King James Version 100% pure

[PeterAV]

My parents speak mandarin Chinese. I will tell you something. Translating english into mandarin will never ever ever have the same connotation and syntax. I find people who argue the superiority of a translation are closed in a small world that speaks on english. Do you know how many languages there are in this world?
quote]
Felix102,you need to know that I am not dismissing the other languages at all.I have posted that several times now.What I said is that the KING JAMES BIBLE is the word of God for the ENGLISH speaking world.It has prooven to be the most acurate to the Hebrew and Greek languages.In fact no ther language will more easily translate from those languages.All you need do is ask any person involved in the etymology of words and that whole field.
Yes ,you are very right in that a word for word translation at all places is a bit disjointed.All translations need to keep that in mind.But the most acurate translation MUST be the GOAL,not copyright laws etc.

THE WORD OF GOD IS NOT TO BE RECEIVED BY THE MIND?
Hebrews 8:10 I will put my laws into their MIND,and wright them in their hearts..
2 Peter 3:1 this second epistle I WRITE unto you ;in both which I stir up your pure MINDS by way of rememberance:
:2 That ye may be MINFUL of the WORDS which were spoken before by the holy prophets,and of the commandments of us the apostles of the LORD and Saviour:
The mind is the battle ground,when the mind is won,then the heart is conquered.
That is why we must renew our minds by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost.
What is it then?I will pray with the spirit,and I will pray with the understanding also:I will sing with the spitit,and I will sing with the understanding also.
What you were trying to say,I believe is that you don't read the Bible in the fleshly nature.the natural understanding.
But we have redeemed minds that understand the things of the Spirit,and the believer is to operate not in the fleshly nature any more.

[joelkaki]

[quote author=2nd Timothy I hate to say it, but this is getting border line cultish!   If the KJV is the only infallable word of God, what are folks who don't speak english to do?   Chinese, Gernam, french, russian?    Are these lost until they learn to speak and read Kings English?    

Nice try 2nd Timothy.You have ignored the two times that I listed the other translations that are the word of God in the various langusges,so your argument is completely flawed.
Not to mention the 900 translations that were made from the KJV into other laguages in the last few hundred years.

And on what basis do you declare that these are the word of God?  Because they follow the KJV?  On what basis is the KJV the standard?  You assume what you need to prove.

That is right.You go ahead and accuse me of causing a stumbling block,when I preach the truth,and show that the Bible alone is the word of God and ought not to be changed.

I agree that the Bible alone is the Word of God and ought not to be changed.  So in other words, if something is added to or taken from the Bible in ANY translation, then that should be changed.  I believe the KJV does add some things that were not truly part of God's Word.

Any babe in Christ would be more than glad to know this.Any babe in Christ has a yielded heart of instant obedience to the truth of God's words.If they see that the Bible that saved them is false they will immediately go to the real Bible.They will be glad to be saved ,and just as glad to escape the clutches of Satan.

Ah, so we are less spiritual (perhaps even hard of heart) because we will not only use the KJV.  I don't believe that the ESV for example is false, therefore I use it, rejoice in it, and learn of my Savior through it.

The only words of God in the false versions that are true are the ones that follow the readings of the KJV.All the rest is not needed,for the truth has already come.

On what basis do you make that claim?  You assume that the KJV is the standard, but you never prove it!

Even the New KJV is all gone to pot,too.
They have beensued for 250,000 with the securities commission.The prsident said he had not seenany worse than this.
The NKJV ommits tons,yet claims to follow the same text as the original KJV.Well, they simply lied.They followed the tex,alright,but made the very same changes as the rest of the apostate fake Bibles.That follow the Alaexandrian Text type,pumped out by the two necromancers Westcott and Hort.
Here is a tiny sampling of the NKJV.Now remember,they are just to update the languge a tiny bit and make as little change as possible.
#1,they make 100,000 changes to the text.
#2,KNJV ommits the word LORD  66times.Real archaic huh?
#3,NKJV ommits the word God  51 times. Same thing.
#4,NKJV ommits the word  heaven 50 times.Now why would they want to water down the Bible like that?
#5,NKJV ommits the word  blood 23 times,Just toss it aside,the blood is old hat these days ,I suppose.
#6,NKJV ommits the word  Hell 22 times.The world loves that one,they say it's about time the churches are agreeing with us.
#7,NKJV ommits the word  Jehovah  entirely.
#8,NKJV ommits the words New Testament entirely.
#9,NKNV ommit the word damnation  Entirely.
#10,NKJV ommits the word  devils entirely.No wonder the end times will be full of people worshipping devils,it is not spoken against in the Bible!!
NKJV ignores the Texus Receptus over some 1,200 times.
NKJV replased the KJV Hebrew[ben Chayyim] with the corrupted Stuttgart edition [ben Asher]Old Testament.
Then they post the logo of the satanic trinity of the ocCULT,on to the cover,but God's word says not to think that the Godhead is like anything...graven by art..Acts17:29.

