Did King James Change Bible?
Punisher

Brooklyn, NY

#128 Jan 19, 2014
Huntington Guy wrote:
<quoted text>You are a fundy Pun! An xeist fundy! The proof is in the pudding. For someone who doesn't believe in something, it sure upsets you when someone does. Why do you think that is? Can you prove 100% God doesn't exist?
Didnt think so!
lol
Oh...you flatter me...becoming my personal little sycophant/groupie.

Now go and eat more pudding...good boy!
Punisher

Brooklyn, NY

#129 Jan 19, 2014
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>They do work. You are more accountable now.
.
Nope, they don't...incantations are the work of your Devil. Stop worshiping the Bible.

dollarsbill

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#130 Jan 19, 2014
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>Nope, they don't...incantations are the work of your Devil. Stop worshiping the Bible.
Stop LYING. You CANNOT. You are OBSESSED!

YOU ARE OF YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL

John 8:44 (NKJV)
44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.

Richie T

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#131 Jan 20, 2014
Gary Coaldigger wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes,you do quote scriptures but you also try to forcibly promote your own opinion about those verses of scriptures as if they were facts when opinions do not constitute as facts but merely of what you think it means.
You may be right and then again you may be wrong but the bottom line is that if you really want to do God's work then you should encourage others to seek the Lord out of their own accord and turn their life over to him.
Study the word of God strictly from the Bible.learn and have faith in the Lord.
I don't go and write books on the Lord and what the word of God says because I don't want to do anything to contrary or mislead anyone that would cause them to get the wrong idea about God,misinterpret God's word or anything else that may contribute to them going to Hell because if I do that then,yes,that would truly be interrupting the work of God.
I'm not that brash as you are and if I was to do anything for the Lord then I don't want any money from it.
You have yet to prove your accusation about me earning money from the Lord's work. Put up or SHUT UP!

Richie T

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#132 Jan 20, 2014
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>How is pointing to Israel being self righteous? God foretold the birth of Israel MANY years before it happened. Explain that. Let me help you. Jesus will return to Israel. That's why He restored Israel.
Zechariah 14:3-4 (NKJV)
3 Then the LORD will go forth And fight against those nations, As He fights in the day of battle. 4 And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, Which faces Jerusalem on the east.
And we cannot wait for that glorious day!:)

“Still Politically Incorrect”

Since: Feb 10

And Damn Proud Of It Too

#133 Jan 20, 2014
Richie T wrote:
<quoted text>You have yet to prove your accusation about me earning money from the Lord's work. Put up or SHUT UP!
You sure do get touchy when you're exposed.
You need to understand that not everybody let's themselves get fooled by people like you.
I just happen to see and recognize what you are doing or trying to do and,come on,you and I both know that what you are doing or trying to do really isn't about doing the Lord's work.
If you was doing the Lord's work then you you would be encouraging those to seek the Lord and turn their life over to him,not putting up links to go to where you are saying,"Hi,my name is Dan Doughtery and this is what I think God's word means,I've written books based on my opinions about God and you better believe every word I say about who God is and what the word of God means because I am always right and I am never wrong about anything."

Richie T

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#134 Jan 20, 2014
Gary Coaldigger wrote:
<quoted text>
You sure do get touchy when you're exposed.
You need to understand that not everybody let's themselves get fooled by people like you.
I just happen to see and recognize what you are doing or trying to do and,come on,you and I both know that what you are doing or trying to do really isn't about doing the Lord's work.
If you was doing the Lord's work then you you would be encouraging those to seek the Lord and turn their life over to him,not putting up links to go to where you are saying,"Hi,my name is Dan Doughtery and this is what I think God's word means,I've written books based on my opinions about God and you better believe every word I say about who God is and what the word of God means because I am always right and I am never wrong about anything."
Still no proof, truth-dodger. You are definitely in the hip pocket of our adversary.

Richie T

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#135 Jan 20, 2014
God's only plan of salvation:

www.scribd.com/doc/31322017 ...

