Open Debate Challenge on My Defending the KJV as the Perfect Word for Today in English

[Bible Highlighter]

The King James Version s missing too many important scriptures and it is estimated that there are about six thousand differences. These include numerous omissions, sometimes of entire verses (e.g., Matthew 12.47, 18.11; Luke 17.36; Acts 28.29; Romans 15.24), and often even more than this (e.g., Matthew 16.2,3; Mark 9.44,46; John 5.3,4; Acts 24.6–8).

Why hold to an inferior old version when, you can take advantage of the more complete modern version.

Actually, the Modern Bibles came about later and there is no history of the church using it. While the Westcott and Hort Revised Version did not come out until 1881, the Modern Bibles did not become really popular until the 1970s, and 80s. So the Modern Bible Advocates are the new kids on the block. So you cannot claim changes because we came first. We already had an established history. Your text is artificial and made up. It is a smashing together of two manuscripts that disagree with each other in thousands of places in the gospels alone. If you look at the omissions in Modern Bibles (when compared to the KJV), it would be the equivalent of 1st and 2nd Peter. That’s a lot. You can claim you came first because your manuscripts are older, but just because something is older does not mean it is more accurate or correct. If a pagan document existed before Christ, it does not make it more accurate or correct.

Anyway, the problem is that I can tell you WHY the doctrines are bad in Modern Bibles. This is simply not the case with the KJV. For examples: Modern Bibles remove all direct references of the Trinity. Modern Bibles teach that you must marry your rapist. Modern Bibles teach that Jesus had a beginning and He did not have any divine powers during His earthly ministry. Modern Bibles leave room for abortion. Modern Bibles will either remove the word “fornication” altogether or water that word down. In Modern Bibles you can divorce your wife for immorality (like lying) instead of fornication. The list of problems goes on and on.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

At the end of the day, nobody is saved by studying the bible. God is not impressed by our knowledge of the Bible. His elect will be saved even if they never read a word of the Bible. The vast majority of those in heaven never had any access to a bible, because the the printing press was not invented during their time.

Most Christians are proud of their supposed knowledge of the bible. They use their knowledge to put other Christians down, and lift themselves above them in pride. The Devil and His Demons know the Bible better than any man, but what good is knowledge alone.

2 Timothy 3:7 always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.​

2 Timothy 2:15
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”

John 12:48
”He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”

Hosea 4:6
”My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee,…”

 

[Christian Soldier]

Archaic and correct beats Modern and incorrect any day of the week.
The ESV and NKJV teach false doctrines.
The NKJV is a Trojan horse. They say it is based on the Textus Receptus. This is primarily true but this is not always the case.

New King James Version - Textus Receptus

textus-receptus.com

Note 1: You may have to keep hitting your refresh button (2-4 times) to get the above article page to load.

Note 2: The website is from a fellow Australian named Nick Sayers. If you ever wanted to challenge your knowledge on this topic I would watch his YouTube channel (Revolution). Nick used to be an NKJV guy for a long while until he started to doing more research on the topic.

Thanks for the link and info, I had a good look at it.

I didn't find anything to be overly concerned about. All the versions still contain the main gospel message, so the reader still gets the overall gospel message.

The first Bible I ever bought was a King James Version, I used it for about 3 years before I put it away and purchased a NKJV, then I purchased an ESV as well.

Most people at my Church use the NKJV, some use other versions as well. Our pastor has never had to advise anyone to read any particular version as most of us choose a version according to our personal preference. Of 'course none of us would ever chose something like the NIV or Good News Bibles.

I can't justify investing too much time into doing an exhaustive study on the subject, as there are far more important subjects to study.

 

[St. SteVen]

I'm not a "KJV Only" person, but there are reasons to still use the KJV with confidence.

Great post. Those are some good points. I use the KJV as a reference tool. Certain scriptures are clearer to me in the KJV. But in general I would not use it exclusively. The archaic language is a real problem. This forum topic linked below depended on the KJV to make my point.

Did Jesus say that adultery is grounds for divorce? - Nope.

