Author Topic: KJV Onlyism  (Read 10080 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ccfromsc

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 20
  • Manna: 1
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #70 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 11:13:27 »
 ::headscratch:: Since you are both arguing about doing a modern day translation in the KJV  "manuscripts" I would say why not use the NKJV that is the NEW King James Version of the bible?

This ought to be interesting how the KJVO bash that translation.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #70 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 11:13:27 »

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #71 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 11:21:16 »
I trust it to the leading of the Holy Spirit. (who will never violate His word)

To Dave and all others that believe the words of the Lord don't exist on earth today and rely on being led by the Holy Spirit:

We all know that spirits can communicate with us, both the Holy Spirit and evil spirits. My question to you is, how do you know which spirit is leading you. In the case of Dave and many others, the spirit that is leading him is telling him that the words of the Lord not longer exist on earth. Dave believes the Holy Spirit is leading him to this conclusion. How do we know if Dave is being led by the Holy spirit? What is the standard that we compare his words to? Remember according to the bible, we must "test the spirits to see if they are of God". Have any of you tested the spirit that leads you? If so, how so?

1Jn 4:1  Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.


Offline DaveW

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14343
  • Manna: 190
  • Gender: Male
  • My grandson Arturus
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #72 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 11:30:54 »
Eden - you are sorely misrepresenting my position by taking a ridiculous position that if only the original autographs were "inspired," and that if we do not have them then God's word is forever lost. 

We have ancient manuscripts from various places and they agree 90+ % of the time.  In that 90% we can be ASSURED that we have an accurate representation of God's word. The remainder is somewhat of a guessing game, but based on various techniques we can say with some certainty that we are CLOSE to what God's word said.

Any leading of the Holy Spirit must line up with what we have and are sure of.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #72 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 11:30:54 »

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #73 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 11:41:14 »
::headscratch:: Since you are both arguing about doing a modern day translation in the KJV  "manuscripts" I would say why not use the NKJV that is the NEW King James Version of the bible?

This ought to be interesting how the KJVO bash that translation.

When someone unashamedly stands for the truth it is not called bashing.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #73 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 11:41:14 »
Pinterest: GraceCentered.com

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #74 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 12:13:01 »
Eden - you are sorely misrepresenting my position by taking a ridiculous position that if only the original autographs were "inspired," and that if we do not have them then God's word is forever lost. 

We have ancient manuscripts from various places and they agree 90+ % of the time.  In that 90% we can be ASSURED that we have an accurate representation of God's word. The remainder is somewhat of a guessing game, but based on various techniques we can say with some certainty that we are CLOSE to what God's word said.

Any leading of the Holy Spirit must line up with what we have and are sure of.

Dave I applogize, I did not mean to misrepresent you. But, in my opinion the reply you gave here presents another problem. None of us in today's church understand ancient Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. Now granted there are people that say they can, these are usaully the ones that say they can't understand the Aarchaic KJV. Nevertheless, most people can't read those languages. So how do we have access to the words of the Lord? Are the words of the Lord only given to the supper intellegent... the elite's of the world. That's how the occult (hidden knowldge) religions operate.

You say that we are assured that 90% of what we have is accurate. Did you come to this conclusion from reading the ancient manuscripts? Or did some man tell you this? If so, why did you believe him... what standard did you use to say he was right. What spirit was leading him?  Was it the Holy spirit or spirit of AntiChrist. Also which part of the bible we can trust? Can you identify the corrupt part, I would like to remove them from my bible.

All I have done hear is try to portray the utter folly of this logic. You and others will think I am bashing you, some will think I am rude. All I did was give you the best example of how ridiculous this philosophy is.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #74 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 12:13:01 »



Offline Mere Nick

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12788
  • Manna: 315
  • Gender: Male
  • Reckon you could make me some biscuits?
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #75 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 15:53:28 »
Acts 12:4

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

Is this really an accurate translation of something?

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #75 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 15:53:28 »

HRoberson

  • Guest
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #76 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 16:43:54 »
If it had typos, then it wasn't the pure word of God; who's to say there aren't other errors?

If the Spirit was inspiring the KJ writers, you would have thought their work would have been flawless.

If the original KJ had the apocrypha, and it was the pure inspired word of God, why don't you use it?

Or was the inclusion of the apocrypha one big typo?

So HRoberson are you saying that the pure words of God don't exist? If they do exist, where are they?
I'm just observing that by your own admission, you don't really know what to believe. You claim that the KJ is the pure, unadulterated word of God, but you admit that it had errors; and you admit to not using the apocrypha which was included in the original KJ.

So, perhaps you could tell me where they exist.

This time, be a bit more consistent in your reasoning.

OK, I will try to be a bit more consistant in my reasoning.
OK, I will try to be a bit more consistent in my reasoning.
OK, I will attempt to be more consistent in my reasoning.
OK, my reasoning will be a bit more consistent this time because I will try harder.

I just gave you the true words of my reply to your post.
Which one of my statements are not the true words of my reply?