“Still Politically Incorrect”

Since: Feb 10

And Damn Proud Of It Too

#136 Jan 20, 2014
Richie T wrote:
God's only plan of salvation:
www.scribd.com/doc/31322017 ...
You won't find the truth of God's plan in your opinions,that's for sure.
Thank God for that.
Huh

Sussex, WI

#137 Jan 20, 2014
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>
Your so-called prophecy is BS! Its simply not the same thing as was allegedly prophesied...
What came to pass? IF the God gave them someplace in France, the West would have given them a part of France post WW2.
The tradition of the Jews is a Religious myth that the rest of the World has to stop promulgating. Of course the dirty deed is done, so we all have to live with it now - but this nonsense that a God gave the Jews such and such area of land is the same as the Native Americans who said the same about their own lands, but of course White European Xtians ignored those claims! As they did for centuries re; the Jews. Centuries of persecution by Xtians. It wasn't till Xtians saw the fruits of their hatred for the Jews that the Xtian World gave them some land back!
Big whoop! And how gracious of the West...after centuries of killing Jews for being Jews, "Here ya go, here's some land we have no right to give you...and do whatever you want to the natives there too...F 'em!" And boy did they!
Nice dance...first it's a 'myth', which it isn't since it came to be.

So, you're saying the west 'caved'? They 'felt' bad? BS, the Jews wanted it since it was theirs to begin with.

How come we (US) never did that with the indians?

Quit doing the Cha Cha when the Walz is being played.
Old GT

Carmel, IN

#138 Jan 29, 2014
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>He is actually talking about two different generations. The last one is THIS GENERATION. This is the terminal generation.
Jesus was talking about the generation that would see the temple torn down. The first question of verse 3. You can't make a connection.

As far as "the end", Jesus said in verse 36;

.........."no one knows"..........

dollarsbill

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#139 Jan 29, 2014
Old GT wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus was talking about the generation that would see the temple torn down. The first question of verse 3. You can't make a connection.
As far as "the end", Jesus said in verse 36;
.........."no one knows"..........
All things did not take place then. But they will be soon.

Luke 21:32 (NKJV)
32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.

Since: Nov 13

Oceanside, CA

#140 Jan 29, 2014
For the last three centuries Protestants have fancied themselves the heirs of the Reformation, the Puritans, the Calvinists, and the Pilgrims who landed at Plymouth Rock. This assumption is one of history's greatest ironies. Today, Protestants laboring under that assumption use the King James Bible. Most of the new Bibles such as the Revised Standard Version are simply updates of the King James.

The irony is that none of the groups named in the preceding paragraph used a King James Bible nor would they have used it if it had been given to them free. The Bible in use by those groups, until it went out of print in 1644, was the Geneva Bible. The first Geneva Bible, both Old and New Testaments, was first published in English in 1560 in what is now Geneva, Switzerland. William Shakespeare, John Bunyan, John Milton, the Pilgrims who landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620, and other luminaries of that era used the Geneva Bible exclusively.

The King James Bible was, and is for all practical purposes, a government publication. There were several reasons for the King James Bible being a government publication. First, King James I of England was a devout believer in the "divine right of kings," a philosophy ingrained in him by his mother, Mary Stuart. Mary Stuart may have been having an affair with her Italian secretary, David Rizzio, at the time she conceived James. There is a better than even chance that James was the product of adultery. Apparently, enough evidence of such conduct on the part of Mary Stuart and David Rizzio existed to cause various Scot nobles, including Mary's own husband, King Henry, to drag David Rizzio from Mary's supper table and execute him. The Scot nobles hacked and slashed at the screaming Rizzio with knives and swords, and then threw him off a balcony to the courtyard below where he landed with a sickening smack. In the phrase of that day, he had been scotched.

Mary did have affairs with other men, such as the Earl of Bothwell. She later tried to execute her husband in a gunpowder explosion that shook all of Edinburgh. King Henry survived the explosion only to be suffocated later that same night. The murderers were never discovered. Mary was eventually beheaded at the order of her cousin, Elizabeth I of England.

