Archive for the ‘Bible evidence’ Category

End Times, Second Coming, and the Truth

April 28, 2017

DID THE APOSTLES THINK THEY WERE IN THE END TIMES?

The “rapture” is not a sudden unexpected one for those who are in light:
1 Thessalonians (13) But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that day should overtake you as a thief. (14) Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.

DID THE APOSTLES BELIEVE THE “SECOND COMING” COULD BE ANY MINUTE NOW?

Paul said –obviously for believers in HIS day– that the end times and Second Coming was NOT immanent, but that the Beast (aka Antichrist) would be revealed FIRST:
2 Thessalonians 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

DID EVERY GENERATION AFTER CHRIST BELIEVE THEY WERE IN THE END TIMES?

It is a Satanic lie that “every generation” thought they were in the end times. Isaac Newton said he thought it wouldn’t be until the 24th century or later. Also, if you check Bible commentaries and writings of most Christian theologians in the 19th century and even leading up to World War II, you’ll find that Christians were saying the end times could not happen until after Israel would be first restored as a nation-state.

DOES THE DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE IN 70 AD AS PROPHESIED IN MATTHEW 24:2 MEAN THE ANTICHRIST IS RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM?

Only a lawyer would wait till he’s out of ear shot to laugh at that one, and only a liar or a deceiver of one’s self could believe it.
The destruction of the temple in 70 AD is God’s affidavit that the end times prophecies in Matthew 24 were of God, the predictions that follow that one. It’s a watermark.

Most of the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah and the End Times, you’ll observe, are in the Bible because certain prophecies they uttered came to pass while they were still alive.

Like Moses and the plagues confirm his prediction of the taking of the evil lands of Canaanites and the prophecy about a later “Great Prophet”.
Jeremiah’s ending chapters are confirmed in the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem.

And so on. When the temple was destroyed in the exact manner Jesus said, the rest of the chapter is to be taken equally “literally”, or in a straightforward reading. Meaning, ye would “hear of” earthquakes, famines, pestilences, but hold on, that does NOT mean it’s the end times, rather, the end “is NOT yet” [my emphasis].

But it is always the time to repent, to ask the Lord Jesus Christ to come into your heart, cleanse you from all righteousness, and accept his gift of eternal life, paid for on the cross and signed by the Creator of life, death and the universe with the Resurrection.

A List of Ways Darwinism and Materialism Hold Back Science

March 23, 2014

Darwinian evolutionary dogma (and other materialist assumptions about the universe) has held science back in at least the following ways:

* Not looking for C14 in dinosaur bones and diamonds for the same reason.

* Natural selection/survival of fittest ideas affecting fishing, hunting, conservation.

* Tonsils being unnecessarily removed.

* Spinal curvature assumptions.

* “Junk” DNA not being studied.

* Treatment of Ota Benga, Aborigines, racist implications of evolution.

* Aryan supremacy (ultimately inbreeding).

** Today “Lysenkoism” is mostly debunked, but it not only confused science in the old Soviet Union  (and I’ll betcha research would uncover some big influences in the USA too). It resulted in mass starvation in the USSR too.

** From wikipedia on “Vestigiality”, there is a paragraph (180 “vestigial organs” in the Scopes Trial!):

In 1893, Robert Wiedersheim published a list of 86 human organs that were, in his words, “formerly of greater physiological significance than at present”. Theorizing that they were vestiges of evolution, he called them “vestigial”.[10] Since his time, the function of some of these structures has been discovered, while other anatomical vestiges have been unearthed, making the list primarily of interest as a record of the knowledge of human anatomy at the time. Later versions of Wiedersheim’s list were expanded to as many as 180 human “vestigial organs”. This is why the zoologist Horatio Newman said in a written statement read into evidence in the Scopes Trial that “There are, according to Wiedersheim, no less than 180 vestigial structures in the human body, sufficient to make of a man a veritable walking museum of antiquities.”[11]

[These “vestigial structures” have ALL been proven to have currently important function for the human body. You can survive without some of them, but you can also survive without one of your arms, tooQ

In this entry wikipedia quotes Darwin on the subject, and some of those quotes look like a good logical foundation for Lysenkoism.

** Mendel’s experiments with inheritance of traits (probably) neglected. (Disproves Lysenko too)

** Belief in abiogenesis would make for misdirection in research into microbiology.

** Moronic assumptions about how human engineers would design a human body better, no doubt still warping biology studies (and students). (Like how they would assemble a human eye. -The fool says he could do better than God-)

** Wasting a (private donation to Harvard) of a million dollars to study how life came from non-life.

** The suppression of proven real good scientists like Forest Mims who embarrassed the entire NASA staff with his $300 of instruments for family research.
==> And other such blacklistings of guys with good credentials.

** Censorship of smack-on predictions based on blacklisted creationists, like Russ Humphreys’ calculations for magnetic field strength of the outer gas giants.

** Censorship of phenomena contrary to Darwinian and long-age physics predictions, like Halton Arps’ catalog of “peculiar galaxies”. It was suppressed until some Berkeley materialist believers wrote about it.

** History censorship, such as Isaac Newton’s own declarations about #1 why he did science (to inspire faith in young men), #2 why science works, and so on.

** The delay (and still suppressed media) in discovery of the statistically “quantized” distribution of red shift measurements, meaning that according to the supposed red shift-distance relationship, all the distant objects “look like” they roughly “cluster together” in concentric spheres with a relative apparent center on the Earth.

** The “apparent” physical and structural orientation of the earth’s local cosmic neighborhood that centers on the Earth. <<== This one even appeared in a Wired Magazine article. The writer went to some museum that had set up a 3-D structure with the astronomical neighborhood of galaxies surrounding the Earth. He said he was struck by this apparent orientation to Earth.

** It’s finally leaking into non-Creationist venues, but Russ Humphrey’s observation about the universe’s apparent centering on our own “neighborhood” of the universe.

** The ongoing refusal to research into what one native African tribe calls “mokele-membe”.

* Archaeology: The neglect of the Ica Stones, the carvings at Angkor (Cambodia temple), and other such things. There are more than one images of dinosaurs at that temple that was built in the 12th or 13th century. One touristy web page says there’s only one, but there are more:
http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/dinosaur-angkor-wat

* PILTDOWN MAN. -> When the Internet was still young, a self-identified “evolutionary biologist” called me an unmitigated liar for saying Piltdown man was a hoax.