One more time... THE APOCRAPHA WAS NEVER A PART OF THE WORDS OF THE LORD! That is so simple to understand. Maps and commentary were in the 1611 edition also, if they are removed, does that mean the words of the Lord have been corrupted.


Excuse me, but if the Spirit inspired the translators, and the Apocrypha was included in that inspiration, why isn't it included now? How do you know that the Apocrypha isn't the word of God if your purported 1611 Spirit-inspired text included it?
The 1611 version had marginal notes and variant readings in the margins. Why, do you suppose, that would be the case if the Spirit inspired the very text? What is the purpose of the marginal notations?

Let's cut to the chase! You don't want to believe the inerrant word of God exists today because that ties you down to a moral and doctrinal standard. You don't want that standard because when a standard exists, it prevents you from creating your own god. Let's see how this works.

Let's say you are reading the book of Acts and you come across Acts 12:4  "And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people." Keep in mind now you don't believe the pure words of the Lord exist today. You reason in your mind "Obvious translation error...Easter is a pagan holiday and Luke knew this. Those KJV translators really blew this one".

So you go to the concordance to see what the orginal greek says. It say's "pascha - Of Chaldee origin (compare [H6453]); the Passover (the meal, the day, the festival or the special sacrifices connected with it): - Easter, Passover". Even though Strong's says both Easter and Passover, you choose Passover because it can't possibly be Easter. You check to see what other bible versions say. Lo and behold they all say Passover. Well you already knew Passover was the correct translation and the NIV just backed you up. Done deal, the KJV translators got it wrong... Reinforcing your idea that the pure words of the Lord don't exist today.

So what just happened? You ran across a verse in the KJV that didn't line up with your preconcieved ideas, so you changed it. You changed the word of God because you didn't lagree with what it said. You in effect created your own personalized words of the Lord. Can you see the error that is guarenteed to manifest when the STANDARD doesn't exist.

Instead of doubting the bible, why don't you dig a lttle deeper. By doubting the pure words of the Lord, here is what you missed.

Act 12:3  And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) Act 12:4  And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

They took Peter in the days of unleavened Bread... The feast of unleavened Bread takes place after Passover. Passover had already happened. ::doh::
Easter however was still a few days away. God even put parenthesis around it to draw your attention to it. Can you believe it... the KJV translators actually knew what they were doing! Maybe they were inspired.

Always remember this and believe God when he says it:

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

This is a rather presumptuous post, presuming what I want to believe to fit your world view.


I take it then, that you really can't explain that if the KJ1611 is the literal word of God, why there are marginal notes? And if the Apocrypha isn't the word of God why the Spirit would have included it?

That's OK; I really didn't think you could.

Offline kjb1769

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 201
  • Manna: 7
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #77 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 18:35:42 »
Acts 12:4

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

Is this really an accurate translation of something?

Obviously it is an accurate translation of something.

And obviously your version doen't agree with the King James Bible.

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #78 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 18:58:58 »
If it had typos, then it wasn't the pure word of God; who's to say there aren't other errors?

If the Spirit was inspiring the KJ writers, you would have thought their work would have been flawless.

If the original KJ had the apocrypha, and it was the pure inspired word of God, why don't you use it?

Or was the inclusion of the apocrypha one big typo?

So HRoberson are you saying that the pure words of God don't exist? If they do exist, where are they?
I'm just observing that by your own admission, you don't really know what to believe. You claim that the KJ is the pure, unadulterated word of God, but you admit that it had errors; and you admit to not using the apocrypha which was included in the original KJ.

So, perhaps you could tell me where they exist.

This time, be a bit more consistent in your reasoning.

OK, I will try to be a bit more consistant in my reasoning.
OK, I will try to be a bit more consistent in my reasoning.
OK, I will attempt to be more consistent in my reasoning.
OK, my reasoning will be a bit more consistent this time because I will try harder.

I just gave you the true words of my reply to your post.
Which one of my statements are not the true words of my reply?

One more time... THE APOCRAPHA WAS NEVER A PART OF THE WORDS OF THE LORD! That is so simple to understand. Maps and commentary were in the 1611 edition also, if they are removed, does that mean the words of the Lord have been corrupted.


Excuse me, but if the Spirit inspired the translators, and the Apocrypha was included in that inspiration, why isn't it included now? How do you know that the Apocrypha isn't the word of God if your purported 1611 Spirit-inspired text included it?
The 1611 version had marginal notes and variant readings in the margins. Why, do you suppose, that would be the case if the Spirit inspired the very text? What is the purpose of the marginal notations?

Let's cut to the chase! You don't want to believe the inerrant word of God exists today because that ties you down to a moral and doctrinal standard. You don't want that standard because when a standard exists, it prevents you from creating your own god. Let's see how this works.

Let's say you are reading the book of Acts and you come across Acts 12:4  "And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people." Keep in mind now you don't believe the pure words of the Lord exist today. You reason in your mind "Obvious translation error...Easter is a pagan holiday and Luke knew this. Those KJV translators really blew this one".