To such individuals as James and his mother, Mary, the "divine right of kings" meant that since a king's power came from God, the king then had to answer to no one but God. This lack of responsibility extended to evil kings. The reasoning was that if a king was evil, that was a punishment sent from God. The citizens should then suffer in silence. If a king was good, that was a blessing sent from God.

This is why the Geneva Bible annoyed King James I. The Geneva Bible had marginal notes that simply didn't conform to that point of view. Those marginal notes had been, to a great extent, placed in the Geneva Bible by the leaders of the Reformation, including John Knox and John Calvin. Knox and Calvin could not and cannot be dismissed lightly or their opinions passed off to the public as the mere ditherings of dissidents.

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/bible-e...

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#141 Jan 29, 2014
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>Stop LYING. You CANNOT. You are OBSESSED!
YOU ARE OF YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL
John 8:44 (NKJV)
44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.
Go and live your life. You cannot because you're crazy!
:)

dollarsbill

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#142 Jan 29, 2014
Truthseeker007 wrote:
The King James Bible was, and is for all practical purposes, a government publication.
The KJV is amazingly consistent with nearly every English Bible. All you are proving is that you can copy and paste propaganda.

Since: Nov 13

Oceanside, CA

#143 Jan 30, 2014
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>The KJV is amazingly consistent with nearly every English Bible. All you are proving is that you can copy and paste propaganda.
The Geneva bible was the first to be translated **completely** from the original languages - the KJV was *not* so done (two of the scriptures of the Apocrypha are translated primarily from Latin, not Greek). Additionally, the KJV relied heavily on previous translations also not taken from original languages, while the Geneva Bible relied heavily only on the original languages.

the ‘original’ Greek text was not written until around the mid-Fourth Century and was a revised edition of writings compiled decades earlier in Aramaic and Hebrew. Those earlier documents no longer exist and the Bibles we have today are five linguistic removes from the first Bibles written. What was written in the ‘original originals’ is quite unknown.
— Tony Bushby; The Bible Fraud (quoted by Michael Tsarion)

The Roman-Catholic Bible differs essentially from that of the Protestants, having fourteen more books. The Bible of the Greek Church differs from both. The Campbellites have a translation of their own. The Samaritan Bible contains only the five books of Moses. The Unitarians, having found 24,000 errors in the popular translation, made another translation containing still many thousands errors. The American Christian Union, having found many thousands of errors in the King James Translation, are now engaged in a new translation. How many more are we to have, god only knows. Martin Luther condemned eleven books of the Bible...and thus made a Bible for himself. Paul's Epistles to the Hebrews he denounced in strong terms...Dr. Lardner and John Calvin each condemned five or six books, and had a Bible peculiar to themselves. Grotius places the heel of condemnation on several books of the Bible. Bishop Baxter voted down eight books as uninspired, and unworthy of confidence. Swedenborg accepted only the Four Gospels and Revelation as inspired. The German Fathers rejected the Gospel of Matthew...The Bible of the learned Christian writer Evanson did not contain either Matthew, Mark, or John. The Unitarian Bible does not contain Hebrews, James, Jude, or Revelation. The Catholics denounce the Protestant Bible, and the Protestants condemn the Catholic Bible, as being full or errors.
— Kersey Graves; Bible of Bibles (quoted by Michael Tsarion)