* Hoeckel’s fraudulent drawings still used today in high school biology textbooks, with some very serpentine disclaimer language. (They were offered straight up to my own kids in the 1990s and past Y2K too).

//

“They that understand among the people shall instruct many”

April 20, 2013
Entrance to Dinosaur Adventure Land in Pensaco...

Entrance to Dinosaur Adventure Land in Pensacola, Florida. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

If the 144,000 were not saved before the Tribulation, then there are pitifully and poorly prepared to be these: “They that understand among the people shall instruct many”.

God is not a “respector of persons”, so says his word, and the kingdom of God was taken from the “Jew according to the flesh” when Jesus said the kingdom was “taken from you and given to a nation bringing for the fruit thereof”.

The spirit quickeneth, the flesh profiteth NOTHING, “Say not ye we have Abraham to our father”, “Who is a Jew” asked Paul and then explained VERY CLEARLY who would inherit the promises made to Abraham. And that the promises to Abraham that “in thy seed” shall all the Earth was blessed came to fruition with the birth, life, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The genealogies list the lineage from Adam to Jesus Christ, so as to show that Jesus was fully human and descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and David, and of the tribe of Judah, literally. The records that they kept during those days provided another proof that Jesus was and is the Messiah. Now, with the records and the record-keeping dissolved into the ether together with the now diluted biological line, the “Jews according to the flesh” are not much more homogenous as such biologically than many nations on the planet, and they are surely no more Jewish than Ruth or Rahab or Uriah the Hittite.

Revelation 7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.

In today’s world, there’s no way you can sort out which Jew-according-to-the-flesh (supposedly) is which tribe, and in fact, they have mixed Arab blood, Ethiopian, Persian, Turkish, and especially European. Even Biblically, Rahab and Ruth share in the Abrahamic line to Messiah, and there are plenty of tribes from the region that intermarried with the Jews in those days. Maybe half of David’s Mighty Men! Jesus made this point too!

So there is another purpose in the numbering of “them which were sealed” as 144,000. I do believe they are probably leaders especially anointed for leading the sheep during the Tribulation. But it would not be “God’s nature” to let babes lead babes with no spiritual guidance. The Word says so:

Isaiah 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Lots of people who had before believed the Rapture was before the Tribulation will eventually come to reconsider, because they don’t always just blindly follow Establishment Christianity.

Kent Hovind and many others have studied the issue and changed in position . So did the ones that made this video to explain themselves:

Hal Lindsey‘s first book, The Late Great Planet Earth, was one of the first on Bible prophecy I read as I was led to faith in Christ and God prepared me to serve him in for street witnessing and missionary work. He introduced the book explaining that he approached the subject from scratch, meaning threw out everything he’d heard and started studying straight from scripture.

He had scriptures that drew an obvious straightforward parallel to events and times, as I remember it. Verses for all of it. I don’t remember enough detail to compare to what I know now after doing the same thing as a Berean. But he candidly admitted in his chapter about the Rapture that he had NOT found ANY clear scripture to support the event as coming before the Tribulation, but he believed it anyway. As many theology doctorates at the time, he used the prop that it was not in “God’s nature” to make us go through the Tribulation. The “evidence” is some of the incidents where God’s leading or prophecy saved his saints.

It’s a stretch to make that leap of logic. But even then he did not realize the disconnect between (1) the plagues of the trumpets and (2) the plagues of the vials of the Wrath of God that come with (after) the last trump that shall sound. The last vial of the wrath of God is when we return back down with Jesus (“saints with him”) and he descends “with a shout”.

More Post-Tribulation truth

April 16, 2013
English: photograph of Cyrus Ingerson Scofield...

English: photograph of Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (Scoundrel and deceiver of the gullible)

Hal Lindsey is trying to say that Sodom and Godmorrah were types of the coming Tribulation, because God took Lot and his family out before judgment.

“Haste thee, escape thither; for I cannot do anything till thou be come thither. Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.”

But God does that, because although Jesus said we’d have tribulation, we do not get the worst of the plagues at the end of the three and a half year period of Tribulation.

The Hebrews were still in Egypt when the ten plagues hit, and then they were taken out. The prophets were still in Israel when it fell to Babylon. The priests (and the faithful) were still in Jerusalem when they believed the prophets enough to welcome Alexander and the troops to Jerusalem. He was so satiated by the prophecies he let them keep all their arms and legs and money. The Jewish Christian faithful –some of them– were still in Jerusalem when Rome came and scattered them all to everywhere else.

Sodom and Gomorrah, God had promised Abraham. Lot had a “righteous soul”. Their judgment and fire and brimstone was total, universal, not one soul left alive.

Some judgments, we get warnings. There will be refuges for some Christians even during the Tribulation. Not just the jungle.

Rev 11:7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.

8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

But here’s where we agree. For sure, the Lord WILL take us up BEFORE the worst of plagues. That’s what we call the Wrath of God.

First, the Tribulation. At the end of that, at the last trumpet, “Rapture”. Then the vials of the wrath of God are poured out upon the earth, the absolute worst of the plagues. With the last of those vials, that’s Jesus Christ and his saints with him on white horses visiting Armageddon on the Beast and his minions.

And even so, some will live through even the Wrath into the “Millenium”, the thousand-year reign of Jesus Christ.

All the verses are in context:

Isaiah 28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. 10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

But when one of them declares something plainly, it’s best to go with that one:

29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

The only way to dismiss Matthew 24 is to cut it out of the Bible if you’re a Gentile, like the 19th entry widows’ swindler and convicted embezzler Cyrus Scofield in America, and his contemporary, the hustler of spiritual intellectuals in the old staid kingdom of the British Empire, John Darby. John Darby hated the Bible so much he wrote his own Bible and called it a “translation”.

The two of them popularized the newly invented pre-Tribulation Rapture doctrine on the two sides of the Atlantic.

The memo apparently didn’t make it to South Africa. An evangelist came to Miami once in the 1980s, and he said he never heard of such a thing as a pre-Tribulation Rapture until he came to the States. I’m sure the Americans have spread it more since then though, and history has been revised.