So you go to the concordance to see what the orginal greek says. It say's "pascha - Of Chaldee origin (compare [H6453]); the Passover (the meal, the day, the festival or the special sacrifices connected with it): - Easter, Passover". Even though Strong's says both Easter and Passover, you choose Passover because it can't possibly be Easter. You check to see what other bible versions say. Lo and behold they all say Passover. Well you already knew Passover was the correct translation and the NIV just backed you up. Done deal, the KJV translators got it wrong... Reinforcing your idea that the pure words of the Lord don't exist today.

So what just happened? You ran across a verse in the KJV that didn't line up with your preconcieved ideas, so you changed it. You changed the word of God because you didn't lagree with what it said. You in effect created your own personalized words of the Lord. Can you see the error that is guarenteed to manifest when the STANDARD doesn't exist.

Instead of doubting the bible, why don't you dig a lttle deeper. By doubting the pure words of the Lord, here is what you missed.

Act 12:3  And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) Act 12:4  And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

They took Peter in the days of unleavened Bread... The feast of unleavened Bread takes place after Passover. Passover had already happened. ::doh::
Easter however was still a few days away. God even put parenthesis around it to draw your attention to it. Can you believe it... the KJV translators actually knew what they were doing! Maybe they were inspired.

Always remember this and believe God when he says it:

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

This is a rather presumptuous post, presuming what I want to believe to fit your world view.


I take it then, that you really can't explain that if the KJ1611 is the literal word of God, why there are marginal notes? And if the Apocrypha isn't the word of God why the Spirit would have included it?

That's OK; I really didn't think you could.

Probably to cause ye of little faith to stumble...  rofl

How simple must I make this, I am trying really hard. A paper bound book is not the words of the Lord, it is a book. Words are not physical entities, they are spirit. Words are manifest in the physical world when they are either written down, spoken or manifested in the physical body of Jesus Christ. See that's another point, when you guys say all bibles are corrupt, your saying the word is corrupt, your saying that the Word of God is corrupt... your saying Jesus was corrupt. The Word is Jesus Christ whether you can understand this concept or not, Jesus Christ is the Word. Which leads to another excellent point. Jesus is the word, there is only one word if 2 words don't agree then they are not both the word, one is Christ and the rest are Antichrist.

Now back to where I was going with this. A book is not the word of God unless the book contains the word of God. I don't care what else was in the earlier versions of the KJV, the word of God was. If you are watching an R rated movie full of curse words and blasphemies and they quote John 3:16, you heard the words of the Lord. The movie was a container for the words of the Lord just like every King James bible from 1611 to the present are containers for the words of the Lord. The King James bible means absolutely nothing to me... the contents of the King James bible means everything to me and I will defend til the day I die. This is not rocket science, it only takes faith in God. God said he would preserve his word I believe him. The sad thing about you anti-KJV Onlier's is you don't possess the one and only thing that God asks from us.....faith like a little child.

P.S. I have read some of the apocrypha and my pea brain has enough since to know it is not inspired, it contradicts the scripture.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #78 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 18:58:58 »

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #79 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 19:20:10 »
Acts 12:4

4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

Is this really an accurate translation of something?

This has already been covered but I think it went under the radar of most. Here it is again.

Act 12:3  And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
Act 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

When did they take Peter?  During the feast of unleavened bread.

What did they do with Peter?  They put him in prison.

Why did they put him in prison? To keep him so that once Easter was over they were going to bring him before the people.


When is Passover?  Just before the feast of unleavened bread. Passover ended at least 1 day before Peter was taken.

Remember, Peter was taken during the feast of unleavened bread. What were they going to do, keep Peter in prison until the next year? Of course not they were not waiting for Passover to end it had already ended. They were waiting for Easter to pass because they were pagans.

Don't believe me? Read it in Exodus.

Exo 12:13  And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt.
Exo 12:14  And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever.
Exo 12:15  Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.

Any translation that says Passover is obviously wrong.

Offline kjb1769

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 201
  • Manna: 7
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #80 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 19:46:34 »
And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD. -Numbers 28:16
And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten. -Numbers 28:17

Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #81 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 19:52:59 »
Passover is the Festival of Unleavened Bread and is celebrated for about 7 to 8 days, and there is a particular feast day called  the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is the night after Passover ends. Therefore every translation that names Passover as the time for this event of Acts 12 is correct.

Offline kjb1769

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 201
  • Manna: 7
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #82 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 20:09:47 »
And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD’S passover. -Exodus 12:11

And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD. -Numbers 28:16

Both verses indicate that the Passover is one day.

That one day is before the feast of unleavened bread.
The feast of unleavened bread is 7 days.

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #83 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 20:13:18 »
Passover is the Festival of Unleavened Bread and is celebrated for about 7 to 8 days, and there is a particular feast day called  the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is the night after Passover ends. Therefore every translation that names Passover as the time for this event of Acts 12 is correct.

If Passover is the feast of Unleavened Bread then how does the day called feast of  Unleavened Bread begin the night after Passover ends? That sounds like double talk, can you explain? Is Passover a feast of it's own or no?


Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #84 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 20:23:50 »
Passover is the Festival of Unleavened Bread and is celebrated for about 7 to 8 days, and there is a particular feast day called  the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is the night after Passover ends. Therefore every translation that names Passover as the time for this event of Acts 12 is correct.

If Passover is the feast of Unleavened Bread then how does the day called feast of  Unleavened Bread begin the night after Passover ends? That sounds like double talk, can you explain? Is Passover a feast of it's own or no?



Yes, Passover is a separate feast day--- a high holy day, but Passover is part of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, which lasted many days.

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #85 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 20:46:08 »
Passover is the Festival of Unleavened Bread and is celebrated for about 7 to 8 days, and there is a particular feast day called  the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is the night after Passover ends. Therefore every translation that names Passover as the time for this event of Acts 12 is correct.

If Passover is the feast of Unleavened Bread then how does the day called feast of  Unleavened Bread begin the night after Passover ends? That sounds like double talk, can you explain? Is Passover a feast of it's own or no?



Yes, Passover is a separate feast day--- a high holy day, but Passover is part of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, which lasted many days.

I know that you know what the feasts represent, so let me ask:

How long did the real feast of Passover last? I'm talking about Jesus on the cross.
When did the real feast of Unleavened Bread begin? When did Jesus become the unleavened "Bread of Life".
How long does the real feast of Unleavened Bread last? How long can we eat the bread of Life?

If you honestly answered those questions, the answer these:

When did the prophetic feast of Passover end?
When did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread begin?
How long did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread last?

Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #86 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 21:08:41 »
Passover is the Festival of Unleavened Bread and is celebrated for about 7 to 8 days, and there is a particular feast day called  the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is the night after Passover ends. Therefore every translation that names Passover as the time for this event of Acts 12 is correct.

If Passover is the feast of Unleavened Bread then how does the day called feast of  Unleavened Bread begin the night after Passover ends? That sounds like double talk, can you explain? Is Passover a feast of it's own or no?



Yes, Passover is a separate feast day--- a high holy day, but Passover is part of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, which lasted many days.

I know that you know what the feasts represent, so let me ask:

How long did the real feast of Passover last? I'm talking about Jesus on the cross.
When did the real feast of Unleavened Bread begin? When did Jesus become the unleavened "Bread of Life".
How long does the real feast of Unleavened Bread last? How long can we eat the bread of Life?

If you honestly answered those questions, the answer these:

When did the prophetic feast of Passover end?
When did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread begin?
How long did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread last?

I am not completely up on the Jewish festivals, but during the time of Jesus, the Passover week, or the Festival of Unleavened bread would begin on Nisan 10 where there is consideration about the selection of the unblemished male lamb for the feast. On Nisan 13, there is the routine of searching for leaven, of which there will be none found (which means they will have gotten rid of it for this occasion). then on Nisan 14, the actual Passover meal was had.

As for the Festival of Unleavened Bread:

Leviticus 23:5-8
5 “The Lord’s Passover begins at sundown on the fourteenth day of the first month. 6 On the next day, the fifteenth day of the month, you must begin celebrating the Festival of Unleavened Bread. This festival to the Lord continues for seven days, and during that time the bread you eat must be made without yeast. 7 On the first day of the festival, all the people must stop their ordinary work and observe an official day for holy assembly. 8 For seven days you must present special gifts to the Lord. On the seventh day the people must again stop all their ordinary work to observe an official day for holy assembly.

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #87 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 21:27:33 »
Passover is the Festival of Unleavened Bread and is celebrated for about 7 to 8 days, and there is a particular feast day called  the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is the night after Passover ends. Therefore every translation that names Passover as the time for this event of Acts 12 is correct.

If Passover is the feast of Unleavened Bread then how does the day called feast of  Unleavened Bread begin the night after Passover ends? That sounds like double talk, can you explain? Is Passover a feast of it's own or no?



Yes, Passover is a separate feast day--- a high holy day, but Passover is part of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, which lasted many days.

I know that you know what the feasts represent, so let me ask:

How long did the real feast of Passover last? I'm talking about Jesus on the cross.
When did the real feast of Unleavened Bread begin? When did Jesus become the unleavened "Bread of Life".
How long does the real feast of Unleavened Bread last? How long can we eat the bread of Life?

If you honestly answered those questions, the answer these:

When did the prophetic feast of Passover end?
When did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread begin?
How long did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread last?

I am not completely up on the Jewish festivals, but during the time of Jesus, the Passover week, or the Festival of Unleavened bread would begin on Nisan 10 where there is consideration about the selection of the unblemished male lamb for the feast. On Nisan 13, there is the routine of searching for leaven, of which there will be none found (which means they will have gotten rid of it for this occasion). then on Nisan 14, the actual Passover meal was had.

As for the Festival of Unleavened Bread:

Leviticus 23:5-8
5 “The Lord’s Passover begins at sundown on the fourteenth day of the first month. 6 On the next day, the fifteenth day of the month, you must begin celebrating the Festival of Unleavened Bread. This festival to the Lord continues for seven days, and during that time the bread you eat must be made without yeast. 7 On the first day of the festival, all the people must stop their ordinary work and observe an official day for holy assembly. 8 For seven days you must present special gifts to the Lord. On the seventh day the people must again stop all their ordinary work to observe an official day for holy assembly.

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #88 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 22:11:29 »
1. What you call the Apocrypha was and still is apart of God's inspired scripture. St. Stephen the first Christian martyr reference it before his death. The Bereans used the canon that had them and wee praised by St. Paul for their diligent study therein. St Timothy was also commended on his knowledge of the canon with those same books.

They weren't remove from the inspired canon until the Protestant Reformation.

2. The KJV is not the best translation. Your fixation on its 7 year development does not prove anything. Scripturally speaking demons, the Devil and the Beast have used 7 to identify their handy work as well. You can not automatically accredit the number 7 to God.

English is the worst language for translating the ancient languages and so by default any English translation is second to languages that are closer to the Semitic and Hellenistic tongue of the Holy Writ.


Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #89 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 22:44:16 »
1. What you call the Apocrypha was and still is apart of God's inspired scripture. St. Stephen the first Christian martyr reference it before his death. The Bereans used the canon that had them and wee praised by St. Paul for their diligent study therein. St Timothy was also commended on his knowledge of the canon with those same books.

They weren't remove from the inspired canon until the Protestant Reformation.

2. The KJV is not the best translation. Your fixation on its 7 year development does not prove anything. Scripturally speaking demons, the Devil and the Beast have used 7 to identify their handy work as well. You can not automatically accredit the number 7 to God.

English is the worst language for translating the ancient languages and so by default any English translation is second to languages that are closer to the Semitic and Hellenistic tongue of the Holy Writ.



If you think the apocrypha is so great, tell me, what doctrines come from the apocrypha?

I don't have a fixation with its 7 year development. I just know what silver, a furnace of earth and seven times mean. When god says "  The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.", I know what he's talking about. Why bash me for understanding the bible?

Are you fluent in the ancient languages? Or do you just use a concordance and pick out the words that fit your theology.


Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #90 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 22:53:19 »
1. What you call the Apocrypha was and still is apart of God's inspired scripture. St. Stephen the first Christian martyr reference it before his death. The Bereans used the canon that had them and wee praised by St. Paul for their diligent study therein. St Timothy was also commended on his knowledge of the canon with those same books.

They weren't remove from the inspired canon until the Protestant Reformation.

2. The KJV is not the best translation. Your fixation on its 7 year development does not prove anything. Scripturally speaking demons, the Devil and the Beast have used 7 to identify their handy work as well. You can not automatically accredit the number 7 to God.

English is the worst language for translating the ancient languages and so by default any English translation is second to languages that are closer to the Semitic and Hellenistic tongue of the Holy Writ.



If you think the apocrypha is so great, tell me, what doctrines come from the apocrypha?

I don't have a fixation with its 7 year development. I just know what silver, a furnace of earth and seven times mean. When god says "  The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.", I know what he's talking about. Why bash me for understanding the bible?

Are you fluent in the ancient languages? Or do you just use a concordance and pick out the words that fit your theology.



1. It doesn't matter what doctrines come out of the Bible (what you call Apocrypha). The fact remains as I have stated and as the Bible records that the Early Church held them to be the inspired word of God as did the majority of Jews before Christianity.

St. Paul praised those versed in their contents and St. Stephen sought fit to quote from them before his martyrdom. Case closed.

2. You apply that verse to the development of KJV as it thats what God intended it for.

3. I wouldn't say I'm fluent in the ancient languages but I am more than familiar with them and I'm just letting you know that claiming that any English translation is the only or best Bible is to reveal your own ignorance of the delicacies of linguistics.

 

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #91 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 23:09:32 »
1. What you call the Apocrypha was and still is apart of God's inspired scripture. St. Stephen the first Christian martyr reference it before his death. The Bereans used the canon that had them and wee praised by St. Paul for their diligent study therein. St Timothy was also commended on his knowledge of the canon with those same books.

They weren't remove from the inspired canon until the Protestant Reformation.

2. The KJV is not the best translation. Your fixation on its 7 year development does not prove anything. Scripturally speaking demons, the Devil and the Beast have used 7 to identify their handy work as well. You can not automatically accredit the number 7 to God.

English is the worst language for translating the ancient languages and so by default any English translation is second to languages that are closer to the Semitic and Hellenistic tongue of the Holy Writ.



If you think the apocrypha is so great, tell me, what doctrines come from the apocrypha?

I don't have a fixation with its 7 year development. I just know what silver, a furnace of earth and seven times mean. When god says "  The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.", I know what he's talking about. Why bash me for understanding the bible?

Are you fluent in the ancient languages? Or do you just use a concordance and pick out the words that fit your theology.



1. It doesn't matter what doctrines come out of the Bible (what you call Apocrypha). The fact remains as I have stated and as the Bible records that the Early Church held them to be the inspired word of God as did the majority of Jews before Christianity.