The position of the church and society at large is mistaken as to what Jesus was quoted as saying in the gospels. IMHO Let's discuss. Questions: 1) What did Jesus actually say? 2) Why did he say it? 3) If we got this wrong, where do we go from here? The position of the church and society...

www.christianityboard.com

]

 

[Christian Soldier]

Actually, the Modern Bibles came about later and there is no history of the church using it. While the Westcott and Hort Revised Version did not come out until 1881, the Modern Bibles did not become really popular until the 1970s, and 80s. So the Modern Bible Advocates are the new kids on the block. So you cannot claim changes because we came first. We already had an established history. Your text is artificial and made up. It is a smashing together of two manuscripts that disagree with each other in thousands of places in the gospels alone. If you look at the omissions in Modern Bibles (when compared to the KJV), it would be the equivalent of 1st and 2nd Peter. That’s a lot. You can claim you came first because your manuscripts are older, but just because something is older does not mean it is more accurate or correct. If a pagan document existed before Christ, it does not make it more accurate or correct.

Anyway, the problem is that I can tell you WHY the doctrines are bad in Modern Bibles. This is simply not the case with the KJV. For examples: Modern Bibles remove all direct references of the Trinity. Modern Bibles teach that you must marry your rapist. Modern Bibles teach that Jesus had a beginning and He did not have any divine powers during His earthly ministry. Modern Bibles leave room for abortion. Modern Bibles will either remove the word “fornication” altogether or water that word down. In Modern Bibles you can divorce your wife for immorality (like lying) instead of fornication. The list of problems goes on and on.

By "modern", I mean post 1850. That's when complete books of the NT written in Greek were found. These date back to the second century so they are the closest to the original books ever found.

I agree the more recent versions of the 1970's and 80's are perverted. I've never read any of those, and going by what you said about them , I'm glad I didn't read them.

I'm amazed at how brazen, some of those who translated the later version were. There are very serious warning in the book of revelation, to those who add or remove words from the bible. They obviously didn't take Gods warnings seriously.

 

[Christian Soldier]

2 Timothy 2:15
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”

John 12:48
”He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”

Hosea 4:6
”My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee,…”

Not sure why you cited, Tim 2:15 that was spoken to Pastors, Ministers, Teachers and Elders. It doesn't apply to us garden variety Church Members. We are not workmen for the gospel, we have day jobs.

I don't know of any Biblically illiterate Christians, who reject Christ. So I don't know what that verse has to do with those Christians who have never studied the Bible.

God rejects those who reject the knowledge of God, but that doesn't apply to Gods elect who were never given the knowledge. You can't reject something, unless it was offered in the first place, so that verse doesn't apply either.

 

[St. SteVen]

I'm amazed at how brazen, some of those who translated the later version were. There are very serious warning in the book of revelation, to those who add or remove words from the bible. They obviously didn't take Gods warnings seriously.

That is a fallacy.
The book of Revelation is a SINGLE scroll. A single book of prophecy The whole Bible is more than 66 scrolls.

Revelation 22:19 KJV
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy,
God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city,
and from the things which are written in this book.

COMPARE

Revelation 22:19 NIV
And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy,
God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City,
which are described in this scroll.

]

 

[Runningman]

To all:

I have defended the KJV as the perfect Word for today on this forum.

I open the challenge to any Christian here to a debate on YouTube via Nick Sayers channel (Revolution). I challenge any Christian who does not believe the King James Bible is the perfect and inspired words of God for the English speaking people of today.

If you are interested in debating me live on YouTube, please let me know and I can have Nick arrange it. You will of course have time to prepare.

Thanks for your time.

May God bless you in Jesus name.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I love the KJV and it's one of my default versions that I will quote. I believe it's good to standardize the version we all use so that scripture reference and study is consistent across all readers. If we are all reading different versions, there are sometimes some major differences in the source manuscript and some subtleties that actually convey a different meaning.

With that being said, the KJV has errors. The first one that comes to mind is the word "candlestick." Candlesticks were not invented until the 17th century so where this word is used in the KJV it's flat out wrong. A better translation would be to generically say lamp. I'll leave it with opening with just one of the many errors to open with so we can go through them all if anyone wishes.

 

[Deborah_]

Modern Bibles remove all direct references of the Trinity. Modern Bibles teach that you must marry your rapist. Modern Bibles teach that Jesus had a beginning and He did not have any divine powers during His earthly ministry. Modern Bibles leave room for abortion. Modern Bibles will either remove the word “fornication” altogether or water that word down. In Modern Bibles you can divorce your wife for immorality (like lying) instead of fornication. The list of problems goes on and on.

This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder whether people have actually used a modern Bible (as opposed to just comparing verses taken out of context).
The Trinity? That's clearly taught in modern Bibles - but in different verses to the favourite quotes of KJV-only propagandists.
Did Jesus have a beginning? No - He "was with God in the beginning" according to my NIV.
"Leaving room for abortion" is an interpretation of certain texts, not a translation.
The word fornication is not used in modern Bibles because it isn't used in modern English. In the NT it's generally replaced with the expression "sexual immorality" -- which is actually a much better translation of the Greek word porneia because it covers a lot more than fornication.
And I don't know which translation (if any) says you can divorce your wife for any kind of "immorality" - the NIV clearly defines it as "sexual immorality" in Matthew 5:32

 

[Runningman]

For examples: Modern Bibles remove all direct references of the Trinity.

Compared to some of the other versions, the KJV is decidedly less Trinitarian than many of the others. I do take note of this since I am myself a non-Trinitarian.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Thanks for the link and info, I had a good look at it.

I didn't find anything to be overly concerned about. All the versions still contain the main gospel message, so the reader still gets the overall gospel message.

You are missing the point. They lied to the reader.

Dr. Arthur Farstad conceived of the NKJV translation project and he was the chief editor on it.

In Arthur’s book, The New King James Version: in the Great Tradition, Arthur Farstad, who served as executive editor of the New King James Version, passes on the guidelines for the editors and translators. It begins:

“The purpose of this project is to produce an updated English version that follows the sentence structure of the 1611 Authorized Version as closely as possible. (…) The intention is not to take from or alter the basic communication of the 1611 edition but to transfer the Elizabethan word forms into twentieth-century English. The traditional texts of the Greek and Hebrew will be used rather than modern critical texts based on the Westcott and Hort theory.”​

However, the NKJV favors the NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV readings at times (Which are other Modern versions that are based on the Critical texts or Alexandrian texts). In fact, this lie that the NKJV is solely a TR text and it does not follow the Alexandrian manuscripts is also promoted on Wikipedia and other online sources. At Wikipedia, it states that the textual basis for the NKJV New Testament is TR (Textus Receptus). While it is true that the TR may be the primary textual basis of the NKJV, that was not the case in all verses because we can see clear changes in the translation that favor the Alexandrian manuscripts or Westcott & Hort’s Revised Edition (The same changes we see in other Modern bibles that are based on the Alexandrian texts), as well. So the NKJV is a Trojan horse bible. It is not what it advertises itself to be.

Another unsettling thing about the NKJV is that it says you can delete what you felt was not a part of the text.

Taken right out of the NKJV pages. It says this:

In fact, the NKJV when it first came out said that they were not going to expose us to the Westcott and Hort text. They lied.
See this video here:

Doctrines Affected in the NKJV:

1. The Personal Pronouns are Removed (See here).
2. The word “generation” in Matthew 1 in the KJV is changed to genealogy. Note: This is important to understand because Matthew 1 is not the genealogy (bloodline) of Jesus Christ but it is a generational listing of Abraham and King David to Joseph (who is the husband of Mary but he is not the blood father of Jesus Christ).
3. Repent is changed to mean other things that do not mean “repent.” (Doctrine).
4. Follows Modern bibles by altering 2 Timothy 2:15. The KJB correctly says Study to shew yourself approved unto God, yet the NKJV alters this to mean something else. This appears in RV 1881. (Doctrine).
5. Changes Godhead (Trinity) to divine nature. This is changed in Romans 1:20 with the RV 1881. (Doctrine).
6. Genesis 2:18, “I will make him an help meet for him.” Is changed to: “I will make him a helper comparable to him.” (Doctrine).
7. Proverbs 19:18 let not thy soul spare for his crying is changed to do not set your heart on his destruction. A similar change is found in the RV 1881 (Doctrine).
8. John 1:3: changes “All things were made BY him;” to: “All things were made THROUGH Him” (NIV, NRSV, RSV) (Doctrine).
9. John 4:24: changes the KJV “God is a spirit” to the impersonal, New Age pantheistic, “God is spirit” (NIV, NASV, NRSV) (Doctrine).
10. 1 Thess. 5:22 change “all appearance of evil” to “every form of evil” (NASV, RSV, NSRV) (Doctrine).
11. Titus 3:10: changes “heretic” to “divisive man” (NIV) (Doctrine).
12. Hebrews 2:16 (KJV) "For verily he took not on [him the nature of] angels; but he took on [him] the seed of Abraham." Hebrews 2:16 (NKJV) "For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham." Clearly this is an attack on the deity of Jesus Christ. (Doctrine).
13. 2 Corinthians 10:5 - Casting down imaginations (vs.) casting down arguments (Doctrine).
14. 1 Peter 1:7 - trial (vs.) genuineness. The KJV says, "That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:" The NKJV says, "that the genuineness of your faith, being much more precious than gold that perishes, though it is tested by fire, may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ," (Doctrine).
15. Colossians 3:2-KJV reads, "Set your affection on things above." NKJV, NASV, NIV and RSV change "affection" to "mind." (Doctrine).
16. The words, “shall make him of quick understanding” is removed Isaiah 11:3. This is important because it is in context of the fear of the LORD (Doctrine).
17. Daniel 3:25 is footnoted, or a son of the gods. So which is it? Having two alternative readings casts doubt on what is being said in the verse. (Doctrine).
18. Proverbs 16:10 changes a divine sentence (KJB) to divination (NKJV). Solomon wrote some proverbs as ideals for civil rulers, but he never proposed that kings should use witchcraft (Deut 18:10) (Doctrine).
19. NKJV replaced “dishonesty” with “shame.” 2 Corinthians 4:2 (NKJV) says, - “But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.” 2 Corinthians 4:2 (KJB) says, - “But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth” (Doctrine).
20. 1 Timothy 6:10 - money is root of all evil is changed to money is root of all kinds of evil. (Doctrine).
21. Romans 3:25 is altered. Romans 3:25 KJB says: "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." Romans 3:25 NKJV says: "Whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed." (Doctrine).
22. 1 John 3:16: removes “love of God”; (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) (Truth). (Note: By removing the words “of God” it attacks the deity of Jesus Christ).

Truths Affected in the NKJV:

1. Genesis 22:8 - is changed to eliminate how God will be the Lamb. (Truth).
2. Ezra 8:36 - lieutenants is changed to satraps. This appears in the RV 1881. (Truth).
3. The Coming One (Which is what the New agers also are looking forward to - See write up below). (Truth).
4. Removes the word Satan and replaces it with, “an accuser” in Psalms 109:6. This change also appears in RV 1881. (Truth).
5. What are these wounds in my hands is changed to wounds between your arms (Zechariah 13:6). A similar change is found in RV 1881 (Truth).
6. Proverbs 18:8 tasty triffles. RV 1881 has something similar to the NKJV, but the RV distorts the KJV verse even more (Truth).
7. Matthew 18:26 & Matthew 20:20: The NKJV removes “worshiped him” (watering down the worship of Jesus) (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV). This change is found in Matthew 18:26 for the RV 1881 (Truth).
8. Mark 13:6 & Luke 21:8: removes “Christ” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) (Truth).
9. John 14:2: (NKJV 1979 edition) changes “mansions” to “dwelling places” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) (Truth).
10. Acts 24:14: changes “heresy” to “sect” (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV) (Truth).
11. 2 Cor. 2:17: With all the “corruptions” in the NKJV, you’d expect 2 Cor. 2:17 to change. IT DOES! They change, “For we not as many which CORRUPT the word of God” to “For we are not, as so many, PEDDLING the word of God” (ditto NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV) (Truth).
12. Rev. 2:13: changes “Satan’s seat” to “Satan’s throne” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) (Truth).
13. The NKJV removes the word “Lord” 66 times! (Truth).
14. The NKJV removes the word God 51 times! (Truth).
15. The NKJV removes the word “heaven” 50 times! (Truth).
16. John 20:17 (KJB): 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. John 20:17 (NKJV): Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’ ” (Truth).
17. HEBREWS 3:16 (KJV) - “For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.” (NKJV) - “For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses?” (Truth).