The one (two?) early-church quotes I’ve seen, rare as ken’s teeth, are ambiguous at best. And they don’t hold a candle to Paul’s own admonitions in the epistles that the day of of the Lord isn’t coming until the Son of Perdition is revealed first. Their talk would not have been about the Judgment, they’re looking for the Lord’s coming back.

There will be some places that serve as refuge during the Tribulation. He will set up in Israel, but even some players in the neighborhood

Daniel 11:41 He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.

Revelation 13 says all nations, tribes and languages, so that means it’s a UN-NWO thing, or its twin. But from Daniel 11 we see he has his hands full with international intrigues, conspiracies, and nations that don’t want to buckle.

They are probably planning on neutralizing the United States with a civil war and, according to more prophecies, on “restoring order” with help from other nations. The USA gets a dose of its own interventionist medicine, you might say, the most recent generations (of Christians, too) being led to war.

They will probably bring America down a few notches, they can sure create havoc with their fiat currency whip and their agents. But Americans are a rebellious bunch and will not fade away quietly.

Daniel 11:45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

Why the King James Bible is the standard

January 6, 2013
May - King James Version of the Bible.

May – King James Version of the Bible. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In the 20th and 21st century we cannot find another such group as the group of scholars that translated the King James Bible, in an environment that encouraged, even compelled, a devout respect for the word of God, that rivaled Moses’ awe at the burning bush.

Without even getting into the arguments over what Greek text to use. I mean you got Westcott and Hort and other such ilk that negotiated over land and sea to “rescue” an abomination in a trash basket that became a fake Greek “Bible” (haha wink wink) and got another one from the deep dark dungeons of the Vatican library.

That’s one BIG reason God would not expect us to trust a Greek standard.

===> WOULD GOD USE TRANSLATION? WOULD HE PROMISE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE OF THE KJB? (WHY NOT CHINESE, SPOKEN [Editor’s note:
natively] BY MORE PEOPLE THAN ENGLISH?)

FIRST, God works providentially through his “created means”?. He also gets to pick the standard and intervene at his own whim. It’s not very “providential” if you get a babble of confusion.

There are at least a DOZEN translations in the Bible and clearly exposed as such. A short list of only a few (there are plenty more):

#1. Joseph’s conversations with the Pharoah,

#2 the record of conversations between the patriarchs’ families and their neighbors in Canaan,

#3 Lot in Sodom,

#4 Nehemiah and his king and later his detractors,

#5 Daniel’s pronouncements to the Babylonians and the Persians,

#6 the sign Pilate placed on the cross pronouncing Christ the “king of the Jews” in THREE different languages translated as such in the Gospels,

#7 and “providentially” speaking ALL KINDS of things in a lot of different languages while they were in the Upper Room.
If God caused the writing of the New Testament to appear in Greek as a standard, early enough A.D. at least, why would he do that? Providentially speaking, it makes ALL KINDS of sense that he would engineer a standard Greek-language collection for all the OBVIOUS reasons that He also would OBVIOUSLY want the world of the 20th and 21st century to have one standard Word of God and not want it to be Koine Greek.

After all, if there is any “providence” involved in today’s Bible, it surely does not look like it with a hundred different “versions” of the Bible. Call the variations, variants, perversions, those would be better words.

Which Bible to use? The cafeteria version (pick one you like)?

And what group of scholars in the 20th or 21st centuries can lay claim to the extent of respect for the word of God like the scholars of the KJB, in the supportive culture of the time, and with the support they needed?

Who can say that our generation of this wicked world of today is even capable of doing better than the generation of the culture and society that cultivated such giants of both science and Biblical research as Isaac Newton?

How can you know what phenomenologically occurred? And you can’t find even one verse to back the claim that God would never want us to have a specific text as a “perfect representation of God’s pure word”? Or that if he could he would refuse to do so?

Because my Bible talks about “EVERY word” (caps mine):

And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every [word] that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.- Deu 8:3

Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him.-Proverbs 30:5

And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.-Luke 4:4

God is not the author of confusion – I Corinthians 14

Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.-1 Cor 14:13

This next one is a doozy for a Bible-confusion cure:

If

any man speak in an [unknown] tongue, [let it be] by two, or at the most [by] three, and [that] by course; and let one interpret. – 1Corinthians 14:27

Pop quiz: Let HOW MANY interpret? How many again?

One interpretation. One. The mark is “in” the right hand or it is “on”. Do you pick one, or find out which one God has picked for you?

The question is also what would God do? Would he have five different versions?

You challenge us to give you verses where God promises that the English of the KJB is the perfect translation, when there are more speakers of Chinese (as a first language) than any other?

HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I MADE THIS LIST, and some forum participants in other venues I’ve sent it to talk like they never saw it.

#1. English is recognized by everyone in the world as THE international language more than any other, bar none. Chinese may be spoken as native tongue but how many Mandarins are there, really? Cantonese is not Mandarin like Portuguese is not Spanish.

#2. FLUENT English, enough for rapid-fire communication in an emergency, is THE minimum requirement for ALL air traffic controller at EVERY ONE of ALL international airports in the world, without exception.

#3. English is the international language of business, and is the most popular language to learn in China.

#4. English is spoken by more people in the world probably than Chinese, because English is the number one choice in learning a second language by non-native English speakers.

#5. English is the overwhelmingly dominant language of the Internet.

#6. English is THE language for “hackers”. Eric S. Raymond, of the Open Software Foundation, reluctantly included GOOD English as an absolute requirement for anybody in the world who wanted to be a hacker (in the good sense of the word), because hackers who spoke other first languages demanded it for the benefit of aspirants.

#7. English is THE language for following developments and history in the medical field. Doctors in Latin America that try to stay current with new techniques, medicines, surgeries, programs read ENGLISH-language journals.

#8. English is acting like it’s on a stealth campaign to infiltrate any language in the world. Hondurans think “anyway” is a word in Spanish and after a big dinner they are “full”, Dominicans ask for a “sandwich”, and the French government has to order the French to speak French to expunge English!

#9. No other language has had the unique juxtaposition of conditions as occurred in the earliest years of the 17th century in the context of a culture and society that celebrated the Word, and freed from Rome and in a way still finding its way without an agreed authority like the KJB became.