A few things--1)  You again assume what you need to prove, namely, that the KJV is the standard by which all else should be judged.  2)  Statistics reallly don't prove anything.  BUT, if you want to play the statistics game, then I'm afraid you have some problems.  Look at these numbers (that I just searched for myself using some Bible software):

The KJV uses "Jesus" 973 times and "Jesus'" 10 times, making a total of 983 times.  

The NKJV uses "Jesus" 971 times and "Jesus'" 9 times, making a total of 980 times, only 3 less than the KJV.

The NIV uses "Jesus" 1241 times, and "Jesus'" 33 times, making a total of 1274 times, 291 times MORE than the KJV.

Which version is taking Jesus out of the Bible?

*Note to all who are not understanding my argument here*
  I am not promoting the NIV as the best translation--I personally don't like it.
  I do not think that this kind of "statistical proof" proves anything, but since it is the kind of reasoning being used by the other position, I am showing where it logically concludes.  
  *end of note*

They demote the trinity,they make salvation to be a works/progressive thing.I Cor 1:18 etc.

They do NOT demote the trinity (the NWT does, but that is the JW version, which as a movement denies the trinity, so that is to be expected.)  Rather, the teaching of the Trinity can be found powerfully in the ESV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, and others.
 
They DO NOT make salvation to be a progressive thing SOLELY.  Salvation is a past event, but it is also something carried out in the present as we are freed from the power of sin in our lives, and salvation has a future aspect as well, called glorification, in which sin is eradicated completely.  Look at Romans 8:30.  1 Cor 1:18 in the versions other than the KJV is not teaching a different view of justification.  Rather it emphasizes the sanctification aspect of salvation DUE TO THE GREEK WORD/CONSTRUCTION.

They promote a works salvation;Matt 7:14 Difficult is the way.
Now that is a lie.Getting saved is the easiest thing there is.But it is narrow.Only through the blood of Christ Jesus.

I'm sorry, but you are misrepresenting the "new versions".  They are not making any sort of statement about how we are saved, or that we have to work hard for our salvation.  
  But I will say this, the path that Christians have to walk can often be difficult.

They promote the ONE WORLD religion;Acts 17:22,Tit 3:10,etc.
Plus there are hundreds of more difficult words in the NKJV,than the KJV.

You've got to be kidding me.  Those passages don't promote one world religion.  I can't imagine how you got that out of there.

Etc.,etc.,etc.
Just incase there are any out there that have other versions,thinking that your versions are better,the answer is nope.They are just as wicked and evil if not worse.There is only one Holy Bible for the English speaking peoples,that is prefect,inspired,infalible,pure,purified.The Holy Bible 1611AV.

Again, assuming what you need to prove,  

Joel

[joelkaki]

Read the material I just quoted.Just before you falsely accuse me of accusing you.
Plus while your at it read New Age Bible Versions,Which Bible is God's Words?In Awe of Thy Word,by gail Riplinger.

I have already read sizable portions of NABV.  If that is your defense, I don't know what else I can say.  Gail Riplinger is, pardon my language, a lunatic.  The lady doesn't even make sense.  I'm afraid that the statements in her book are simply unsupported.  Acrostic algebra?  The NIV and the sinking of the Titanic are related?  Come on, let's be rational.  

  I suggest you read "The King James Only Controversy" by James White, and listen to their interaction (I believe it is found on www.aomin.org .    

Then when you finnish that go to a more pleasent presentation by Dr.Peter S.Ruckman.He also has a few eye openers.his list is;
The Christian Liar's Library
The Mythological Septuaguint
The Scholarship only Controversy,can you trust the professional liars?
Manuscript Evidence
Biblical Scholarship
Alexandrian Cult Series
The Errors in the King James Bible
How to teach the original Greek
King James Onlyism versus Scholarship onlyism
Differences in the King James Version
The Monarch of the Books
The last Grenade
Of course there is much more but this will help a lot in your eye opening ventures.

I'm sorry, but if that is the stuff you have been reading, then I can see why you support this like you do.  But honestly, Gail Riplinger does not document her positions accurately, misrepresents others, and just makes up stuff out of thin air.  

However, please do not take my comments personally.  I do not mean to be abrasive.  And I believe Dream Weaver is correct, and we all need to simmer down somewhat.  
  Please realize I do admire the fact that you desire to support the Scriptures, however much I may disagree with the manner in which you do so.

Joel

[Soldier4Christ]

Brothers while I support the KJV totally I agree also that the other versions have been used successfully to bring many to Jesus Christ.

I also agree with DW,

Almost everyone of you need to simmer down some.

To call others Pharisees or other such names, implied or directly, is not being Christian like and is running you both in danger by doing so.

Eph 4:1  I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2  With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3  Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4  There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5  One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6  One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Eph 4:7  But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.

[asaph]

Brothers while I support the KJV totally I agree also that the other versions have been used successfully to bring many to Jesus Christ.

I also agree with DW,

Almost everyone of you need to simmer down some.

To call others Pharisees or other such names, implied or directly, is not being Christian like and is running you both in danger by doing so.

Eph 4:1  I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2  With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3  Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4  There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5  One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6  One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Eph 4:7  But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.

Thanks,
I deleted my post.
asaph

[asaph]

Since Westcott has been blackballed by KJO advocates, and continues to be, I post this a second time to see if I can get a response. I believe the author, Mr. May, has been open and honest in his attempt to come to the aid of the deceased Westcott.

Westcott, Hermes & the Occult
by James May[1]
While advocates of the King James Only position have hurled a myriad of accusations at Brooke Foss Westcott, none is perhaps more serious in nature than the assertion that he was a practitioner of the occult. The first bit of evidence produced by Gail Riplinger in support of this thesis is his membership in a student association at Cambridge University named the Hermes Club. Actually the club was first called the Philological Society and only later renamed Hermes. Gail, with James Sightler[2] and David Sorenson[3] close behind, would have us believe that this club was, to get right to the essence of the whole mess, a group of devil worshipers.[4] This idea is immediately obvious as New Age Bible Versions titles the section in which Hermes is discussed as “Hermes: Alias ‘Satan’,” and then proceeds to allegedly quote Helena Blavatsky to the effect that “Satan or Hermes are all one.”[5] I say “allegedly quote” because I have not personally looked up this reference, and I have learned NEVER to trust any quote from any King James Only defender without examining it myself. Two considerations supposedly demonstrate that the Hermes Club was concerned with the occult: The name of the club and the topics discussed in the club meetings. The only 19th century documentation that has been presented concerning the nature and activities of the Hermes Club is found in the biography of Westcott written by his son Arthur. Since this material is somewhat difficult to secure, I have reproduced the account of the club in full in the next three paragraphs:
Westcott’s most intimate friends during his career as an undergraduate were J. Llewelyn Davies, C. B. Scott, and David J. Vaughan. These four, together with W. C. Bromhead, J. E. B. Mayor, and J. C. Wright, were the original members of an essay-reading club, which was started in May 1845, under the name of “The Philological Society." At a later date the society took the name of “Hermes." The society met on Saturday evenings in one or other of the members' rooms, when a paper was read, and a discussion, not infrequently somewhat discursive, ensued. The following were the subjects of papers read by my father:-- The Lydian Origin of the Etruscans; The Nominative Absolute; The Roman Games of (or at) Ball; The so-called Aoristic Use of the Perfect in Latin; The Funeral Ceremonies of the Romans; The Eleatic School of Philosophy; The Mythology of the Homeric Poems; The Theology of Aristotle; Theramenes.
On two joyful occasions the ordinary business of the society at the weekly meeting was suspended--the first being 7th March 1846, when Westcott was elected to the “Battie" Scholarship; the second, 6th March 1847, when Scott was elected to the "Pitt” Scholarship. In 1847 A. A. Vansittart and J. Simpson became members of the club. At times the society's philosophic gravity relaxed, as witnesses the following entry in the minute-book under date 8th May 1848: "Mr. Vaughan having retired to his rooms, and Mr. Davies within himself, the rest of the society revived the ludus trigonalis [a Roman game of ball], and kept it up for some time with great hilarity." Presumably Westcott took his share in this hilarious revival, though it did not form part of the discussion on his paper concerning Roman Games of (or at) Ball.
The last recorded meeting of the society took place on 15th May 1848. On that occasion the character of Theramenes was discussed in Westcott's rooms. Before separating for the evening the society chose the character of Philopoemen as the "next topic of discussion." So ends the minute-book. Whether the society survived to discuss the character of Philopoemen or not is not apparent. Probably not, for the four faithful members of the club had now graduated. There is an entry in the minute-book which indicates that in March the end was near. Above the initials B. F. W. occur these words: "Let me here offer my heartfelt tribute to a society from which I have derived great pleasure, and, I trust, the deepest good-not least under the feelings of today." The subject that evening had been "The Condition of Women at Rome”; but the discussion had wandered over a wide field, and, in its latest stages, was concerned with a comparison of Plato and Aristotle.[6]
It hardly needs to be said that the description of this club as given in Westcott’s biography strikes the reader much differently than the material found in Riplinger, Sightler and Sorenson. The term philological, as used in the original club name, refers to the study of classical Greek and Latin literature, religion and culture, and the description of the activities of the club seems to very much fit this title. So why the change to “Hermes”? Should we see some hidden occult significance in this? To disarm Westcott’s accusers on this point we must only show that “Hermes” has attributes and associations which are not connected to the occult and which would reasonably explain the choice of the club’s title. To this end we note that Hermes was the messenger of the gods and was himself the god of eloquence:
In the Odyssey, however, he appears mainly as the messenger of the gods and the conductor of the dead to Hades. . . . He was also god of eloquence and presided over some kinds of popular divination.[7]
Interestingly this usage is also reflected in the pages of the New Testament:
And they began calling Barnabas, Zeus, and Paul, Hermes, because he was the chief speaker (Acts 14:12, New American Standard Bible).
The word “Hermes” in this verse is transliterated from Greek into English by the NASB and other modern translations. The KJV obscures the use of the name by following the Latin and thus translates the Greek “Hermes” as “Mercurius.” The obvious point is that the people in Lystra did not call Paul Hermes because they believed that he was Satan or because they thought that he was somehow connected with the occult. No, he was the chief speaker, and it seems most likely that the young Cambridge students called their club Hermes because they considered themselves to be eloquent speakers in their meetings.
There is a second occurrence of Hermes in the New Testament in Romans 16:14:
Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the brethren which are with them (Romans 16:14, King James Version).
The name Hermes in Romans 16:14 is identical to the name in Acts 14:12. Those who read no Greek will be helped by knowing that it has the Strong’s concordance number 2060 assigned to it. It appears a very safe assumption that the early Christians did not agree with Gail Riplinger that “Hermes” = “Satan”. The first century church would not have accepted anyone into its midst with a name associated with the devil, but would have demanded that the name be changed, which leads us to conclude that the use of the name Hermes provides no reasonable indication that the Cambridge club was associated with the occult.
Riplinger and Sightler also imply that the topics covered by the Hermes Club in its meetings indicate an occult connection. To this end they chose only the most sinister sounding topics to relate to their readers. The full list of topics presented by Westcott, as given in his biography, is as follows:
1.    The Lydian Origin of the Etruscans
2.    The Nominative Absolute
3.    The Roman Games of (or at) Ball
4.    The so-called Aoristic Use of the Perfect in Latin
5.    The Funeral Ceremonies of the Romans
6.    The Eleatic School of Philosophy
7.    The Mythology of the Homeric Poems
8.    The Theology of Aristotle
9.    Theramenes
Of these topics Riplinger mentions only numbers 5, 6, 7 and 9; Sightler only number 6. The others perhaps sounded too innocuous for a band of devil worshippers. It takes little research in a good encyclopedia to confirm that these are indeed subjects that young classical scholars might discuss. Since these papers have not been presented to us, we have no way of knowing the opinions which Westcott expressed toward his topics. For example, we do not know what aspects of Aristotle’s theology were discussed, and we do not know what criticisms were offered. In other words, and to get right to the point, the Hermes Club provides no indication whatsoever that Westcott was involved in the occult.
Addendum: An Important Correction
With what appears to be but one exception, quotations in Riplinger, Sightler and Sorenson associating the god Hermes with the occult are completely irrelevant and do not prove that Westcott wished such an identification. The information below first appeared in Riplinger and was then copied by Sorenson:
The designation [Hermes] is derived from “the god of magic. . .and occult wisdom, the conductor of Souls to Hades,. . .Lord of Death. . .cunning and trickery, (Riplinger, p. 400).
The latter title [Hermes] was so named by Westcott because it derived from “the god of magic. . .and occult wisdom, the conductor of Souls to Hades,. . .Lord of Death. . .cunning and trickery, (Sorenson, p. 175).
While both versions claim to relate Westcott’s motives, the second by Sorenson contains a particularly egregious error. Instead of referencing Riplinger as his source, Sorenson here has a footnote (number 36) informing his readers that this information was derived from volume 1, page 47 of the biography of Westcott written by his son. This statement would indeed be a strong indictment if it had been written by Westcott’s son, but it was not.[8] Sorenson’s footnote is simply wrong. There remains not one shred of evidence that Westcott chose the name Hermes for any reason except that Hermes was the god of oratory.
asaph