The first Bible I ever bought was a King James Version, I used it for about 3 years before I put it away and purchased a NKJV, then I purchased an ESV as well.

Most people at my Church use the NKJV, some use other versions as well. Our pastor has never had to advise anyone to read any particular version as most of us choose a version according to our personal preference. Of 'course none of us would ever chose something like the NIV or Good News Bibles.

I can't justify investing too much time into doing an exhaustive study on the subject, as there are far more important subjects to study.

The NIV was the first popular Modern Bible in the Modern Bible Movement based on the Westcott and Hort text.
The ESV is probably one of the worst of the Modern Bibles in the Modern Bible Movement.

 

[Christian Soldier]

That is a fallacy.
The book of Revelation is a SINGLE scroll. A single book of prophecy The whole Bible is more than 66 scrolls.

Revelation 22:19 KJV
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy,
God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city,
and from the things which are written in this book.

COMPARE

Revelation 22:19 NIV
And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy,
God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City,
which are described in this scroll.

]

Are you suggesting that it OK to corrupt the other 65 books, as if God only cares about the last book and all the preceding books are not important and anyone can make any changes they want without any consequences?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I love the KJV and it's one of my default versions that I will quote. I believe it's good to standardize the version we all use so that scripture reference and study is consistent across all readers.

The differences between the Beza 1598 Textus Receptus NT Greek (used for the KJV) and the Alexandrian manuscripts like Vaticanus and Sinaiticus (Modern Versions past 1881) is subtly different but those small differences doctrinally are serious. Most do not care and they are not much into the Bible anyway. They think if you take the Bible too seriously it is an idol, which is not what idolatry is.

If we are all reading different versions, there are sometimes some major differences in the source manuscript and some subtleties that actually convey a different meaning.

Yes, my point exactly.

With that being said, the KJV has errors.

Errors only exist in the eye of the beholder. There are many great apologetics for the KJV that are logical and sound. Somebody simply does not want a perfect Word sees what they desire to see.

The first one that comes to mind is the word "candlestick." Candlesticks were not invented until the 17th century so where this word is used in the KJV it's flat out wrong.

That is simply not true. Candlesticks have a long history and their invention dates back to ancient times. The use of candles themselves can be traced back to at least 3000 BC in ancient Egypt and Crete. The Bible mentions candlesticks in several places, most notably in the construction of the Tabernacle and Temple in ancient Israel.

One of the earliest and most significant mentions is in the book of Exodus in the Old Testament. God instructed Moses on the construction of the Tabernacle, which included a golden lamp-stand, often referred to as a candlestick (menorah in Hebrew). This is detailed in Exodus 25:31-40.

The menorah has continued to be a significant symbol throughout Jewish history, representing light, wisdom, and divine inspiration. Its image can be found on ancient coins, mosaics, and other artifacts dating from the Second Temple period (516 BCE to 70 CE) and beyond. The menorah remains a powerful symbol in Judaism today, often seen in synagogues and on ceremonial objects.

Here is a picture of the ancient Jewish Menora.

 

[St. SteVen]

Are you suggesting that it OK to corrupt the other 65 books, as if God only cares about the last book and all the preceding books are not important and anyone can make any changes they want without any consequences?

LOL
Too late to complain about that. Do you have any idea where the Bible came from? We don't have the original manuscripts.

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus – Textual Criticism 101​

https://www.bereanpatriot.com/majority-text-vs-critical-text-vs-textus-receptus-textual-criticism-101/#Corruption-of-the-Alexandrian-text-type

"It shouldn’t come as a surprise, but we don’t have the original documents that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, and other New Testament writers wrote. They were originally written on either papyrus (essentially paper) or possibly parchment (animal skins) which have long since degraded with time and use. However, the originals were copied many, many times. Those copies were copied, which were copied, which were copied, which were…"

]

 

[Bible Highlighter]

This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder whether people have actually used a modern Bible (as opposed to just comparing verses taken out of context).