#10. There is NOT ONE verse that anybody can offer that says God will never have just one standard text as his word, BUT anyone who reads the word and takes it to heart cannot but see that as a presumption that underlies the entire whole of God’s word! Why would God cause intellectual and unending confusion over what he said? If little things like this don’t matter, why does the word of God say they do?

If God says the world was created in six days, he doesn’t mean “maybe” six days. If his word says six hundred threescore and six, it doesn’t mean six hundred thirty-six.

October 6, 2012
Resurrection River Valley

Resurrection River Valley (Photo credit: DCSL)

The Resurrection of Christ

The Resurrection of Christ (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I found an interesting writing by Rich Wendling at the following link, an answer to “skeptic” Valerie Tarico at another link:
http://richwendling.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/pushing-people-out-of-the-church-part-6/

The article starts with

The fact that some naïve Bible study leader ignorantly thought that “dinosaur skeletons actually are the bones of the giants described in early books of the Bible” isn’t an argument against Biblical creationism. It does, however, point out the fact that too many Christians are ignorant of both science and the Bible

–> But then they object to using the cockamamie Hopeful Monster theory of evolution against Darwinian evolution. It proves nothing. The ancient Greeks, without visiting Galapagos, were the first to propose evolution. In fact, it is condemned explicitly in Jeremiah as a pagan idea:

Saying to a stock, Thou [art] my father; and to a stone, Thou hast brought me forth: for they have turned [their] back unto me, and not [their] face: but in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise, and save us. – Jeremiah 2:27

Rich makes this point further on:

All origins theories other than the straight-forward Biblical account of six literal days a few thousand years ago take mankind’s fallible ideas and hold them in higher authority than God’s Word. All of these other theories question the authority of the straight-forward teaching of the Bible.

That’s true  but it’s important to mention that belief in the Bible is grounded not in the false “blind faith” professed by many Christians, but used as an accusation against all of us, but these God-deniers still have to prove they are not science-deniers by addressing the science that has converted many a scientist and atheist to young-earth creationist.

The very origin of Christianity is based on the hard evidence of the fact of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in bodily form. Demonstrably dead from the piercing of the Roman sword in his side to make sure, as historians say the Romans did to make sure of it, he was seen by “five hundred” in the flesh, eating with them and having  fellowship with them.

After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. — First Corinthians 15:6

As always, then, the arguments against the Biblical facts of Christianity are religious, whether they are made by “Christians” or by atheists or Darwinians.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, – Romans 1:22

Whence one of my favorite couple of verses:

[[To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.]] The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. – Psalm 19:1

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.- Isaiah 1:8

October 6, 2012
Phillip Johnson and intelligent design profile...

Phillip Johnson and intelligent design profiled in the East Bay Express (Photo credit: Raymond Yee)

This is a photo I took on 2 June, 2007 at the ...

This is a photo I took on 2 June, 2007 at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, United States. I asked beforehand, and was granted permission to photograph on the property and release the photos to the public domain. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Libel for being called a “creationist“, being lumped together with those who believe Adam and Eve and Noah were real people and the Bible is historically accurate? My, my. Badge of honor rather.

Of course we’re way different. Intelligent Design includes many self-described Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and one miniscule thread of atheism that even floated a proposal that believing in the Big Bang afterward )today) caused it to happen in our past. (Kid you not).

Science carried me with history, facts, logic catalysts from atheism to a fleeting belief in design by some entity but didn’t stop until the evidence for Adam and Noah became too obvious.

ID thinkers should check the mirror when they talk about young-earth creationists, compare their anti-creationist missives with their own criticisms of anti-designists. Especially when they pretend that young-earth creationists are not driven by evidence from science, or simply ignore it. Because evidence that the earth is young, evidence of the Flood, and verifications of predictions based on the Biblical narrative like Russel Humphreys’ calculations of planetary magnetic fields, are also scientific.

That said, most ID scientists and writers do not engage much in creationism-bashing. Eugenie Scott does mean the word “creationist” as an insult and as a propaganda trick when he uses it against Intelligent Design theory, so it’s fair to say he was trying to libel somebody with the label. But some do fault YEC (Young-Earth Creationists) wrongly as rejecting science. Andrew Flew fits there, as a believer in God that became a theist based on Design science, but still had pejorative and false labels for the God of the Bible. He may have progressed further before passing on, time will tell on the other side.

Libel for being called a “creationist”, being lumped together with those who believe Adam and Eve and Noah were real people and the Bible is historically accurate? My, my. Badge of honor rather.

Of course we’re way different. Intelligent Design includes many self-described Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and one miniscule thread of atheism that even floated a proposal that believing in the Big Bang afterward )today) caused it to happen in our past. (Kid you not).

Science carried me with history, facts, logic catalysts from atheism to a fleeting “designism” but didn’t stop until the evidence for Adam and Noah became too obvious.

“Designists” should check the mirror when they talk about young-earth creationists.

King James Bible: Refutation of one Robert Joyner

May 26, 2012

What Robert Joyner shows in this article is the Biblical truism, “Knowledge puffeth up”. But it gave me some good talking points about the King James Bible.

HAVE WE BEEN LIED TO?
By Dr. Robert Joyner
In this article I will show the KJV Only group has repeatedly lied and misrepresented the facts, not just a few times, but over and over. This is the way they propagate their theory. Lying and deception is normal for them.


A common trick of the guilty, accuse the victim.

NEW AGE VERSIONS

Gail Riplinger’s writings are a good example of distortion, twisting the facts and outright lying. When I was sent an advertisement of her NEW AGE VERSIONS, it was evident this book was extreme and way out in left field. She claimed there was a hidden alliance between the new Bible versions and the New Age Movement. She asserted that the New Versions had occult origins. They would prepare the churches of the last day to accept the religion of the Anti-Christ and to receive his mark.


Already getting fulfilled. One report tells of a prophecy instructor sent to churches from the “Left Behind” people, already saying that nobody has anything to fear from an embedded chip (in his right hand or forehead, I might add), because, according to him, the Bible says it is placed “ON” (my emphasis) the skin rather than “IN”. There is only one Bible “version” in English that says “in”, the KJB.

John Hinton, graduate versed in a great many languages including the ancient Biblical languages, blasts away at “on” explaining that the “mark” is from a word that implies an incision, a groove, not face paint.

