------
I agree, there was no advanced revelation in the KJV. How do you then account for where it differs from other, prior Bibles? Earlier you said God "corrected" them - wouldn't this direct involvement of God in correcting the scriptures count as advanced revelation? If not, why not?
--------------------------------------------------


They don't differ in the way that you all like to think they do, and claim they do, and to which is not the same as the mv's are different. In the instances where they seem to differ are spelling, punctuation, typeface changes and printing errors, to which God in his providence and guidance concerning His words, saw fit to it that these printing errors, spelling changes, typeface, punctuation changes were corrected, or maybe a better word would be updated (made better/improved), and has been preserved or as you all like to call it "pickled" for generations of believers. This has nothing to do with advanced revelation, but the power and guidance of God over His words.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Stop talking about MVs for 30 seconds, and stay focused on the KJV. Your constant refernce to MVs makes it look like you're just trying to deflect the questions.

The problem is that "spelling, punctuation, typeface changes and printing errors" are not what we are talking about. We are talking about word changes - word differences from prior versions, word differences from the texts it was translated from. If the KJV has "the perfect words", then it required "correction" of everything else in existence. This is advanced revelation.

 

If you believe that "easter" is proper in Acts 12 and that "churches" is proper in Acts 19:37 the only explanation is that of "advanced revelation". While Ruckman believes these to be mistakes, they are "inspired" mistakes and "advanced revelation"

You've gone to great lengths michelle in giving your view as to why you believe "easter" is a proper usage in Acts 12 but what about Acts 19:37 which "temples" is translated "churches" in the AV1611 English but in the koine Greek it is "temples"

Did the KJV translators make a mistake referring to pagan "temples" (in the Greek) as "churches" in the AV English and if so is this "advanced revelation"?

HankD

 

--------------------------------------------------
The problem is that "spelling, punctuation, typeface changes and printing errors" are not what we are talking about. We are talking about word changes - word differences from prior versions, word differences from the texts it was translated from. If the KJV has "the perfect words", then it required "correction" of everything else in existence. This is advanced revelation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


You haven't shown one word change, nor have you shown that it changed and was different from the previous bibles. You have only shown typeface, and printers errors, etc. You have shown the English language can be presented in the same way using different words with the same meanings. You have not shown these different words, have different meanings to make them "word changes" to which "altered" the text.

This issue has everything to do with the mv's because you are trying to compare the KJB to the previous bibles in order to justify apparent and obvious errors in the modern versions and claim they are the same thing. They are not the same thing.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

--------------------------------------------------
You've gone to great lengths michelle in giving your view as to why you believe "easter" is a proper usage in Acts 12 but what about Acts 19:37 which "temples" is translated "churches" in the AV1611 English but in the koine Greek it is "temples"

--------------------------------------------------

Is it not true Hank, that Greek and Hebrew words have a variety of meanings? How is it that you can tell me that what you "think" is the proper translation of the Greek and Hebrew text is that above men who knew these languages better than most people today? Not only did they know those languages, but knew their own language alot better than those of today. I believe Easter is the proper word in that passage, as it is not only one of the meanings of pasha in the Greek, but it is and has been the preserved word of God for believers in the churches for generations.

God has put his stamp of approval on that word, in HIS words of truth. Argue with God about it. Not me. I am done explaining this to you all who are stubborn to the facts and truth
of this issue of Easter.

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Michelle,

It wouldn't matter how much 'evidence' was paraded before you. You have your head buried so deep in the sand of King James Version Onlyism that you just will not see it!

I pray that one day you will realise the big fat lie that you've been fed. And I pray that it happens soon.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Trotter,

You pray that someday I will wake up and realize that I do not have the words of God perfectly in my own language? You pray that I will doubt God and his promises? Thanks, but no thanks. I will however, continue to keep you and all here in my prayers. That the Lord may open your eyes and heart to this wonderful truth, so that you will not be deceived anymore with Satan's lie (3:1).


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

OK so be it, but this is know to the KJVO leadership as an element of "advanced revelation" which you wisely have separated yourself from (although you support "easter" for some different reason, "God has put His stamp of approval on it" whatever that means, sounds an awful lot like a euphemism for "advanced revelation" michelle).

So now I must "argue with God" about "easter" in the English text as oppossed to "pascha" in the original language text as when He first gave it.
Should I ask Him why He changed His mind ("advanced revelation" maybe).

So be it. What happened to your jot and tittle theory?. Oh that's Hebrew, Greek is a different story.

So what about Acts 19:37 michelle, will you grace me/us with an answer?

Stubborn HankD

 

michelle said "You haven't shown one word change"

Yes, michelle, we have. Over and over. The problem is that you refuse to acknowledge them, you wriggle around the obvious, you constantly change the rules. You have already made up your mind that nothing could possibly convince you.

Tell you what: YOU describe what would convince you of a word change, an error, etc. That way, when we show it to you, you will be without excuse and have to accept the truth. So please, describe for us what it would take for you to be convinced. Explain what would constitute a legitimate change or error.

 

Amen, Natters. That's exactly what I was trying to say.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

--------------------------------------------------
Tell you what: YOU describe what would convince you of a word change, an error, etc. That way, when we show it to you, you will be without excuse and have to accept the truth. So please, describe for us what it would take for you to be convinced. Explain what would constitute a legitimate change or error.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The problem of many here, is that they focus on irrelevant issues of the past rather than today. The focus is always put upon the KJB and the Bibles prior to it, to which is not this issue at all, and to which has been explained to you, to which you reject the answer and the truth. WE live today, here, now in this present day. The church has believed, lived and used the KJB for generations (400 years), even up until this day (not any of the other Bibles prior to this and to which are irrelevant to this issue because of this). The KJB has been and continues to be the word of God in the English language for English speaking believers. Modern versions have altered God's word of truth in our language. This is the ISSUE that you all keep avoiding. You focus upon issues that have nothing to do with today, nor can you compare them to the issue to today. You continue with the circular reasoning, logic and arguments, rather than facing the issue of today, here, now in our language. For many generations believers have had the word of God and NNE QUESTIONED nor DOUBTEDthis, nor did, nor should they have a reason to. Christians knew and believed that they had every word of God, and still do today. Why is it that many today do not believe this? And why is it that many must always turn to the past or the Greek and Hebrew to hide behind? I trust the word of God, that God has blessed the English speaking churches with for generations, first, and over and above anything you all try to tell me otherwise or contrary to it. God's word of truth is my final authority, just as He was for all the previous generations. Not anyone else. Not Hank, not Natters, not Dr. Bob, not Bruce Metzger, not John Ankerberg, not Gail Riplinger, not Peter Ruckman, etc. It is just plain, simple and honest FAITH in God and his promises and His infallible word. Many mv advocates are lacking in this department I fear. Many not only do not have this simple faith and understanding of this issue, they lack understanding of the scriptures themselves also. Maybe the Lord is trying to give you what you believe. You believe God has allowed errors in his word, then he will give you over to having the mind that believes those errors. Suit yourself.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle