Read e-book Why I Believe the King James Bible is the Word of God

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Why I Believe the King James Bible is the Word of God file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Why I Believe the King James Bible is the Word of God book. Happy reading Why I Believe the King James Bible is the Word of God Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Why I Believe the King James Bible is the Word of God at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Why I Believe the King James Bible is the Word of God Pocket Guide.

Privacy International Resellers. Toggle navigation Toggle navigation. Halloween Vacation Daily Witnessing Plan. View Cart. What Is The "Septuagint"?

Isn't the Devil behind the Bible Version confusion? Are Bereans Out of Date?

Chapters and verses: finding your way around

Sinaiticus part 3: Which Part Is Scripture? Daniels answers difficult questions about the KJV. Learn how to defend the KJV and why you can trust it. Bible publishers are slowly changing the Bible, and few are noticing! Modern Bibles disagree in key verses and about crucial doctrines of the Christian faith. Which Bible can we trust?

Esv Onlyism

Daniels on 9 different Bible topics. Which Bible Would Jesus Use? If Jesus walked into your church, which Bible would He quote from?

Peter Ruckman - Why I Believe The King James Bible is the Word of God

What's New? One of them was exceptionally gentlemanly in his disagreement; I couldn? The other was the one respondent who was a bit curmudgeonly. And both independently said the same thing to me:? We have such different views of Scripture that we can? My view of Scripture is what I take to be the orthodox, evangelical, Reformation Protestant view: the original autographs of the Bible, the Greek and Hebrew, are inspired and authoritative; translations are the Word of God, too, but they are subject to human limitations.

But these men elevate a translation? In effect, they treat that translation as itself inspired. This is a serious doctrinal issue with many ramifications in bibliology and in pastoral care. We do indeed differ.


  1. King James Version (KJV)?
  2. Why the King James Bible – KJV Teens 4 Christ.
  3. Why I Believe the Bible Is the Word of God.
  4. Gastroenterology: Liver Complications/Allergies (Audio-Digest Foundation Gastroenterology Continuing Medical Education (CME). Book 25)!
  5. Advances in Heterocyclic Chemistry: 103.
  6. 1 John KJV - Beloved, believe not every spirit, but - Bible Gateway;
  7. Davidsbundler, Op. 6 (Lebhaft).

I had hoped I could still get them to engage in conversation about something that, theoretically, we should be able to agree on: Bible translations should use language readable by normal people. With many, I failed. But a few KJV-Only brothers and sisters who read my book did listen to me carefully and agreed to engage on the ground I chose: the Bible? There Paul argues repeatedly that the Corinthians should not speak in tongues without a translator. Because edification requires intelligibility.

Articles :: Why I Believe the King James Bible is the Pure Word of God - Perfecting of the Saints

Paul goes so far as to say that unintelligible words should not be used in church And in a way they? But if we can? Paul states the principle so clearly and repeatedly that I feel very safe in applying it beyond tongues. I find it hard, for example, to imagine Paul forbidding untranslated miraculous tongues but allowing Quechua to be used for the service in a Chinese-speaking congregation?

Edification requires intelligibility.

I also find it hard to believe? The key concept of my book? We all know there are? But I argue that there are also plenty of? I gave examples like? How long halt ye between two opinions,? Remove not the ancient landmark,? God commendeth his love toward us?? These are not obscure passages but common ones, and I contend that I further argued that no contemporary readers are ever likely to discern that they are in fact misunderstanding, because the contemporary senses of these words make sufficient sense in context that no one will think to look them up in the Oxford English Dictionary , the only source that tells readers what English words used to mean centuries ago.

But my KJV-Only readers insist that this problem is surmountable.

Background

One pastor wrote,. If we use the King James for preaching, teaching, discipleship, training, and evangelism, we must take care to plainly teach and explain the truths of the Bible. Should you choose to give the KJV to a child or a new believer, great priority and care should be given to their discipleship and biblical education.

His church uses the KJV exclusively as a matter of doctrinal conviction. But he doesn? He has as much ability as anyone I? But, sadly, I don? Too many specialized linguistic skills are required. He read the book of Philippians looking for? He said that wasn? I countered that if there are ten in such a brief book and I found more than ten in just the first chapter , including apparently common words like supply , that would average out to about 5, total in the Bible.

Is that enough to cause concern?? I asked. I sent my book to dozens of KJV-Only leaders, and many of them read it. None has explained how pastors or laypeople can go about discovering the? How are you supposed to know you? And yet one prominent KJV-Only pastor of a large church? Pass me the OED!? In other words, the translators asked readers to rise to the level of the KJV rather than lowering the Bible to meet readers. My calls for readability, they say, are really calls for dumbing down the Bible.

I think this objection confuses the inherent difficulty of many portions of the Bible with the difficulties that are posed by archaic language.

How many words are there in the Bible?

Peter acknowledges that Paul wrote things that are? I don? But neither do I think that it? Whatever the KJV translators actually accomplished, their aim was understandability. They said so in their preface:. We desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar.

The very vulgar is the common people, the man and woman on the street. I quoted this line in my book, and one KJV-Only respondent said that, yes, the? Translators to the Reader?