[PeterAV]

[quote author=joelkaki And on what basis do you declare that these are the word of God?  Because they follow the KJV?  On what basis is the KJV the standard?  You assume what you need to prove.
.........
Well, lets just say 99 percent of manuscript evidence including the thousands of manuscripts found AFTER 1611.
There are 5,300 Manuscripts.Less than 50 peices of manuscripts belong to the Alexandrian false heretical Minority standard,that all the modern versions follow.
The translarors lie so much just to get you to buy their own private version.Those thousands of manuscripts found since 1611 agree with the KJV 99 percent and even the 1 percent has to follow the 99 much of the time,or they could not be pushed on to the publick as a bible.

The KJV changes nothing.You are against all manuscript evidence,plus,it is not about oppinion.

Ah, so we are less spiritual (perhaps even hard of heart) because we will not only use the KJV.  I don't believe that the ESV for example is false, therefore I use it, rejoice in it, and learn of my Savior through it.
..................
No,because you do not believe the Bible is the bible.When they see it for what it is they simply believe,because they have not had time to be falsely indoctrinated to the point of offence when the truth comes out.Instead,they humbly submit.

On what basis do you make that claim?  You assume that the KJV is the standard, but you never prove it!
................
That's right,go ahead,and IGNORE 99 percent of the manuscript evidence that favours the KJV as a trustworthy translation.99 percent of manuscript evidence is hard to throw away now isn't it.

Even the New KJV is all gone to pot,too.

Here is a tiny sampling of the NKJV.Now remember,they are just to update the languge a tiny bit and make as little change as possible.
#1,they make 100,000 changes to the text.
quote]

A few things--1)  You again assume what you need to prove, namely, that the KJV is the standard by which all else should be judged.  The KJV uses "Jesus" 973 times and "Jesus'" 10 times, making a total of 983 times.  

You forgot to mention that those CHANGES are NOT IN THE Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts that was received by all.They insert where there ought not to be,and take away where it ought not to be.This is playing games.

They demote the trinity,they make salvation to be a works/progressive thing.I Cor 1:18 etc.

They do NOT demote the trinity (the NWT does, but that is the JW version, which as a movement denies the trinity, so that is to be expected.)  Rather, the teaching of the Trinity can be found powerfully in the ESV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, and others.
 
...........
The NWT,by the JW's have the very SAME changes in the Bible as the modern versions,because they are founded upon the same faulty Greek and Hebrew texts.
 

They promote a works salvation;Matt 7:14 Difficult is the way.
Now that is a lie.Getting saved is the easiest thing there is.But it is narrow.Only through the blood of Christ Jesus.

I'm sorry, but you are misrepresenting the "new versions".  They are not making any sort of statement about how we are saved, or that we have to work hard for our salvation.
...................
Mark 10:24 Children,how hard it is to enter the Kingdom of God.Modern versions=LIE

 

They promote the ONE WORLD religion
You've got to be kidding me.  Those passages don't promote one world religion.  I can't imagine how you got that out of there.
............
There are multitudes of times when it should be GOD,or HIM or Jesus,or He,and it is replaced by the NEUTER 'the ONE'
Or the NAME.they always down grade the true words of God.

There is only one Holy Bible for the English speaking peoples,that is prefect,inspired,infalible,pure,purified.The Holy Bible 1611AV.

Again, assuming what you need to prove,  

........................
I assume nothing my man.I have followed the majority of manuscript evidence is all.This includes throughout the whole of the text and the whole of history.
Feel sorry that you think that 99 percent with 5,300 manuscropts isn't enough to convince you of the overwhelming proof of the trustworthiness of the Holy Bible.

[joelkaki]

[quote author=joelkaki And on what basis do you declare that these are the word of God?  Because they follow the KJV?  On what basis is the KJV the standard?  You assume what you need to prove.
.........
Well, lets just say 99 percent of manuscript evidence including the thousands of manuscripts found AFTER 1611.
There are 5,300 Manuscripts.Less than 50 peices of manuscripts belong to the Alexandrian false heretical Minority standard,that all the modern versions follow.
The translarors lie so much just to get you to buy their own private version.Those thousands of manuscripts found since 1611 agree with the KJV 99 percent and even the 1 percent has to follow the 99 much of the time,or they could not be pushed on to the publick as a bible.

The KJV changes nothing.You are against all manuscript evidence,plus,it is not about oppinion.

Ah, so we are less spiritual (perhaps even hard of heart) because we will not only use the KJV.  I don't believe that the ESV for example is false, therefore I use it, rejoice in it, and learn of my Savior through it.
..................
No,because you do not believe the Bible is the bible.When they see it for what it is they simply believe,because they have not had time to be falsely indoctrinated to the point of offence when the truth comes out.Instead,they humbly submit.

On what basis do you make that claim?  You assume that the KJV is the standard, but you never prove it!
................
That's right,go ahead,and IGNORE 99 percent of the manuscript evidence that favours the KJV as a trustworthy translation.99 percent of manuscript evidence is hard to throw away now isn't it.

Even the New KJV is all gone to pot,too.

Here is a tiny sampling of the NKJV.Now remember,they are just to update the languge a tiny bit and make as little change as possible.
#1,they make 100,000 changes to the text.
quote]

A few things--1)  You again assume what you need to prove, namely, that the KJV is the standard by which all else should be judged.  The KJV uses "Jesus" 973 times and "Jesus'" 10 times, making a total of 983 times.  

You forgot to mention that those CHANGES are NOT IN THE Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts that was received by all.They insert where there ought not to be,and take away where it ought not to be.This is playing games.

They demote the trinity,they make salvation to be a works/progressive thing.I Cor 1:18 etc.