St. Paul praised those versed in their contents and St. Stephen sought fit to quote from them before his martyrdom. Case closed.


 

I didn't know that the bible recorded that the early church considered them to be inspired.
Where is that found in the bible? I would like to read it.

Also, where in the bible does Paul praise those versed in the apocrypha? 

As far as Stephen goes, I thought he quoted from the old testament. Please provide the verses where Stephen quotes the apocrypha also.

I am eager to learn new things about the bible.



Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #92 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 23:28:19 »
Passover is the Festival of Unleavened Bread and is celebrated for about 7 to 8 days, and there is a particular feast day called  the Feast of Unleavened Bread which is the night after Passover ends. Therefore every translation that names Passover as the time for this event of Acts 12 is correct.

If Passover is the feast of Unleavened Bread then how does the day called feast of  Unleavened Bread begin the night after Passover ends? That sounds like double talk, can you explain? Is Passover a feast of it's own or no?



Yes, Passover is a separate feast day--- a high holy day, but Passover is part of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, which lasted many days.

I know that you know what the feasts represent, so let me ask:

How long did the real feast of Passover last? I'm talking about Jesus on the cross.
When did the real feast of Unleavened Bread begin? When did Jesus become the unleavened "Bread of Life".
How long does the real feast of Unleavened Bread last? How long can we eat the bread of Life?

If you honestly answered those questions, the answer these:

When did the prophetic feast of Passover end?
When did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread begin?
How long did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread last?

I am not completely up on the Jewish festivals, but during the time of Jesus, the Passover week, or the Festival of Unleavened bread would begin on Nisan 10 where there is consideration about the selection of the unblemished male lamb for the feast. On Nisan 13, there is the routine of searching for leaven, of which there will be none found (which means they will have gotten rid of it for this occasion). then on Nisan 14, the actual Passover meal was had.

As for the Festival of Unleavened Bread:

Leviticus 23:5-8
5 “The Lord’s Passover begins at sundown on the fourteenth day of the first month. 6 On the next day, the fifteenth day of the month, you must begin celebrating the Festival of Unleavened Bread. This festival to the Lord continues for seven days, and during that time the bread you eat must be made without yeast. 7 On the first day of the festival, all the people must stop their ordinary work and observe an official day for holy assembly. 8 For seven days you must present special gifts to the Lord. On the seventh day the people must again stop all their ordinary work to observe an official day for holy assembly.

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #93 on: Fri Jul 06, 2012 - 23:51:17 »


Of course the KJV is right, as is every other mainstream version. I see no discrepancy.


??? KJV says Easter and all others say Passover.... and they are all right?

Are these the questions you are concerned about?

When did the prophetic feast of Passover end?
When did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread begin?
How long did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread last?


I really don't know what you are asking. Spiritually, the Passover ended at the the tomb, where Jesus was resurrected, yet the alfikomen ritual breaks the bread that is come out of hiding (Jesus' burial) and everyone gets a piece, which also perpetuates the act of the Lord's Table that Jesus instituted before the cross. So, truly, the celebration of the Passover seder, in that respect, is relevant even today.

As for the other questions, I am really not sure what you are asking, as the Festival of Unleavened Bread is all a part of Passover celebrations, yet literally starts on the 15th and goes to the 21st.

You are right, Passover began the moment Jesus died. The unleavened bread was not available for us until Jesus died.
The fulfillment of Passover ended, then the feast of unleavened Bread started... that means all translations that say Passover are wrong - KJV got it right.


Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #94 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 00:33:06 »


Of course the KJV is right, as is every other mainstream version. I see no discrepancy.


??? KJV says Easter and all others say Passover.... and they are all right?

We know what King James meant---Passover.

Are these the questions you are concerned about?

When did the prophetic feast of Passover end?
When did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread begin?
How long did the prophetic feast of Unleavened Bread last?


I really don't know what you are asking. Spiritually, the Passover ended at the the tomb, where Jesus was resurrected, yet the alfikomen ritual breaks the bread that is come out of hiding (Jesus' burial) and everyone gets a piece, which also perpetuates the act of the Lord's Table that Jesus instituted before the cross. So, truly, the celebration of the Passover seder, in that respect, is relevant even today.

As for the other questions, I am really not sure what you are asking, as the Festival of Unleavened Bread is all a part of Passover celebrations, yet literally starts on the 15th and goes to the 21st.

Quote
You are right, Passover began the moment Jesus died. The unleavened bread was not available for us until Jesus died.
The fulfillment of Passover ended, then the feast of unleavened Bread started... that means all translations that say Passover are wrong - KJV got it right.

You don't seem to understand that the Jews of Jesus' day considered the whole Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread 'the Festival of Unleavened Bread', both running consecutively---the bible calling it 'the days of unleavened bread'.

Offline EDEN2004

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Manna: 20
  • Gender: Male
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #95 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 07:38:04 »


Of course the KJV is right, as is every other mainstream version. I see no discrepancy.


??? KJV says Easter and all others say Passover.... and they are all right?

We know what King James meant---Passover.



Now that's good advice to pass on to the readers... when you don't agree with the bible, change it.
That's why I don't read the newer translation, they have the same philosophy as you.
 

Here's another place where the KJV got it right and the NIV got it wrong. I'm sure you think there are no discrepancies here also, so tell me Lively what did the King James really mean?

NIV
Dan 3:25 The king said, "Look! I see four men walking around in the fire. They aren't tied up. And the fire hasn't even harmed them. The fourth man looks like a son of the gods."

KJV
Dan 3:25  He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

Offline Mere Nick

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12788
  • Manna: 315
  • Gender: Male
  • Reckon you could make me some biscuits?
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #96 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 08:58:23 »
Ezekial 45:21 from the KJV

In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.

Ok, so it was seven days.  I've asked, but no has answered, why the word "Easter" is in the KJV.

It appears that the word "Passover" comes from the Greek word "pascha".  Online sources tell me it is in the NT 29 times, translated as "passover" everytime except in the KJV where it is always called passover except for the one time in Acts 12:4. 

here is my source on that.

I read this article and learned that the word "Easter" is of pagan origin. 

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #97 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 09:51:08 »
Ezekial 45:21 from the KJV

In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.

Ok, so it was seven days.  I've asked, but no has answered, why the word "Easter" is in the KJV.

It appears that the word "Passover" comes from the Greek word "pascha".  Online sources tell me it is in the NT 29 times, translated as "passover" everytime except in the KJV where it is always called passover except for the one time in Acts 12:4. 

here is my source on that.

I read this article and learned that the word "Easter" is of pagan origin. 


Easter is a blend of pascha and a pagan root word but that word is only used in the English language. All other languages use the pascha root.

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #98 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 10:00:00 »
1. What you call the Apocrypha was and still is apart of God's inspired scripture. St. Stephen the first Christian martyr reference it before his death. The Bereans used the canon that had them and wee praised by St. Paul for their diligent study therein. St Timothy was also commended on his knowledge of the canon with those same books.

They weren't remove from the inspired canon until the Protestant Reformation.

2. The KJV is not the best translation. Your fixation on its 7 year development does not prove anything. Scripturally speaking demons, the Devil and the Beast have used 7 to identify their handy work as well. You can not automatically accredit the number 7 to God.

English is the worst language for translating the ancient languages and so by default any English translation is second to languages that are closer to the Semitic and Hellenistic tongue of the Holy Writ.



If you think the apocrypha is so great, tell me, what doctrines come from the apocrypha?

I don't have a fixation with its 7 year development. I just know what silver, a furnace of earth and seven times mean. When god says "  The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.", I know what he's talking about. Why bash me for understanding the bible?

Are you fluent in the ancient languages? Or do you just use a concordance and pick out the words that fit your theology.



1. It doesn't matter what doctrines come out of the Bible (what you call Apocrypha). The fact remains as I have stated and as the Bible records that the Early Church held them to be the inspired word of God as did the majority of Jews before Christianity.

St. Paul praised those versed in their contents and St. Stephen sought fit to quote from them before his martyrdom. Case closed.


 

I didn't know that the bible recorded that the early church considered them to be inspired.
Where is that found in the bible? I would like to read it.

Also, where in the bible does Paul praise those versed in the apocrypha? 

As far as Stephen goes, I thought he quoted from the old testament. Please provide the verses where Stephen quotes the apocrypha also.

I am eager to learn new things about the bible.




1. Look up the verses pertaining to the Bereans and St. Timothy. When the Bible says "scriptures" it is referring to the Septugaint which includes all of the inspired OT which includes what you now call the Apocrypha.

2. St. Paul praises the Bereans who were using the OT canon with the Septugaint which includes the books you call Apocrypha. They are apart God's scriptures and will be no matter what you all say or do.

3. Yes St. Stephen quoted from the OT. What you call the Apocrypha is apart of the OT.

Offline Mere Nick

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12788
  • Manna: 315
  • Gender: Male
  • Reckon you could make me some biscuits?
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #99 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 10:08:26 »
Ezekial 45:21 from the KJV

In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.

Ok, so it was seven days.  I've asked, but no has answered, why the word "Easter" is in the KJV.

It appears that the word "Passover" comes from the Greek word "pascha".  Online sources tell me it is in the NT 29 times, translated as "passover" everytime except in the KJV where it is always called passover except for the one time in Acts 12:4. 

here is my source on that.

I read this article and learned that the word "Easter" is of pagan origin. 


Easter is a blend of pascha and a pagan root word but that word is only used in the English language. All other languages use the pascha root.


What are the ancient manuscripts that bible translators look at that in Act 12:4 it has a blend of pascha and some pagan word instead of just pascha?

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #100 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 10:14:42 »
Ezekial 45:21 from the KJV

In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.

Ok, so it was seven days.  I've asked, but no has answered, why the word "Easter" is in the KJV.

It appears that the word "Passover" comes from the Greek word "pascha".  Online sources tell me it is in the NT 29 times, translated as "passover" everytime except in the KJV where it is always called passover except for the one time in Acts 12:4. 

here is my source on that.

