Less Than a Third of Americans Say Bible Is Actual Word of God
According to the findings of a Gallup poll released on Wednesday, 28 percent of Americans believe that the Bible was "the actual word of God" and that it should be "taken literally, word for word." Forty percent of Americans agreed with that statement in 1979 â€” a record high â€” though the number has since declined every year with the exception of 2012.
Nearly 50 percent of Americans agree that the Bible is the "inspired word of God" and that not all of its content should be taken literally. The 47 percent of respondents who believe this perspective is 2 percent higher than when Gallup began asking the question in 1976, and five points short of the 52 percent who agreed with it in 2003....
Michael, of course each IFB church has the right to pick the Bible it wants to use. Why would one want to pick one with errors that is not even English, but Elizabethan? Rationally speaking?
[URL=http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/kjvo.htm]]]Dear KJV Only Advocate:[/URL]
'Do not give them a loaf of bread, covered with an inedible, impenetrable crust, fossilized by three and a half centuries. Give them the Word of God as fresh and warm and clear as the Holy Spirit gave it to the authors of the Bible. . . . For any preacher or theologian who loves God's Word to allow that Word to go on being misunderstood because of the veneration of an archaic, not-understood version of four centuries ago is inexcusable, and almost unconscionable'---Edward H. Palmer
The Trinitarian Bible Society has been associated with the King-James-Only Movement. However, as the Society has publicly stated, "The Trinitarian Bible Society does not believe the Authorised Version to be a perfect translation, only that it is the best available translation in the English language."
Unlike others in the King James Only movement, the Society claims, "The supernatural power involved in the process of inspiration, and in the result of inspiration, was exerted only in the original production of the sixty-six Canonical books of the Bible (2 Peter 1:20-21; 2 Peter 3:15-16)."
"Translations from the original languages are likewise to be considered the written Word of God in so far as these translations are accurate as to the form and content of the Original."
"Translations made since New Testament times must use words chosen by uninspired men to translate Godâ€™s words. For this reason no translation of the Word of God can have an absolute or definitive status. The final appeal must always be to the original languages, in the Traditional Hebrew and Greek texts."
Jim Lincoln wrote: an unacceptable Bible to use in the local church.
Jim Lincoln That would be your opinion and you are entitled to hold to it.
But despite the grief I've had with KJV Onlyists in honesty I have to take the position if a local church under no external manipulation chooses to use the KJV as their Bible of choice/preference they have that right.
Personally I know of a small Bible school that has choosen to use the KJV because they have students coming in from all sorts of backgrounds who have used all sorts of translations, so for the school they use the KJV so everyone is reading from the same translation
And they didn't need my permission to do so.
Also I know a broadcaster here on SermonAudio whose church uses the KJV but tells people who visit to bring there Bible whatever translation it is (apparently they don't condemn other translations)
With people like these I feel no strife, animostiy, pressure to conform to their personal preferences, certainly no manipulation and twisted (I hate to use the word) research such as with Gail Riplinger.
If I was among such people I would have no problem picking up my well marked copy of the KJV and enjoying fellowship with them as a part of the family of God
Michael Hranek, all too true, the KJV has too much baggage with it, The British should have pride in the KJV, [URL=http://bible.org/seriespage/part-ii-reign-king-james-era-elegance]]]Part II: The Reign of the King James (The Era of Elegance)[/URL], but also note [URL=http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1824]]]Part III: From the KJV to the RV (from Elegance to Accuracy)[/URL]. The RV keeps the Elizabethan English, if that is what one craves, and is the Authorized Replacement for the KJV, but that extra baggage that KJV carries the jingoism of it's British supporters besides [URL=http://moriel.org/MorielArchive/index.php/discernment/ruckmanism/the-truth-about-kjv-only-the-mormon-ecumenical-homosexual-and-neo-nazi-agendas]]]The Truth About KJV Only...Agendas[/URL] make it an unacceptable Bible to use in the local church.
Luke 9:49,50 And John answered and said, master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. And Jesus said unto him, forbid him not:for he that is not against us is for us.