They do NOT demote the trinity (the NWT does, but that is the JW version, which as a movement denies the trinity, so that is to be expected.)  Rather, the teaching of the Trinity can be found powerfully in the ESV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, and others.
 
...........
The NWT,by the JW's have the very SAME changes in the Bible as the modern versions,because they are founded upon the same faulty Greek and Hebrew texts.
 

They promote a works salvation;Matt 7:14 Difficult is the way.
Now that is a lie.Getting saved is the easiest thing there is.But it is narrow.Only through the blood of Christ Jesus.

I'm sorry, but you are misrepresenting the "new versions".  They are not making any sort of statement about how we are saved, or that we have to work hard for our salvation.
...................
Mark 10:24 Children,how hard it is to enter the Kingdom of God.Modern versions=LIE

 

They promote the ONE WORLD religion
You've got to be kidding me.  Those passages don't promote one world religion.  I can't imagine how you got that out of there.
............
There are multitudes of times when it should be GOD,or HIM or Jesus,or He,and it is replaced by the NEUTER 'the ONE'
Or the NAME.they always down grade the true words of God.

There is only one Holy Bible for the English speaking peoples,that is prefect,inspired,infalible,pure,purified.The Holy Bible 1611AV.

Again, assuming what you need to prove,  

........................
I assume nothing my man.I have followed the majority of manuscript evidence is all.This includes throughout the whole of the text and the whole of history.
Feel sorry that you think that 99 percent with 5,300 manuscropts isn't enough to convince you of the overwhelming proof of the trustworthiness of the Holy Bible.

You have not offered evidence that 99 percent of 5300 manuscripts supports the KJV.  You have simply asserted it.  Therefore I feel no compulsion to "be convinced" that your position is correct.  

Plus the study I have done leads to a very different conclusion.

Joel

[2nd Timothy]

Just incase there are any out there that have other versions,thinking that your versions are better,the answer is nope.They are just as wicked and evil if not worse.There is only one Holy Bible for the English speaking peoples,that is prefect,inspired,infalible,pure,purified.The Holy Bible 1611AV.

There Is No 1611 King James Bible

For many people, it is not enough to just have any King James Bible. They take the extra step of proclaiming the Authorized 1611 KJV translation to be the only true Word of God. Because the King James used today has been revised several times, they don't feel it can be trusted.

I have some bad news for these 1611 KJVO folks: There is no existing copy of the original manuscript produced by King James' faithful translators. The pre-print text and the original autographs confirming the validity of the translation have all been lost to history. There is no way the KJVO advocates can be certain that the 1611 translation has not been tampered with.

According to a pamphlet written in 1660, the king's printers possessed the finished product five years before it was published. Because the KJVO camp is fond of conspiracies, the time gap should cause great concern. After all, they have no way of knowing if the original KJV translation made it to the print press.

The 1611 KJV Bible has indeed seen several revisions - 1613, 1629, 1638, 1644, 1664, 1701, 1744, 1762, 1769, and the final one in 1850. The concern over the validity of the modern KJV Bible is silly because the vast majority of the changes were simply spelling changes or single word updates.

Like many here I use the KJV in my readings as well as many other versions.   The Pure Gospel is the same in all that I have seen.  Man is sinful and God sent His Son Jesus to die on the cross for our sins.

The Gospel of Christ knows no barriers, languages, depths, heights and the gates of hell shall not prevail.  

I have nothing more to add.  Carry on!

Grace and Peace!

[felix102]

I support the KJV but do not believe it is as good as the Recovery version. You can see more by looking up Witness Lee.

I now use the Recovery version more often. But for me it does not matter what version I use...the Spirit still leads me. The Spirit will lead you if you let it. This is done best when you pray over the verse. Read each word and believe in it with all your being. Go slowly. When you pray it you are exercising your spirit. That's how you receive the word.

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

I also use the KJV and NIV quite often. When you search Scripture, you must come to Jesus to find life. If you do not find life it is useless. These Words are spirit and life.

Jesus scolded the pharisees for searching through the Scriptures and not coming to Him. Likewise, when we go to the word we must come to Christ.

John 5:39
You search the scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,

John 5:40
Yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

[PeterAV]

Does any of your sorces believe that they posses in their hands the infalible words of God?Do you?
A book without prooven error?
By the way you speak,I trow not.
Would you like me to post the list of manuscripts?You know I can.

[asaph]

I support the KJV but do not believe it is as good as the Recovery version. You can see more by looking up Witness Lee.

I now use the Recovery version more often. But for me it does not matter what version I use...the Spirit still leads me. The Spirit will lead you if you let it. This is done best when you pray over the verse. Read each word and believe in it with all your being. Go slowly. When you pray it you are exercising your spirit. That's how you receive the word.

John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.

I also use the KJV and NIV quite often. When you search Scripture, you must come to Jesus to find life. If you do not find life it is useless. These Words are spirit and life.