Anyone in his right mind knows that no Bible will do this. The New Age movement is not built on any Bible. The Anti-Christ will not have any kind of Bible. He will be against all Bibles. Later on I learned that many gullible people were buying Riplinger’s book. That is unbelievable, I thought.
When I saw a copy of her book, it was so evident that everything in it was slanted, twisted, or was a bald-faced lie. She could not get anything right. She even misquoted the KJV.


What anyone in their right mind knows in the real world is that New Agers are quoting their own interpretations of the Bible ALL THE TIME. They do just like modern versions, “Hath God said”, followed by “What is really says is this. What Jesus really said is that.” Blah blah.

[…meaningless content-lacking opinion snipped..]
David Cloud is a strong believer in the KJV Only view, but he said regarding NEW AGE VERSIONS, “It is the frequent error in documentation, in logic, and in statement of fact that gives cause for alarm. There are many good points made in the book, but it is so marred by error, carelessness, and faulty logic that it cannot be used as a dependable resource.” Cloud went on to say that the book was not accurate in its references, the documentation was unreliable and it contained countless statements which were entirely unsubstantiated.


This is an opinion from a source that  Joyner said in the opening paragraph belongs to a group that continually lies and misrepresents, presumably to refute a stronger KJB opnion that has better facts.

Riplinger claimed she was inspired by God to write her book. She said it was such a direct revelation from God, she hesitated to put her name on it. So she put G. A. Riplinger, which meant to her, God as the author and Riplinger as secretary. So she is saying that God is the primary author.


Joyner’s next paragraphs blows all credibility out the window about inspiration.

The Bible clearly says inspiration stopped when Revelation chapter 22 was complete. Riplinger is doing the same thing cults do when they add their books to the Bible. Gail Riplinger is a heretic. She is not worthy to be taken seriously. Yet thousands read what she says and do not question it. This is amazing!


I read the book and there is not one sentence or thought there than can be reasonably or honestly twisted to imply any claim that she was adding a book to the Bible. It is the modern versionists, however, who are always –admittedly!– putting their own words into chapters and verses in the Bible. They admit it when they claim that “no translation” is perfect.

What is amazing is that so many smart people can believe that God would leave us without an inspired Bible standard, so we can KNOW things like the Mark of the Beast going “IN” the skin rather than “ON” the skin.

How can someone with the degrees and training which Mrs. Riplinger is supposed to have, make such mistakes? The answer is this. Mrs. Riplinger is not a Bible scholar. All of her degrees, her teaching, and her writing had been in the area of interior design. When she taught at Kent State, it was in the Home Economics department. She taught interior design.


So what? God’s word includes writings at the hand of a 12-year old prophet (Jeremiah), a fisherman (Peter), a physician (Luke and Acts), a bunch of “unlearned and ignorant men” (Acts 4:13), a humble shepherd boy (David) and let us not forget the best example, a carpenter by trade.

And the critics who invoke “the praises of men” as an argument against those who don’t have it, remind me of the Pharisees who told the Jews, “Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him?” (John 7:48)

NAMES OF KJV ONLY BOOKS

Just the names of these crazy KJV Only books show the lack of logic the movement is built on. One is called THE FINAL AUTHORITY. Everybody should know the original Hebrew and Greek is the final authority.


When did God say only the “original Hebrew and Greek” is the “final authority”? Where is the Biblical reference for this?

And by the way, how does this author know exactly what the “original Hebrew and Greek” actually says? There are countless copies of copies. There are not only different “families’ of ancient copies in codex and manuscript form, and nobody –nobody at all– can show us with finality one of these “originals”. Parts of inspired Jeremiah in their own “versions” show that what finally got passed on in the first generation was a re-inspiration of the first writing.

Where did God say he would never speak in a different language, or inspire a translation the exact way he wanted it?

However, Jesus did say that “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.” (Matthew 5:18)

Jesus promised that “not one jot or one tittle” would pass, till all is fulfilled. We all know he was obviously talking about ALL the meaning of ALL the scripture, down to the most minute detail of nuance of meaning.

The KJB translators were not only the best scholars of the English language and of the Biblical languages, they were believers, devout, who also knew the Bible a lot better than modern translators, who often make mistakes that they could avoid had they known it.

However, the purpose of this book is to show the KJV is the final authority. Another book is GOD WROTE ONLY ONE BIBLE. Of course God only wrote one Bible but the book tries to show God only wrote one version, which is entirely a different matter. But KJV Only folks don’t see the stretch here: the change from Bible to version.


God is not the author of confusion. Failing to see the significant difference between “divisive” and “heretic” is not a laughing matter, or between a mark of the Beast “in” the right hand from a mark of the Beast “on” the right hand. Or a thousand other differences.

Or take the difference between the gospel of Mark with or without The Great Commission passage.

Another book is THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT ARE NOT THE SAME. The argument of this book attempts to tell readers that if something is different, it cancels whatever it differs with. That is faulty logic. A Ford and a Cadillac are different but one does not cancel the other. Both will carry you where you want to go. They both serve the same purpose. So Bible versions are different but they serve the same purpose. One version may be in old English, another in Modern English, but both serve the same purpose. KJV Only people can’t see this. Another book is, LET’S WEIGH THE EVIDENCE but the only evidence given is one sided and the only thing it proves is the lack of logic of the author. Is Logic and common sense being abandoned by modern preachers and Christians?


A Ford and a Cadillac does cancel each other out unless you’re a millionaire. You buy one or the other, most of us. And one DOES cancel the other. Ask ANY mechanic whether repairing a Ford is the same as repairing a Cadillac.

But automobiles give me an even better comparison to make.

At one company my manager was a Cuban refugee, an accountant, who had worked on one of Castro’s collective farms. One day he was going on a trip to Havana. The farm mechanic asked him to see if he could find an old 1954 Ford pickup repair manual so he could figure out how to fix their Russian made pickup. The accountant asked him how could that work?

The mechanic explained that the Russian pickup was an EXACT COPY of the Ford model. There are lessons there about economics and socialism and dictatorship and corporate espionage, but in this context the fact is that the Russian trick was a COUNTERFEIT copy, a truck that purported to be something it was not.

A phony dollar bill has a lot of little things that are just like the real thing, but there are differences that make all the difference.

If it isn’t God’s word 100%, then it’s phony and you can’t trust it.

People can get saved using a counterfeit, but along the way if you keep using a counterfeit you’ll get caught.