John UK Wrote: Matthew 17:21 KJV (21) Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
Hi John, interesting choice because this always gives me problems. Jesus accused the apostles of lacking faith in this instance but then turned around to say this. I always wonder why He accused them of not having enough faith to displace the spirit when only fasting would have got the job done.
As far as the versions, there are some really bad bibles but I don't lose sleep over whether a word here and there is questionable because God has made sure to keep doctrine in tact. Interestinghow tthere's no particular chapter on say, baptism, salvation, or whatever, but all topics are spread throughout. You can tear out an entire book or random pages and still get the full message while reading what remains.
AV wrote: Michael H...really? calling Gods people servants of satan, because you happen to not agree with what they posted? What sort of spirit is that? Time to climb down from your sanctimonious soap box and quit trying to be the SermonAudio magisterium. If you disagree...fine...no reason to be so mean spirited.
Dear AV Ahhhhh? Haven't you read your own KJV Bible? The Apostle Paul rebuked Simon Peter openly in the matter of those seeking to impose circumcision on the Gentile believers. Are you seeking to impose the KJV on others against their will and conscience?
And let us not forget, Jesus Himself rebuked Simon Peter: "Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men."
If it smarts that it is more than possible you may have allowed Satan to (ab)use what is good to you to serve him (hurt others and their confidence in the Bibles they choose in good conscience to use) perhaps you ought to reconsider your ways
There is quite a bit to the issues of Translations, good conscience, respect for others when they disagree with us involved in the matter of the KJV and the Onlyists. Since space is so limited here, if you want to discuss things further feel free to eamil me
It's astonishing but true that there are some Christians who diligently read their Bible, but have never ever seen this verse:
Matthew 17:21 KJV (21) Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
Now please note that this is a spiritual warfare strategy verse - PRAYER AND FASTING. It is a strategy against the devil and all his servants.
Think about it. What sort of verses would the devil love to have removed from the Christian's Bible? Would it not be verses which show the Christian how to win victories?
Maybe with all these modern English versions, folks have been going downhill and forgotten that the devil is a real person who is arrayed against the Christian and wants to destroy him.
A couple of questions.
1. Does your Bible have the verse above?
2. Now think very carefully, and answer if you will, How has the devil been attacking God's word ALL THESE YEARS since he fooled Eve with the words, "Yea, hath God said?" Think about it. How is the devil attacking God's word TODAY!? You say, "I don't think he is attacking it, we've gotten over a hundred English versions, and more coming out as each year passes."
Michael H...really? calling Gods people servants of satan, because you happen to not agree with what they posted? What sort of spirit is that? Time to climb down from your sanctimonious soap box and quit trying to be the sermon audio magisterium. If you disagree...fine...no reason to be so mean spirited.
Instead of thinking of it as trying to divide, try thinking of it as trying to unite. I can't speak for anyone else but I hold to the belief that the kjv is the inerrant, infallible perfect word of God. Of course God can save someone with the modern "versions", but eventually the new believer needs to know that what they Are reading is not the true word. The terrible aspect of this is the fact that new versionists offer no error free version of Gods word. The whole argument is about how God could not have preserved His word because men make errors. They don't even risk saying something like " the kjv isn't Gods perfect standard because the niv/esv/nasb is". They simply say that there is no perfect word. Why read any one of them if they all have errors? I submit that Gods true word that has bore fruit for 400 years is the word we should all be united under, and I will never be so bold as to assert emphatically that it is full of errors.
Shane wrote: Would be nice to see the hyper kjvoists do the same.
[AUTHOR]John UK wrote: Michael my bro, I hope you will not allow the devil, through Jim Lincoln and KJV-Onlyists Cultists, to cause a rift between us.John UK I won't want to see that either. By the grace of God let guard against it.
There is no confusion when everyone speaks the same language. Confusion and discourse entered the Church when the Revised Version(s) entered the scene. This is the same lie satan has asked, "Yea, hath God said".
This site never changes even after all this time; still discord amongst the brethren here.