I read this article and learned that the word "Easter" is of pagan origin. 


Easter is a blend of pascha and a pagan root word but that word is only used in the English language. All other languages use the pascha root.


What are the ancient manuscripts that bible translators look at that in Act 12:4 it has a blend of pascha and some pagan word instead of just pascha?


St. Bede the Venerable was the first one to use the word. If my memory is correct he used the Vulgate to draft his Anglo Saxon translation.

However the Vulgate does not use the pagan root.  St. Bede saw a correlation between Easter's root "rising, especially at the dawn" to the Resurrection and the Passover and incorporated it to make it relate better to Europeans.

Offline Mere Nick

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12788
  • Manna: 315
  • Gender: Male
  • Reckon you could make me some biscuits?
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #101 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 10:21:05 »

St. Bede the Venerable was the first one to use the word. If my memory is correct he used the Vulgate to draft his Anglo Saxon translation.

However the Vulgate does not use the pagan root.  St. Bede saw a correlation between Easter's root "rising, especially at the dawn" to the Resurrection and the Passover and incorporated it to make it relate better to Europeans.

So, you are saying that Bede translated the word pascha into easter that one time instead of passover like all the other times? 

What it appears is that the word "easter" in the kjv is due to pagan influence of the Brits instead of something in whatever manuscripts were being used to make the kjv translation.

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #102 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 10:42:18 »

St. Bede the Venerable was the first one to use the word. If my memory is correct he used the Vulgate to draft his Anglo Saxon translation.

However the Vulgate does not use the pagan root.  St. Bede saw a correlation between Easter's root "rising, especially at the dawn" to the Resurrection and the Passover and incorporated it to make it relate better to Europeans.

So, you are saying that Bede translated the word pascha into easter that one time instead of passover like all the other times? 

What it appears is that the word "easter" in the kjv is due to pagan influence of the Brits instead of something in whatever manuscripts were being used to make the kjv translation.

I would love to shed light on the pagan-gnostic influence that permeates Protestantism in both doctrine and origin but I honestly don't think that is a fair evaluation.

For one it wasn't the British who first I trounced the Easter word to the English language, it was St. Bede. So if we're to attribute this translation to pagan influence it would be his fault not the Anglicans.

However with that said I do not think even St. Bede was influenced by paganism. When we see the words that have existed as names of pagan idols we automatically assume foul play. However we fail to consider the etymology of the words we recognize as names for pagan deities. Easter means the shining although it served as the name for a goddess. If we can not divorce a word's meaning from its former function as the name of a pagan deity then we are going to run into a look of trouble.

The God of Abraham as God of Heaven now becomes the God of Zeus (zeus meaning heaven and or sky). Hades becomes not simply an allusion to a place of residence for the dead but a living entity that our God hurtles into the lake of fire.

And on and on in a never ending cycle of misunderstanding.

Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #103 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 10:47:04 »


Of course the KJV is right, as is every other mainstream version. I see no discrepancy.


??? KJV says Easter and all others say Passover.... and they are all right?

We know what King James meant---Passover.



Now that's good advice to pass on to the readers... when you don't agree with the bible, change it.
That's why I don't read the newer translation, they have the same philosophy as you.
 

Here's another place where the KJV got it right and the NIV got it wrong. I'm sure you think there are no discrepancies here also, so tell me Lively what did the King James really mean?

NIV
Dan 3:25 The king said, "Look! I see four men walking around in the fire. They aren't tied up. And the fire hasn't even harmed them. The fourth man looks like a son of the gods."

KJV
Dan 3:25  He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

Who is changing it? We all know that the word, 'Easter' is referring to the Passover. Seems to me old King James has changed it only to Anglicize it.

As for Daniel 3:25...it varies from translation to translation. The exclamation says that the fourth man looks like a son of the gods or god, or of the divine being, yet we all know that it is the Son of God. We also know that these are pagans talking, who are confronted with the living Christ! What do you think you would say in their same position?

I see nothing of import to be concerned about.

Offline kjb1769

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 201
  • Manna: 7
Re: KJV Onlyism
« Reply #104 on: Sat Jul 07, 2012 - 12:45:00 »


Who is changing it? We all know that the word, 'Easter' is referring to the Passover. Seems to me old King James has changed it only to Anglicize it.

[/quote]

King James Authorized the translators he didn't translate the bible.

The following is quoted from American Dictionary of the English Language Noah Webster 1828

Easter, n. [Sax. easter; G. Ostern; supposed to be from Eostre, the goddess of love or Venus of the north, in honor of whom a festival was celebrated by our pagan ancestors, in April ; whence this month was called Eostermonath. Eostre is supposed by Beda and others to be the (Astarte) of the Sidonians. See Beda, Culver, and the authorities cited by Culver, and by Jamieson, under Paysyad. But query.]

A festival of the christian church observed in commeration of our Savior's resurrection. It answers to pascha or passover of the Hebrews, and most nations still give it this name, pascha, pask, paque.


 

     
anything