WORD FOR WORD TRANSLATION?

The KJV Only group is so against dynamic equivalency (This term means that translators give the meaning, rather than a word for word translation). They contend the KJV is a word for word translation. Actually there is no such thing possible. All translators know this.


Of course they do, and of course the KJB translators knew this better than anybody, and since I know of NOT ONE KJBO advocate that even says this, it is a “straw man” argument that means absolutely nothing to the issue.

The issue is that the “dynamic equivalence” philosophy is totally destroyed by the fact that Jesus said the Word would be preserved down to each “one jot or one tittle”.

The author wasted a lot of paragraphs refuting this straw man. The KJB is a straightforward translation that does not take liberties with a paraphrase philosophy of translation.

Actually the NASB is a more literal translation than the KJV. If the KJV Only people really wanted a literal translation, they would like it but instead they curse it.


The NASB is translated from a small set of manuscripts known as the Alexandrian line, and it’s actually God that curses anyone who removes parts from the books that are parts of the Bible (The Great Commission, the adulterous woman story).

VERSES LEFT OUT?

The KJV people ask, “Why do the modern versions leave verses and words out?” I think they have the question reversed. It should be, “Why does the KJV insert so many words and verses?” The fact is, the Textus Receptus and the KJV translators included most any verse or phrase that was in any manuscript, which was available to them. The modern versions put the verse in only if the manuscript evidence required it. This is more logical. The KJV is based on the Byzantine text, which is a derived text. It obviously incorporates into itself the earlier readings found in both the Alexandrian and Western texts. When manuscripts differed, they would put in both readings. For example, in Luke 24:53 the KJV says they were “Praising and blessing God.” The Alexandrian text says “blessing God.” The Western text says “praising God.” The Byzantine text joined both readings together rather than omitting one reading. Erasmus even put verses in out of the Latin vulgate. So there are verses and phases in the KJV that are not found in any Greek manuscript. Examples are parts of Acts 9:5-6 and Rev. 22:14. Remember it is just as bad to add to the Word as it is to delete.(Rev. 22:18)


The KJB translators were devout believers and had the Word of God in awe, so they followed their knowledge guided by their devotion in the renderings, and by their fruits we know them when we get into details.

Actually many verses that are left out of the modern versions are repeats. For example, in Mark 9, the KJV says three times, “the fire is not quenched.” The Modern versions have it only once.


This makes a reader wonder whether he is being honest. The Bible is FULL of repeated verses. “These six [things] doth the LORD hate: yea, seven [are] an abomination unto him:” (Prov 6:16). Many of the words of Jesus are repeated throughout the Gospels. Paul preaches a gospel of grace not works in many different ways.

Talking about adding and leaving out verses, the 1611 KJV added 14 entire books, a total of 172 chapters, called the Apocrypha. Certainly no other version adds or takes away this many verses. The 1611 KJV is the worst version of all about adding verses. How dare the KJV Only people to even talk about leaving out verses! I know Peter Ruckman and others give silly excuses and explanations for the 1611 KJV containing the Apocrypha, but the bottom line is, the original KJV contained the Apocrypha.


Even the 1611 printing had disclaimers on the Apocrypha, and in the earliest subsequent editions they quickly realized the confusion it was causing and took it out. On the other hand, the modern translations almost all are based on the Alexandrian manuscripts that include the Apocrypha, some of them including extra books like “The Shepherd of Hermes”.

Those facts are listed in Gayle Riplinger’s book, and this guy claims to refute the book?

THE ALEXANDRIAN TEXT


He then defends the Alexandrian text without examples that refute the criticism of them, by just saying there are good people and bad people everywhere. Of course he skips over the actual arguments and presents no real defense, because there is none.

WESTCOTT AND HORT
B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort are the main scholars the KJV Only advocates love to hate. Gail Riplinger and others have misquoted and misinterpreted what they said. They even quote W.W. Westcott and attribute it to the scholar B.F. Westcott. Riplinger and others quote B.F. Westcott’s son when he said his father had investigated spiritualism. They use this against Westcott.


Somebody lied about this. Riplinger had the right Westcott and Hort, and their sons wrote about them and exposed them. The two actually questioned their own choice for a translation, “Are you sure?”

Their sons (yes of that Westcott and Hort) wrote and confirmed that they hated the Bible (the KJB was the Bible then), they said the Garden of Eden was a fairy tale, they thought the expiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ was contemptible, they said anybody who believed in the miracles was deluded, and anybody who believed in the Resurrection was especially demented. And I can believe that the one son wrote that their “investigations” were no good. Maybe he had more sense than his father, more love for God.

But what is really demented is their preference for the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus manuscripts. These two contradict each other in more places than any of the other Alexandrian manuscripts among themselves or any of them differ from the Byzantine.

The Sinaiticus was snatched by Tischendorf during travels in the middle east, from a trash basket where the monks had lazily let it lie for unknown centuries, waiting to be burnt. He stole it –that’s right, stole it– with promises of remuneration that motivated the monks to let him take it. Years later they claimed he had swindled them.

The Vaticanus they found in an extensive search through the Vatican’s ancient rooms, specifically looking for an alternative to the Byzantine.

They are older because earlier generations of Christians with spiritual discernment had discarded them. They used the better ones for their copies, which of course wore out faster. That’s why the Byzantine line is more recent.

ANTI-BAPTIST KJV

It is well known that King James hated Baptists. He said he wanted to “harrow out of England” all Baptists. The King James Version was rejected by Baptists when it first came out. When the Baptists first came to America, they brought the Geneva Bible, not the KJV. In fact, some of the first Baptists to arrive here had been run out of England by King James.
King James, in 1612, imprisoned a Baptist preacher named Thomas Helwys for a tract he had written opposing the state church (Church of England).
John Bunyan, a Baptist and author of PILGRIMS PROGRESS, spent many years in the Bedford prison because of persecution from the Church of England (which King James and the KJV translators were part of).


Now this is very telling. Here he criticizes the Authorized Version by way of using King James, who did not do translation though he knew the languages, but thinks it’s okay to use a Catholic version from the Vatican with cooperation from Vatican authorities counts against the Alexandrian versions.