I have used Modern Bibles. In fact, I still use them to help update the archaic wording in the KJV at times. But I am not looking to explain away the English in the KJV because I see it as the perfect Word of God for today. Anyway, you are incorrect on the Trinity verses. There are only indirect references of the Trinity in Modern Bibles. Inferences are made from these verses. All your direct references of the Trinity have been removed in Modern Bibles. The Comma in 1 John 5:7 is the most clearest verse on the Trinity. The word “Godhead” appears three times in the KJV and it means Trinity in context. But your Modern Bibles refer to this as God’s divinity, which does not make a whole lot of sense in context.

The Trinity? That's clearly taught in modern Bibles - but in different verses to the favourite quotes of KJV-only propagandists.

Notice how you did not bring forth any verses that clearly teach the Trinity in Modern Bibles.

Did Jesus have a beginning? No - He "was with God in the beginning" according to my NIV.

John 1:18 says that Jesus is the begotten God in certain Modern Bibles. Meaning, some Modern Translations are stating Jesus had an origin. The KJV says He is the begotten Son. Micah 5:2 in some Modern Bibles also implies that He has an origin. The KJV says He is from everlasting and not from ancient of days or the distant past.

"Leaving room for abortion" is an interpretation of certain texts, not a translation.

Luke 1:15 in certain Modern Translations such as the CEV, GNT, ICB, PHILLIPS, MSG, NCV, NLV, and WE all basically say from the time of John the Baptist's birth, he will be filled with the Holy Ghost. This is unlike the KJB that correctly says he will be filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb. Being filled with the Spirit in the mother’s womb suggests John the Baptist is a living human being inside the mother. Today, some Christians believe in abortion because they don’t think the baby is alive inside the womb (Which is basically the murder of innocent babies). No doubt, Modern bibles like these could potentially lead a person to justify the murder of the innocent.

Regardless if it is the underlying manuscripts or the translation, the problem is that this comes from the Modern Bible Movement and it does not come from the Pure line (i.e., the Textus Receptus / KJV).

The word fornication is not used in modern Bibles because it isn't used in modern English. In the NT it's generally replaced with the expression "sexual immorality" -- which is actually a much better translation of the Greek word porneia because it covers a lot more than fornication.

You are not a Greek speaking expert who actually knows the etymology of Greek words and their different usages to make such a claim with any kind of authority. Some of the KJV translators knew the original languages far better than you or any Critical Text scholar today. Georgios Babiniotis lives in Greece, and his native tongue is Greek. He has written multiple Greek dictionaries and is considered an expert in Greek in his own country. Babiniotis said there is a grammar error in the text in two ways if the Comma is not in 1 John 5:7.

Anyway, Fornication is sex before marriage. Just read the word “fornication” below in context of the verse.

Matthew 5:32
“But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.”

Logic dictates that other forms of sexual immorality is not in view of this verse. It is talking about traditional sex before marriage. That is what is in view in context here. That’s the problem with the Critical Text side. They do not read things in context.

And I don't know which translation (if any) says you can divorce your wife for any kind of "immorality" - the NIV clearly defines it as "sexual immorality" in Matthew 5:32

But the problem is that the NASB simply says ”immorality” and can mislead. The NASB is praised by many in the Modern Bible Movement. The NIV is actually considered a liberal translation even amongst Modern Scholars and or Modern Bible Proponents.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Compared to some of the other versions, the KJV is decidedly less Trinitarian than many of the others. I do take note of this since I am myself a non-Trinitarian.

Arianism is actually more problematic than you imagine. There are references in history from many different sources that state that they destroyed the original Scriptures and replaced it with their own corrupt versions. Some other Arians did have the uncorrupted Scriptures that contained the Comma in 1 John 5:7. For example, t the Council of Carthage, 460 bishops testified to the Comma and the Arians cut their tongues out (even despite the fact the Comma was in their Scriptures). But a miracle took place. They were able to still speak after and confess of the truth. Some Arians were even worse and killed Trinitarians, and burned down their homes. So there is a dark history involving Arianism.