dollarsbill

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#144 Jan 30, 2014
Truthseeker007 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Geneva bible was the first to be translated **completely** from the original languages - the KJV was *not* so done (two of the scriptures of the Apocrypha are translated primarily from Latin, not Greek). Additionally, the KJV relied heavily on previous translations also not taken from original languages, while the Geneva Bible relied heavily only on the original languages.
the ‘original’ Greek text was not written until around the mid-Fourth Century and was a revised edition of writings compiled decades earlier in Aramaic and Hebrew. Those earlier documents no longer exist and the Bibles we have today are five linguistic removes from the first Bibles written. What was written in the ‘original originals’ is quite unknown.
— Tony Bushby; The Bible Fraud (quoted by Michael Tsarion)
The Roman-Catholic Bible differs essentially from that of the Protestants, having fourteen more books. The Bible of the Greek Church differs from both. The Campbellites have a translation of their own. The Samaritan Bible contains only the five books of Moses. The Unitarians, having found 24,000 errors in the popular translation, made another translation containing still many thousands errors. The American Christian Union, having found many thousands of errors in the King James Translation, are now engaged in a new translation. How many more are we to have, god only knows. Martin Luther condemned eleven books of the Bible...and thus made a Bible for himself. Paul's Epistles to the Hebrews he denounced in strong terms...Dr. Lardner and John Calvin each condemned five or six books, and had a Bible peculiar to themselves. Grotius places the heel of condemnation on several books of the Bible. Bishop Baxter voted down eight books as uninspired, and unworthy of confidence. Swedenborg accepted only the Four Gospels and Revelation as inspired. The German Fathers rejected the Gospel of Matthew...The Bible of the learned Christian writer Evanson did not contain either Matthew, Mark, or John. The Unitarian Bible does not contain Hebrews, James, Jude, or Revelation. The Catholics denounce the Protestant Bible, and the Protestants condemn the Catholic Bible, as being full or errors.
— Kersey Graves; Bible of Bibles (quoted by Michael Tsarion)
Israel is back. You are in DEEP trouble.

THE RESURRECTION OF DAMNATION

John 5:28-29 (KJV)
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Since: Nov 13

Oceanside, CA

#145 Jan 30, 2014
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>Israel is back. You are in DEEP trouble.
THE RESURRECTION OF DAMNATION
John 5:28-29 (KJV)
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
Do you have a shrine of the Rothchilds in your basement?
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#146 Jan 30, 2014
Chuck wrote:
Did King James introduce concepts into the Bible?
Is it possible the whole thing is a misinterpretation or has been altered to suit King James?
Before the King James Bible, he published something called "the divine rights of kings" , it explained how God wanted kings to rule the world
The idea of Kings having rights granted by God: is that based on Bible from Hebrew language? or do these concepts only appear when they got translated in English?(or into other modern languages spoken by other monarchy type society
Is it possible that concepts like "Kingdom of Heaven" teaches us to think of heaven and God in a hiearcry monarchy sort of way?(read KingDOMINATION of heaven)
So are things really set out like that in Hebrew bible
or do we have a kings version of the bible? one best translated to suit him/one designed to teach people to think of bible concepts in a monarchy sort of way.
the God a Lord? LandLords?
KingDomination of Heaven?
(Or did any of these words get twisted to what they now mean today, King Lord and KingDom,)
I ask these questions from an ignorant perspective, im trying to learn i haven't decided any conclusions and im not pushing any theory. i would just like to hear more, especially from somebody who speaks Hebrew.
If you desire the pre-Greek NT - the AENT (ARAMAIC ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT) is available now - published in 2010 from a manuscript dating to 167 AD.

Yes the Greek has mistranslations, outright changes, missing text and added texts.

Then come to know from actual history that Paul was not accepted as an apostle, and after the issue in Acts later on in his history - all the Church rejected him as a liar - the Balaam of the NT, the false apostle. James was written for the trial of Paul that he says in II Tim. 4 that all Asia had abandoned him at his first defense - Paul was found to be a liar, just as Jesus said to the Church in Ephesus (the capitol of Asia) in Revelation 2 - which was told after Paul had died.

What does God require? To abide in the teachings of His Son.

onediscipletoanother.org
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#147 Jan 30, 2014
Truthseeker007 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a shrine of the Rothchilds in your basement?
From what I've come to know, Dollarsbill is correct on that statement. It is one of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The truth is difficult, I understand. 4 hr blacklagoon 46
You are God, What is the first thing you Fix? 5 hr Jake999 70
George Washington and the duty of prayer 5 hr Big Al 11
The False Teachings of the Hebrew Israelites, s... (Jan '14) 5 hr Big Al 1,664
Faith during hard times Fri blacklagoon 107
the pauline paradox Fri susanblange 85
Are Your Beliefs TRUE? Fri blacklagoon 142
More from around the web