As a matter of fact, to expose the truth even more, he has to now explain why he prefers a family of translations that has more approval from the Vatican than the KJB or the Byzantine Greek documents for that matter. Oh yes, and why do his modern translations make sure that their end product is approved by Catholic scholars?

Who is the bigger historical persecutor of Baptists? Anglicans or Catholics?

PRO CATHOLIC

A heavy Catholic influence was exhibited in the KJV from the time of Erasmus, a Roman Catholic who compiled the Greek text. The reason he put I John 5:7 in his Greek text was because the Catholic church threatened to excommunicate him if he didn’t. This verse is found in only two late Greek manuscripts. It is not found in the Majority text. Erasmus knew it did not belong in his Greek text. But the worst thing to a Catholic is ex-communication, so he put it in. He also put in other verses from the Latin Roman Catholic Bible.


Blah blah, pure speculation based on a need to get things from OUTSIDE the Bible to use to criticize the King James Bible. There is not one reference to examples from either side of the debates, just pure ad hominem. They don’t like the messenger, so they’re criticizing how he does his hair.

The Gunpowder Plot blows the accusation to pieces. King James blessed the suggestion of a Puritan to make a translation that would be used in all the English-speaking world in 1603 and it was underway by 1604

In 1605, the Gunpowder Plot was discovered. Its mastermind was a Jesuit priest, and their intent was to blow up the Parliament building during a speech by King James, to cut off the head of the government and install a pro-Catholic coup in its place.

The Catholic church at the time HATED translations of the Bible to the vernacular and banned its subjects from reading it. John Knox (1514-1572) was a priest in the Roman Catholic church who did not even know there was such a book until he saw it on a list of banned books.

God is not the author of confusion. Why would he want us to have a hundred different “translations” of his Word? The fact is, there is absolutely no Biblical basis for saying God would never anoint a modern rendition of his Word in the way he wants us to read it.

He said he’d preserve every single “jot” and every single “tittle” of meaning in his word. Not the general “message”.

Let your communication be yea and nay, we are told, meaning straightforward. There is one standard. Go check these things for yourself.

 

KJB Clarifications: Answers to Questions

March 2, 2012
Bible

Bible (Photo credit: Sean MacEntee)

Rich Wendling says he doesn’t understand why anybody would be KJBO and he asks some questions in his blog:

Theological Positions I Don’t Understand, Part 1:

http://richwendling.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/theological-positions-i-dont-understand-part-1/

Apparently he has had people in his life who used to take a KJB-Only position but have changed. The sad thing is that this is more an indication that they themselves did not understand the reasons why it may be God‘s position, because they have moved away from that understanding.

There is a LOT more to insisting on the KJB as THE standard for Christians than just tradition.

Let’s take his questions in raw form, as is:

#1. There are several different texts used in Bible translation.  How do we know the texts upon which the King James was based are inerrant?

The supremacy of the KJB does not just depend on its based-on text, the Textus Receptus, which is also known as The Majority Text, as it comprises about 95 percent of the manuscripts and codexes from ancient times that exist today of the New Testament. The Hebrew text used for the Old Testament is for most translations the Mazoretic, which is pretty much agreed to by all scholars as best representing the originals.

There are two main body of texts. The Majority Text, which is majority for getting the most respect from the earliest Christians in most ancient times, the text the Byzantines-then-Greek Orthodox never gave up.

But we must understand anyway that today there is absolutely no existing “original” text of any book or part of the Bible in existence today. What we have are multiple generations of copies of copies. So when any of the modern version advocates or anti-KJB commenters talk about “only the originals are inspired”, what are they talking about?

Because they do not know WHAT they are talking about, because there are NO existing “original autographs” anywhere in the world today, those are long gone on the dust heap of history. So by their own claims, they have NO BASIS to back up what they say about fidelity to the so-called “originals”.

But it’s a good question, How do you know? There are good reasons for the Textus Receptus over the Alexandrian texts, among other things being that the Alexandrian texts claimed as basis and used in modern versions h ave bigger differences among themselves than they do from the Majority Text.

Another is “By their fruits ye shall know them”.

#2. How can any translation be inerrant, since we don’t know what some Hebrew and Greek words used in the Bible actually mean?  How could they have been translated correctly?  For example, the Hebrew word תיבת or teiveh only appears twice in the Old Testament.  It is the word for Noah’s ark, and the word for Moses’ baby basket.  Nobody knows exactly what it means, though.

“Nobody knows exactly what it means” today, maybe, but this is another evidence of the excellent knowledge of the 70 or so brilliant scholars that worked on the King James Bible. These are people who had a dedicated, sincere love for the Lord, and at the same time did not lack for fluency in the Biblical languages. They wrote prose in those languages, they could hold debates in these languages, they could have revived them in a way similar to the Hebrew spoken today in Israel, except that their Greek would have been closer to the ancient Koine.

But they did not manifest the hubris, the pride, or the guesswork of the modern translators when it came to a word that they really did not understand.

For example, when they came across the Hebrew word “behemoth” in the book of Job, they did not take a wild guess like your modern versions. “Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.” -Job 40:15. They didn’t even add the misleading NIV footnote saying it could be a hippo or an elephant, which between the lines says “your guess is as good as ours”.

But the “elephant” guess is WORSE today than even just treating it like the KJB does, because it’s a sign of unbelief.

No the KJB scholars did not know the word so they transliterated it, and if you read the text you’ll understand it’s the description of a dinosaur without doubt. But the modern graduate of the dumbed-down schools of today cannot believe Genesis, they do not believe the Bible cover to cover, so they guess at something else.

#3. A related problem is that there are many Hebrew and Greek words for which we do know the meaning, but there is no corresponding English word with exactly the same meaning.  How can any translation in any language be inerrant?

Let’s explain by example.

Revelation 13: 16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

Note that word “in”, as in “in their right hand”. The NKJV, NIV, NLT, that is really ALL the modern translations replace the word “in” with “on”.