Jesus scolded the pharisees for searching through the Scriptures and not coming to Him. Likewise, when we go to the word we must come to Christ.

John 5:39
You search the scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,

John 5:40
Yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

Felix102,
Great word! The Recovery Version is very good. You are right on! Whatever the version, the Word read and prayed over becomes spirit and life to us. It does not matter what version but whenever the name of Jesus is spoken there is mercy and grace. Before I was a believer whenever I heard the name of Jesus spoken as a cuss word I was convicted in my spirit. Jesus is NIV, KJV, RV, NASB, Etc. He is all in all! He is the gospel, He has become my Salvation!
I am always inspired by your posts brother.
asaph  

[asaph]

To whom it may concern,
All the versions are without error because the Holy Spirit teaches us what He wills. God is not limited to one version.
(LITV)  When a prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah, if the thing does not happen or come about, that is the thing which Jehovah has not spoken; that prophet has spoken it proudly; you shall not be afraid of him.
(KJV)  When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

Is it proudly or presumptuously? Is it Jehovah or LORD? The Holy Spirit says both words are acceptable in both instances.
H2087
זדון
zâdôn
zaw-done'
From H2102; arrogance: - presumptuously, pride, proud (man).

Am I evil for believing this? If I am tell me how.

Even the NLT is used by the Holy Spirit to teach us a facet of truth.

22If the prophet predicts something in the LORD's name and it does not happen, the LORD did not give the message. That prophet has spoken on his own and need not be feared.

While it is not a word for word tanslation neither is it a lie or evil word as some would have us to believe. The Lord Spirit is the teacher. Love Him and be taught!

asaph


 

[PeterAV]

[quote author=asaph Since Westcott has been blackballed by KJO advocates, and continues to be, I post this a second time to see if I can get a response. I believe the author, Mr. May, has been open and honest in his attempt to come to the aid of the deceased Westcott.

It is very obvious by the writer's own words,that he has not read all that Gail has.Yet he gives his oppinion.And this is to be the standard.Now it is true that we all do not have to read everything around,to get the grip on things.
But he goes about it all wrong.
He didn't quote Westcott much,now,did he?She did.All he did was do a paper on what someone said she said or some other person said.Without spending any time on the facts.
The facts,like Westcott's own word,perhaps,may put it into perspective,right?
Plus if you take a look at the list he wrote down,it sure was not Christianity they were studying,now,was it?

Westcott[Greek editor]vol II p232,242,263,147,148,239.
               Westcott...Living One in his Gospel of the Ressurection pg 63
 "To me it appears that the Spirit is teaching us now above all things the unity of life,of all things,of all beings,of the seen and of the unseen...We view...men as disconnected,but this is simply a consequence of our limited powers.
To God all life that is truly life is one...There can be no doubt that the uniform tendency of recent research is to establish in many unexpected ways the closeness of the conections by which we are bound one top another."
 
  "In proportion as we know more fully,this conection is found to be more powerful and far reaching.It is the element-one element-in the idea of life which has been revealed to us in this age...the little life which is now my own is part of a vaster life."
Now that is New Age,Greek stuff,like Plato and Aristotle.
All is one harmonius whole,ya right.

Then we wonder why the modern Bibles have instead of HIM as in Jesus,they insert THE ONE.

Life of Westcott Vol I pgs 249-255,164,volII pg 306,Historic faith pg258,The Gospel of the Ress.pg 63,Religious thought in the West.p 106
 "All..is gathered up without loss of personality in One...God in all things and all things in God."

The life of Westcott pg251

 "As far as I could judge,the idea of La Salette was that of God revealing himself now,and not in one form but in many."
 ibid p 274VolII
Wescott spoke of the "consecration" of the host.
Sounds like he has Catholic leanings here.

Historic Faith p11

  "There was a time when it was usual to draw a sharp line between religious and worldly things.That tima has happily gone by."
Excuse me?
ibid p13

It is no longer 'faith in God,but faith for things'.B.F.Westcott's years of association with the esoteric world led him to call "faith" a "power" we can "use."

Lots more to come.
Historic Faith pgs111,105,253,Greek Tex with Notes and Addenda p70,Gospel of John:the AV with intro.and notes p 246.
  "The revelation of the Divine in man realized in an through Christ...Man is divine...Every type of essential human excellence coexists in Christ...humanity has been raised in the Son of Man to the right hand of God."

Here is a great one.this is found in Lif eof Westcott vol II p 127
  "David is not a chronological person."
Hey,it gets better!
Life and Letters of BF Westcott volII p 101,226,volI,pgs 231,209,Religious Thought in the West pg228
  "Only a social interpretation of the Gospel." I John 2:2 is "foreign to the language of the New Testament"..great difficulty with the notion of sacrifice and vicarious punishment."...he sees "man paying his debt."..."Some by diligent obedience have been raised to the loftiest places in the celestial hierarchy."in Col 1:14 he supports the removal of  "through his blood".."the redemptive efficacy`of Christ's work is to be found in his whole life.".."The redemptive work of Christ was complete in his last discourse."..."No doubt many do not agree with me."

