The King James Bible is preserved and inspired!

Religions & Spirituality
1

Most Christians believe that only the original manuscripts of the Bible were inspired and inerrant. However, Baptists like me actually believe that in English, the King James Version is the preserved translation of those originals and that it is just as inspired and inerrant as they are.

Psalm 12:6-7 says, “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.”

God has promised every generation that His Word will be preserved forever.

Moreover, the changes in the modern versions all create corruptions and contradictions, and it starts in the very first verse of the Bible. Here’s an example:

In the King James, Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

In the English Standard Version, it says, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

Did you notice the difference? In the KJV, it says “heaven,” singular, whereas the ESV says “heavens,” plural. Here’s the issue: God didn’t divide Heaven until verse six, where it says, “And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.”

Genesis 2:1 says, “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.”

The modern version just lied to your face! God didn’t create the “Heavens” in the beginning, He created “Heaven.” The modern versions attack the inerrancy of Scripture. If you’re thinking, “oh, but only the ESV has that issue,” you’re wrong. The NIV, RSV, NWT, WEB, NLT, YLT, TLB, etc. also make the EXACT SAME CHANGE.

That is only a single example; I could spend hours telling about all the changes that modern versions make and I wouldn’t even scratch the surface.

The King James Bible never adds to God’s Word, never takes away from it, and never changes it. Modern versions repeatedly alter Scripture, create contradictions, and deny God’s promise to preserve His words forever.

Proverbs 30:5 says, “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.”

Thus, the real question isn’t which Bible you prefer. The question is, do you trust Him?

2 Likes
2

Yes the KJV is my favourite because it’s fearless..:slight_smile: Later translations are useful for cross-referencing in modern language, but on the whole they’re too pol-correct for my taste, for example by replacing the KJV’s word ‘heathens’ with the wimpy “nations’.

3

All of the modern translations of the Bible are WRONG . The only previous translation that is any good is the Original king James’ Authorised Version Bible (1611) and even it has been incorrectly translated in places and the Books in it are not in their correct chronological order (Please read the following King of kings’ Bible “contents page” for the correct order of Books). Under God’s Supervision, the “King of kings Authorised Version of the Holy Bible” was completed in 2000 (the text of which is older than the kJAV; has the Thees and Thous and is more accurately interpreted and more informative than the kJAV but in PERFECT harmony with it, using mostly the same text but having capital letters when referring to God - He; Him; His; Thine; Thou; Who etc. to make it easier to understand; with notes included in the text to make things clear. It also contains that which was wrongfully removed).

The King of kings’ Bible, a free-gift to the world during these end-times, exactly as prophesied (Dan. 12:1-4; Rev. 5:1-5)

4

The newer the Bible the worst it is. Intentional mistranslations having been happening for a long time. See the most atrocious and recent translations by Scofield:

Even the New King James Version(formerly my favorite Bible) has adopted some of these changes. We have a copy of a copy that gets further and further from being the original.

Even the King James Bible was edited and written by Masons. Here is the cover of the original King James Bible:

IMG_0734
IMG_0734300×250 39.5 KB

Notice all the Illuminati, Masonic, and Rosicrucian symbolism?

The older the Bible the better.

1 Like
5

Even the King James Bible was edited and written by Masons.

Absolutely not. Like I have already showed you, in Psalm 12:6-7, God promised to preserve his words to every generation. Matthew 5:18 says “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”

Here is what a jot (yod) looks like: י

Here is what a tittle looks like: ב

These are tiny little symbols/letters. Jesus said that not one JOT or a TITTLE pass from the law, which is the BIBLE. God has repeatedly promised that his words will be preserved forever. 2 Timothy 3:16 says “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” Claiming that the Bible is “Masonic“ is wicked and blasphemous.

1 Like
6

No. The KJV is completely perfect; there is not an error contained within it. As I said before, God promised to preserve his word for every generation forever (Psalm 12:6-7) and God cannot lie (Titus 1:2). Any Bible that contradicts the KJV (even the “King of Kings version“) is not God’s Word.

7

No, the KJV isn’t completely perfect; God is Perfect.

Take the time to review what’s been shared, before having a knee-jerk reaction to it.

The KJV 1611 was the best, most accurate translation there was until the King of kings’ Bible was published.

1 Like
8

The Bible is perfect because the Bible is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is God, and is the “Word of God.“

Romans 10:6-8 says of Christ:

“But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;“

This passage is referencing Deuteronomy 30 where it says,

“For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.”

Why does the Apostle Paul reference an Old Testament passage about the commandments (which is SCRIPTURE)? Because Jesus Christ is the scripture. We don’t need to pull down Christ from Heaven in order for him to be with us; he is already in our mouth and in our heart because he is the Bible!

John 17:17 says “Thy word is truth,” and Jesus Christ is called “the way, the truth, and the life.“

1 Like
9

No the Bible is not Masonic. You misunderstood me.

The Bible is great. **Man **has edited God’s word. The Bible doesn’t say man can’t alter or edit his word but rather warns of curses to the men who do. I posted the Scofield link to show how it has happened very recently.

The KJV has known “mistranslations”. The fourth horseman being interpreted as pale instead of green. The seven Churches is actually supposed to be the seven communities. God didn’t remove a rib from Adam. These are just a few that I know off hand.

Do you think the man or men who wrote the KJV did not have their own personal motives or agendas? There is Masonic symbolism on the cover of the original KJV Bible. These weren’t flawless monks that made this Bible. I am sure they changed a lot of small and subtle things just like we have witnessed with are own eyes. Some intentional mistranslations, some unintentional. Probably had mistranslations that helped the Bible line up with the Catholic religion.

Have you heard the theory that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was not a virgin? The story of a virgin giving birth to a chosen one is a story found in ancient cultures like old Babylon and others that predate Jesus. Well if you look into the original Hebrew and Greek words that were used for virgin then you will find something interesting. The word virgin could have been translated into many English words like maiden or girl, but the word virgin was chosen every time. Was this to help line up the story of virgin giving birth to the chosen one in our Bible?

1 Like
10

Here is Christ, through the mouth of Jesus from the cross, calling to His God:

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me? (Eno. 89:20; Psalm 22; Isaiah 52:13 to 54:1; Sura 4:157-8.)

Here is Christ, letting the world know that His Father is His God, the same as for the rest of us:

John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto MY Father, and your Father; and [to] MY God, and your God.

And here is Christ, in heaven, sitting on the Right-Hand of His Father and His God:

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in The Temple of MY God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of MY God, and the name of the city of MY God, [which is] New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from MY God: and [I will write upon him] my NEW name.

It requires a special (extreme) level of insanity to IGNORE Christ’s own words THAT HE HAS THE SAME FATHER AND GOD AS WE DO.

11

That would discredit some of the prophecies about Christ (Isaiah 7:14 ) but even if someone argued that the text is questionable, the story in Luke is some evidence to Mary’s virginity in the sense that Christ was her first born….unless someone still wants to argue that she must have been sleeping around (a whore) before having her first child (hello, Talmud).

image
image518×196 6.23 KB

As a Christian, the idea that Christianity simply mooched off of older traditions has never been a strong enough argument to insinuate doubts in my mind. Have you ever wondered how various cultures around the world all have a Flood myth? Perhaps, because as Noah’s 3 sons and their wives reproduced and re-populated the earth, they told their children and subsequent generations the Flood story. So why would the promise of Redemption be any different in regard to older cultures having Virgin birth myths or sun/son-god myths?

As the pre-Flood generation, Noah and his family must have known about God’s promise of redemption to be wrought by Christ sometime in the future. Even if that wasn’t the case, I find it implausible that God couldn’t find one soul, post-Flood, from Shem to Abraham (who received the same promises) to give him a prophecy about the Cross. Prophecies that would no doubt be refurbished or embellished by his progeny as they spread throughout the earth.

1 Like
12

I don’t think the Bible is mooching off of older religions. But perhaps the Catholic religion or others twisted the Bible to line up with pagan beliefs such as ‘virgin giving birth to chosen one’ and ‘trinity’?

Every culture believing in the flood just further cements that the Bible is a true story.

I am not trying to pick apart Christianity but rather trying to bring to light certain beliefs and agendas that people who edited the Bible may have had.

1 Like
13

I understood where you’re coming from so i wasn’t misreading your post. Its a pretty common argument used to discredit Christianity (maybe you have never taken note) that it just stole from older faiths & traditions. This is usually from atheists or adherents/defenders of those older traditions.

14

I have heard about pagans trying to discredit the Bible completely for the reasons you mentioned and some. I believe the truth is somewhere between ‘the Bible is 100% accurate and needs to be taken at face value’ and ‘the Bible is bologna and steals from other religions’. On personal my walk with God, I would like to know where I was lied to so I could be manipulated for man’s personal agendas.

1 Like
15

Have you got some of these ideas from zeitgeist?

Here’s a shortish (11mins) video that debunks a couple of zeitgeist’s claims. There’s longer more in depth videos floating around.

4 Likes
16

I never heard of Zeitgeist and I’m not a big fan of Bill Maher. I did not realize people were drawing so many parallels between Jesus and ancient deities.

The chosen one born of a virgin is a common ancient story. Which is why it may have been shoehorned into the Bible to appease or convert pagans. Similar to how the birth of Jesus is celebrated on Saturnalia.

The common story of resurrection is another thing however. The ancient stories of resurrection were all fictional gods and characters. Jesus was very much a real person despite the fact we could argue exactly who he was. Jesus returning from the dead was kind of similar to how Moses’ miracles outdid all of the magicians’ “miracles”.

2 Likes