At the following link find some amazing insights into the guiding hand of God and the expertise of the KJB translators in using the word “in” instead of the misleading “on”, and the wild perversion of the word with the word “tattoo” in some:

http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/hinton_rev_13_16.html

From John Hinton: The preposition epi can also mean in, to, at, with, along with, and a number of other similar meanings. It must be read in context before it is translated, and unlike the correctors of today, the KJV translators were able to do that. They did, and they realized that a xaragma, which is translated as mark, involves a scratching or etching into the skin. This, we could imply, would include injections, although the idea of injections was not known when the text was written. Any philologist of even meager ability realizes that prepositions cannot be put into neat little boxes. They virtually never translate perfectly from one language to another. For instance, if we were to make a word for word translation of “turn the light on” or “turn the light off” into any foreign language, we would not be understood at all. For another example, when one learns a preposition in Arabic like ‘ala, the meaning of “on” will be learned first. If we were to try to translate it as “on” in every instance, we would make a complete mess out of the language, because ‘ala means a whole lot more than just “on”, and it frequently requires either a lot of experience or a lot of thought to discern what it means in a given passage. I am sure that there is not a language in the world that uses prepositions that does not have other examples. The translators of old put their discernment to work when they translated epi; the modern version pseudo-translators did not.”

That’s why he felt compelled to introduce the above paragraph with this commentary:

Revelation 13:16 is one of those verses that fakes and second-rate Greek scholars use to puff themselves up, and it requires only the most elementary level of study. Yes, indeed, when epi is used as a preposition it is most often translated as “on” just as all dictionaries will tell us. I did learn this the very first day that I began studying koine Greek, and probably learned it the first day that I began studying Greek twenty some years ago when my focus was on Modern Greek. This is as basic as it gets, so why do these Bible “correcting” pipsqueaks think that these great scholars of old, who were far more educated than they will ever be, did not know the most common meaning of epi? This is not just ignorance, but the worst kind of arrogance. The fact that they chose not to translate epi as “on” demonstrates that they knew something the modern quasi or pseudo-scholar does not know. These 53 men (the 54th died early) knowingly translated or approved of the translation of epi as “in” in its context for a reason.

#4. Even if it were possible to have a perfect, inerrant translation – how do we know it’s the King James?

That’s the best question yet. You can just follow the word itself for this one, even the modern perversions haven’t been able to cover up the Biblical basis for this.

While we’re into this one, keep in mind that the modern translators have absolutely no Biblical basis whatsoever to say that God cannot have inspired a translation for modern times. None. Their “Biblical” objections are actually ad hoc character assassinations mostly, and the use of the word “cult” as pejorative, and other irrelevant noise.

God promised in Psalm 12:8 to keep his pure words preserved, as silver purified in the furnace and tried seven times.

The most important thing God has to tell us, to show us, is his word. Some anti-KJBO screeds take exception to Psalm 12, saying it means something else. Even based on their mouthings, even if you think it’s a promise to preserve the poor, what do you think is more valuable to God but the word. After all, that’s Jesus without the flesh (John 1:1)

God knew that English would be the standard language around the world in today’s troubled times. It is the international language of commerce, trade, diplomacy, business, journalism, science, technology, and as a software developer I can tell you that ALL programming languages are based on English. To be a real hacker, take it from Eric Steven Raymond, one of the original group that invented the word at MIT in the earliest computing days:

http://tinyurl.com/2t9ab

“As an American and native English-speaker myself, I have previously been reluctant to suggest this, lest it be taken as a sort of cultural imperialism. But several native speakers of other languages have urged me to point out that English is the working language of the hacker culture and the Internet, and that you will need to know it to function in the hacker community.”

At every international airport in the world, if you cannot speak fluent English enough to handle fast-talking emergencies, you cannot be an air traffic controller. I’ve lived in Latin America, and doctors follow developments in medicine in the English journals.

That’s merely evidence that it would be most likely according to God’s desire to have us “make disciples of all nations”, to use English.

If it hadn’t have been ‘er, who’d have been ‘er, as the saying goes. If not the KJB, which? Every criticism of the KJB that I have ever seen, every one, without exception , has been itself flawed and has proven to be without merit.

God is not the author of confusion. There are more than 100 English language translations and “paraphrases” oday on sale. I Corinthians 14 says God is not the author of confusion, and it’s talking about interpretation of tongues.

Can God inspire a translation? There are at least a dozen places in scripture that were obviously first written as translations from a different language, including Joseph’s conversations in the Egyptian, Daniel’s in Babylonian, and “King of the Jews”, and modern translators claim that those original translations were inspired, so they agree that a God can guide a translation.

There is internal consistency in the King James, it does not contradict itself. Doctrine testifies to it. In the King James you put out a heretic from fellowship, in the NIV you put out Jesus, because it says to remove anybody who is “divisive”.

#5. Even if the King James Bible was inerrant in 1611, when it was written, how can it be inerrant now, since the English language has changed so much in the last 400 years?  Many English words do not mean the same thing in today’s English as they did in 1611 English.

The King James Bible kept the English language stable over 400 years, after its previous erratic wanderings. The KJB is just as understandable today as then. A lot of the words that have been called “archaic” by people who did not know better are simply a matter of simply learning English, not archaic at all.

Along those lines, this is one complaint about the “thee”s and “thou”. But those words had gone generally out of use by the 13th or 14th century. The reason those words are in the KJB is for accuracy. It distinguishes the second person singular pronoun from the second person plural. There are a number of passages where this makes much difference.

Scriptural grounds for and against KJBO

February 19, 2012

The points they use against the KJB (‘What about generations past”) exposes their own bankruptcy on that very issue. How do they know which one of these has the “original Greek”? Well, they have their own “priestly scholars”, meaning the scribes and Pharisees they trust to tell them what the Greek means.

That is, they have to pick one and say “That one reference standard proves the KJB is wrong”.

Oh yeah? They can’t prove anything, because they claim that the only acceptable true standard to say XYZ is excactly what the Word of God says, are the long-gone “original autographs”.

Besides, they cannot point to any scripture at all that they can use to say that God would never preserve his word in later eras, in times to come, in a new language. Nor can they point to even one scripture that hints that God would be happy with one hundred “acceptable” variations from his Word to be used to cite “scipture”. Not one.

But I’ve seen enough examples here & elsewhere from people who do know Koine Greek (hundreds, maybe thousands) that even the Greek doesn’t help them.

There’s nothing conclusive on their side but the relevant verses are:

(1) the verses that promise preservation in Psalms,
(2) “Not one jot or tittle shall pass away till all be fulfilled” (*See note),
(3) “God is not the author of confusion”,
(4) No prophecy…is of private interpretation
(5) But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
(6) “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” (I Corinthians 1:10)