Just a very tiny sample of his mind set,that is agreable to the occult and New Age mind set.See how we clear up things by going to the source,instead of quoting someone that speaks against the accuracy of the quotes by Gail?
James May missed the mark.
I haven't even touched many of the worse teachings he has laid down for posterity,even though he was careful not to expose himself,so he could get the work done on the Fake Greek Text.

[asaph]

[quote author=asaph Since Westcott has been blackballed by KJO advocates, and continues to be, I post this a second time to see if I can get a response. I believe the author, Mr. May, has been open and honest in his attempt to come to the aid of the deceased Westcott.

It is very obvious by the writer's own words,that he has not read all that Gail has.Yet he gives his oppinion.And this is to be the standard.Now it is true that we all do not have to read everything around,to get the grip on things.
But he goes about it all wrong.
He didn't quote Westcott much,now,did he?She did.All he did was do a paper on what someone said she said or some other person said.Without spending any time on the facts.
The facts,like Westcott's own word,perhaps,may put it into perspective,right?
Plus if you take a look at the list he wrote down,it sure was not Christianity they were studying,now,was it?

Westcott[Greek editor]vol II p232,242,263,147,148,239.
               Westcott...Living One in his Gospel of the Ressurection pg 63
 "To me it appears that the Spirit is teaching us now above all things the unity of life,of all things,of all beings,of the seen and of the unseen...We view...men as disconnected,but this is simply a consequence of our limited powers.
To God all life that is truly life is one...There can be no doubt that the uniform tendency of recent research is to establish in many unexpected ways the closeness of the conections by which we are bound one top another."
 
  "In proportion as we know more fully,this conection is found to be more powerful and far reaching.It is the element-one element-in the idea of life which has been revealed to us in this age...the little life which is now my own is part of a vaster life."
Now that is New Age,Greek stuff,like Plato and Aristotle.
All is one harmonius whole,ya right.

Then we wonder why the modern Bibles have instead of HIM as in Jesus,they insert THE ONE.

Life of Westcott Vol I pgs 249-255,164,volII pg 306,Historic faith pg258,The Gospel of the Ress.pg 63,Religious thought in the West.p 106
 "All..is gathered up without loss of personality in One...God in all things and all things in God."

The life of Westcott pg251

 "As far as I could judge,the idea of La Salette was that of God revealing himself now,and not in one form but in many."
 ibid p 274VolII
Wescott spoke of the "consecration" of the host.
Sounds like he has Catholic leanings here.

Historic Faith p11

  "There was a time when it was usual to draw a sharp line between religious and worldly things.That tima has happily gone by."
Excuse me?
ibid p13

It is no longer 'faith in God,but faith for things'.B.F.Westcott's years of association with the esoteric world led him to call "faith" a "power" we can "use."

Lots more to come.
Historic Faith pgs111,105,253,Greek Tex with Notes and Addenda p70,Gospel of John:the AV with intro.and notes p 246.
  "The revelation of the Divine in man realized in an through Christ...Man is divine...Every type of essential human excellence coexists in Christ...humanity has been raised in the Son of Man to the right hand of God."

Here is a great one.this is found in Lif eof Westcott vol II p 127
  "David is not a chronological person."
Hey,it gets better!
Life and Letters of BF Westcott volII p 101,226,volI,pgs 231,209,Religious Thought in the West pg228
  "Only a social interpretation of the Gospel." I John 2:2 is "foreign to the language of the New Testament"..great difficulty with the notion of sacrifice and vicarious punishment."...he sees "man paying his debt."..."Some by diligent obedience have been raised to the loftiest places in the celestial hierarchy."in Col 1:14 he supports the removal of  "through his blood".."the redemptive efficacy`of Christ's work is to be found in his whole life.".."The redemptive work of Christ was complete in his last discourse."..."No doubt many do not agree with me."

Just a very tiny sample of his mind set,that is agreable to the occult and New Age mind set.See how we clear up things by going to the source,instead of quoting someone that speaks against the accuracy of the quotes by Gail?
James May missed the mark.
I haven't even touched many of the worse teachings he has laid down for posterity,even though he was careful not to expose himself,so he could get the work done on the Fake Greek Text.

Have you actually read in context everything you quoted above? Or is this taken from one of your KJO cohort's writings. I have not read Westcott myself so I refrain to comment. However the essence of what Mr. May said in his argument is that Westcott was misquoted by his adversaries and time frames were off also.. There is a good possibility that this is the case here also. But thanks for at least responding to the article.

asaph