Jim Lincoln wrote:
Ah, Albert, I can never be as amusing as you fellows.
excerpt from, [URL=https://www.jashow.org/articles/uncategorized/is-the-king-james-version-of-the-bible-the-only-bible-christians-should-trust-and-readpart-3/]]]Why KJVO Claims and Arguments Cannot Be Trusted[/URL]

Jim Lincoln wrote:
Ah, Albert, I can never be as amusing as you fellows.
excerpt from, [URL=https://www.jashow.org/articles/uncategorized/is-the-king-james-version-of-the-bible-the-only-bible-christians-should-trust-and-readpart-3/]]]Why KJVO Claims and Arguments Cannot Be Trusted[/URL]

Observer wrote:
Almost, Albert?
What will it take to push you over the edge? Lol
You know a few months ago no one cared about a flag, until some stupid liberal stood up and alleged its connection to racism then all the liberals were up in arms.
Same with Jim. His "experts" say be upset about the KJV and suddenly Jimbo's apoplectic with concern and wants it buried.
There is such as thing "theological correctness", which is nothing to do with soundness, but everything to do with sound-bytes.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
Yes, when it's Scripture, Albert. There are writings in the KJV that are from, man, not God [URL=http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm]]]See " Indisputable, universally recognized errors in the KJV"[/URL]
A Bible that isn't in good contemporary language of the people--like the NKJV, is worse than useless.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
There is no where in Scripture that the KJV is called inspired. there are plenty of errors in it, to see that it isn't. Only the original autographs are inspired.
The Anglican at that time was no better than the Catholic one.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
I thought those Anglicans were pagans and I was right!
etc.
Experts in the 19th century had no problems of seeing the errors in the KJV, [URL=http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm#inconsistent]]]Errors where the KJV translation disagrees with the Textus Receptus[/URL].

try again wrote:
so the KJV translators were wrong, they should have said Herod had his own holiday to celebrate instead of "and because he saw that it pleased the Jews" (who would not be impressed with a pagan holiday) Plus where is your historical evidence that a holiday for Ishtar took place around passover during the time of the apostles? You are on shaky ground.
Now if instead you realize that the instuctions for the translators was to rely upon the Bishops Bible and shun the Geneva Bible (because it argued against the "divine right of kings", you will come up with a much better reposne as to why the word Easter is used.
Plus the Church of England (1563 Homolies) refers to "Easter, a great, and solemne feast among the Jewes"
http://www.pennuto.com/bible/acts124.htm
John 11:55
Bishops Bible
And the Iewes Easter was nye at hande, and many went out of the countrey vp to Hierusale before the Easter, to purifie them selues.
KJV
And the Jews' passover was nigh at hand: and many went out of the country up to Jerusalem before the passover, to purify themselves
thus when the Bishop Bible translators used Easter in Acts 12:4 they understood it to be Passover

fly wrote:
to briefly deal with one word--
According to the critics, the word "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is a mistranslation, because the Greek word is"pascha," and it is translated "passover" twenty-eight times in the New Testament, and it should be translated likewise in Acts 12:4.
This is what happens when a man is so hung up on "the Greek" that he can't read plain English. It should NOT be translated "passover" because the Passover had already passed. The "days of unleavened bread" had already begun (vs. 3), which means the Passover was over (Num. 28:16-18; Exo. 12:13-18). The Passover was always the fourteenth day of the first month, while the days of unleavened bread ran from the fifteenth through the twenty-first. Herod could not have been waiting for the Passover. Besides, why would a Gentile king like Herod be concerned about a Jewish feast day? "Easter" is from the pagan "Ishtar", the goddess that the pagans worshipped--Rome included. Herod wanted to wait until his pagan holiday was over before bringing Peter out to the people.

Lurker wrote:
Thanks Albert.
It's a rare occasion to encounter another who uses the bible to interpret a particular text. Its even rarer to encounter another who knows his/her way around the prophets. I'd be remiss if I didn't offer my email address. If you have a mind to, drop me an email and, Lord willing, perhaps we can learn from each other's studies.Hello sister B.
The consummation of all things is generally regarded as eschatology. And since you agreed with brother Mike's comment "yet future", I trust you can appreciate why I spoke up.
That said, I agree there are ages (aions) in the bible which come to an end in judgment and another begins eg. the flood.
In any event, this thread is about the KJV so I'll leave it there.
Blessings

B. McCausland wrote:
Thank you Lurker and Albert for your valuable observations. B.McClausland, we my be saying the same thing if your day of God's consummation matches my Millennium Kingdom term, but I might be wrong. Without wishing to alienate different perceptions, apologies if this understanding defers from yours.

Jim Lincoln
Albert, Dumping Bibles even a bad one like the KJV, into the laps of children is counterproductive and plays into the hands of such atheists as Dawkins.

Gipp Grip wrote:
righto!
Erasmus, who edited the Greek text which was later to be known as the Textus Receptus, was an embarrassment to the pope and a poor example of a "good" Roman Catholic.
"Our hope is in the mercy of God and the merits of Christ." Of Jesus Christ he stated, "He ... nailed our sins to the cross, sealed our redemption with his blood. " He boldly stated that no rites of the Church were necessary for an individual's salvation. "The way to enter paradise," he said, "is the way of the penitent thief, say simply, Thy will be done. The world to me is crucified and I to the world."
He mentioned Anabaptists as early as 1523 even though he himself was often called the "only Anabaptist of the 16th century." He stated that the Anabaptists that he was familiar with called themselves "Baptists." (Ironically, Erasmus was also the FIRST person to use the term "fundamental.")
..the greatest compliment, though veiled, that Erasmus's independent nature ever received came in 1559, twenty-three years after his death. That is when Pope Paul IV put Erasmus's writings on the "Index" of books, forbidden to be read by Roman Catholics.
http://samgipp.com/answerbook/?page=57.htm

Jim Lincoln wrote:
I am curious if Dawkins had give the £370,000 (would that around ½ million dolars?) q.v., [URL=http://www.christian.org.uk/news/dawkins-hopes-free-bibles-will-turn-kids-off-scriptures/]]]Dawkins hopes free [KJV] Bibles will turn kids off scriptures[/URL] to pass out commemorative copies to the state schools, would he have gotten what he wished? Personally I think,

pennned wrote:
I can only relay the discussion I heard....
Hades is the temporal when someone passes away and not with the Lord, below the ground, and gehenna the place of outer darkness and torment, forever. the challengers to our faith use the hades verses to show its not an eternal state, well hades isn't, gehenna is. like how heaven is the resting place for believers today, but then come the resurrection (for others resurrection for judgment). so the KJV pastor noticed a meaning difference in the English and was smart enough to figure out the descriptive difference in the KJV matches the hades/gehenna difference of the original Greek. see, White debates these nonCHristian guys, because we have people trying to erode our basic doctrines. he uses the greek to prove just because hades is not eternal, doesn't negate gehenna. the kjv pastor says that's too confusing for sharing the gospel and white explains, well yes, someone in hades will go to gehenna, it is technically correct to explain to nonbeleivers the end destination and punishment for sin is hell (gehenna). I hope this makes some sense.