George Vance Smith was a Unitarian and he rejoiced in the Revised Version. This was the first Modern Bible as a part of the Modern Bible Movement today. The problem is that the Modern Bible Movement is also filled with Catholicism, liberalism, and Spiritism, too. This is not an empty claim by any means. Catholic ideas can be seen in Modern Bibles and yet they are not present in the KJV. Top scholars like Bruce Metzger were liberal. Westcott and Hort were into Spiritism, and other Bible translators in the Modern Bible Movement have also talked to spirits. In fact, some of them talked to the spirits to help make their Modern Bible. So it is more than just Unitarianism that is the problem in the Modern Bible Movement. The list of problems goes on and on.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Not sure why you cited, Tim 2:15 that was spoken to Pastors, Ministers, Teachers and Elders. It doesn't apply to us garden variety Church Members. We are not workmen for the gospel, we have day jobs.

This is silly. Just because Paul wrote to Timothy who was in a pastoral role does not mean it was written only to pastors, teachers, and elders alone. Nothing in the context of these letters suggests that it is only for pastors, teachers, and elders.

1. Joshua 1:8
"This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success."

2. Psalm 1:2
"But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night."

3. Psalm 119:11
"Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee."

4. Psalm 119:105
"Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path."

5. Acts 17:11
"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

6. 2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

7. Colossians 3:16
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."

These verses in the KJV also emphasize the importance of studying, meditating on, and living by the Word of God.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 talks about the man of God in general and not Timothy alone, nor does it refer to pastors, teachers, or elders only.

I don't know of any Biblically illiterate Christians, who reject Christ. So I don't know what that verse has to do with those Christians who have never studied the Bible.

A Christian can reject Christ and not even realize they are rejecting Him because they do not receive Christ’s words. This is evident if you read John 12:48 in light of reading also Matthew 13:41-42, and John 8:34-35. Obviously a person who rejects Christ’s words is not saved even if they may claim to know Christ or they think they are elect or saved. Many will be shocked come judgment day.

God rejects those who reject the knowledge of God, but that doesn't apply to Gods elect who were never given the knowledge. You can't reject something, unless it was offered in the first place, so that verse doesn't apply either.

That is incorrect. God’s people are destroyed for lack of knowledge according to Hosea 4:6.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

By "modern", I mean post 1850. That's when complete books of the NT written in Greek were found. These date back to the second century so they are the closest to the original books ever found.

I agree the more recent versions of the 1970's and 80's are perverted. I've never read any of those, and going by what you said about them , I'm glad I didn't read them.

I'm amazed at how brazen, some of those who translated the later version were. There are very serious warning in the book of revelation, to those who add or remove words from the bible. They obviously didn't take Gods warnings seriously.

What manuscripts are referring to that have been found post 1850?
Are you referring to Vaticanus and Sinaiticus?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

LOL
Too late to complain about that. Do you have any idea where the Bible came from? We don't have the original manuscripts.

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus – Textual Criticism 101​

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus - Textual Criticism 101 - Berean Patriot

"It shouldn’t come as a surprise, but we don’t have the original documents that Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, and other New Testament writers wrote. They were originally written on either papyrus (essentially paper) or possibly parchment (animal skins) which have long since degraded with time and use. However, the originals were copied many, many times. Those copies were copied, which were copied, which were copied, which were…"

]

There is no Majority Text. James Snapp Jr. has a position that is flawed because the church never used his exact preferred text through history. To say that the Bible is being discovered by one lone scholar is pretty silly. God would obviously provide His Word that would be perfect for His church and it would not be lost. If it was partially lost, how could we trust God’s Word? We would have to become the authority of what God has said, and God has not said. We would be sitting in the seat of God determining what His words are. The obvious way to test to see if we have God’s words or not if there is good fruit from His words. The KJV has led to the three greatest revivals in history. Its influence and reach is incalculable, and it is unlike other translations or words chosen by some obscure scholar (or lone-wolf).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Thanks for the link and info, I had a good look at it.

I would highly advice in watching Nick Sayers YouTube Channel called Revolution. It is very informative. He really goes overboard in doing his homework that others are too lazy to do.