Up next


If You Do Not Have The KJV You Do Not Have The Holy Ghost - The Original King James Only

87 Views
Luke2136
13
Published on 30 Jul 2022 / In Bible / Sermons

⁣Modern 'Bibles' ESV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, Etc. Have Been Rejected By The Holy Ghost - The Original King-James-Only
***
The Holy Ghost is named in 89 verses in the KJV but 90 times total - Acts 19:2 is 2x. Interesting thing about this verse: It is from the book of Acts account of the apostle Paul's encounter with a group of "about twelve" men in Ephesus who knew only "John's baptism" - they had never heard "whether there be any Holy Ghost". Which is exactly what happens to users of so-called modern-versions. [Acts 19:1-4, 5-7]

(video made from blog post: http://anothervoicerev184.blog....spot.com/2015/01/hol

Show more
We need your support. Contribute today. Together we are stronger. Danke. #1488
2 Comments sort Sort By

Isaac Mack Burton
Isaac Mack Burton 4 months ago

#kjvcult

   0    0
Luke2136
Luke2136 4 months ago

um.. nah

Westcott and Hort were involved in a lot of cultic and heretical activity though

   0    0
Jailer
Jailer 4 months ago

Kjv is better than most but does have some not so honest translations which creates heresies,

Hides two seedline,
Promotes universalism and due to very poor rendering of words such as unclean and profane both being translated as unclean tricks Christians into eating pork, pork isnt food
Praise Jesus(Yahshua) brother

   1    0
Luke2136
Luke2136 4 months ago

Yahshua - and every other variant spelling (there are many) of 'yeshua' or 'yeshu'

- the different spellings do not mean a thing - they are all derived from the talmud - and are a jewish slur on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ - meaning essentially 'may his name and memory be blotted out'

-adding some extra letters to the name is the trick used to say it's not the same it's different, it's the 'sacred name' etc. etc.

No, changing the spelling doesn't change the original talmud meaning at all - it is just how the judaizers sell it to professing christians to judaize-deceive them..

recommend to whosoever has ears to hear.. reject it outright

   0    0
Jailer
Jailer 4 months ago

@Luke2136: Yahshua(Yahweh saves) and Yahweh are transliterated from hebrew. Not talmud. Kinda is similar to Joshua right?

The yesh spelling is the blotted out joo version

And the kjv blotted out Yahwehs name into LORD how many times in the old testament?

   1    0
Luke2136
Luke2136 4 months ago

Hey Jailer - not really looking to debate here reason being had too many already and fact is most guys who engage on these topics already have their minds made up - so that's how that goes

Anyway all non-KJV versions come from the Alexandrian texts. This is a problem because every one of those texts ultimately are just another variation (i.e. rewrite) of the original Westcott and Hort - whichever manuscripts they use. Westcott and Hort were crypto-jews (had to be i believe) - who denied many fundamental tenets of christianity - and had a very dark background which can be easily researched. The text they produced systematically altered the scriptures. Bottom line reading ANY version other than the Authorized Version (KJV) you are reading Westcott Hort - no way around that.

And God the Holy Ghost the third person of the triune Godhead has nothing to do with Westcott-Horts.

(*and definitions of the Greek is another subject entirely - extremely arbitrary [done by Wescott and Horts' buddies in just about every case], and especially considering no "original manuscripts" exist)

anyway ttfn

   0    0
Jailer
Jailer 4 months ago

Why did they alter Yahweh to Lord? Render profane as unclean. This is kjv...

   1    0
Jailer
Jailer 4 months ago

kjv only crowd usually promotes race mixing and pork sandwhiches

   1    0
Luke2136
Luke2136 4 months ago

@Jailer: have to ask the Holy Ghost he is the author - he used 'LORD' in the OT and 'Lord' in the NT - must be that is how he wants men to refer to God/him

..as for the supposed correct translation of Greek words - he didn't use the arbitrary Greek translations of men

my argument would be that he in fact corrected them - and he is the language expert

Bottom line is this - if men can 'correct' the bible any way they choose - which they do all the time - then we do not have a real bible at all.

What is the final authority then? Man's word or God's word?

   0    0
Luke2136
Luke2136 4 months ago

here's the interesting thing -

the WHO crowd (Westcott-Hort only) make themselves the 'final authority'

they have no real bible - the Greek say this, the Greek says that - I will decide what is right

Man does not have a bible then - God has failed - he was unable to preserve it like he said

   0    0
BrotherinChrist
BrotherinChrist 4 months ago

@Luke2136: Hey my brothers! This is to you and Jailer.

I am very thankful to have been chosen to have my eyes and ears opened in these bad times. Being lead back to Jesus Christ is the most beautiful and amazing thing I could have ever imagined. So as this is mainly about the KJV bible I will just put my feelings on this issue from what I have concluded after research. I do believe that the KJV is the best English version of the Scriptures we have today. Though as Jailer has stated that it is not 100% perfect at all. I know sometimes people get rubbed the wrong way when they hear "the Bible is not perfect" thinking things like "if we can't trust the Word(or Bible) what can we trust". After spending many hours comparing Scriptures I believe the main thing we need to focus on is the Spirit in us. Even if the translation was 100% perfect there would be many things we would not understand or maybe decipher differently. As us here are awakened to CI I believe we should share our different thoughts of Scripture to just help one another and be able to agree to disagree on topics.

I'm sure you know of the "1611KJV only" crowd. I actually spent some time trying to relay this to one man, not even CI, that the 1611 version was not 100% perfect either. Giving him numerous exact details of things that were wrong or not correct. Would not take it and was called names. Typical I guess from some. Sad though.

So, the Bible I mainly read from is a KJV which I have found to be kind of a mix between the Cambridge and Oxford editions. Though I use a website with many older translation to parallel with and break down word for word. I'll leave a link to the site. One thing that I really like is the Wessex Gospels. The first translation of the four Gospels into Old English. Very hard to follow and read though with others to parallel you can catch some. They call Jesus "Halend" which means "saviour/healer". Also Jew is not in there which I like. Mainly I use the "Parallel" and "Analysis. https://textusreceptusbibles.c....om/Parallel/43002001

Oh, and I still use Jesus Christ because that was the name I was saved by. Hope I have helped a little. God Bless you both!

   1    0
Luke2136
Luke2136 4 months ago

@BrotherinChrist: it's all good.. nothing personal for me talking on the bible version question.. and if there is disagreement, which there very often is on all sorts of doctrinal issues as well as bible versions - i'm not offended by it in any way.

If someone can prove you wrong - oh well - shouldn't ruffle your feathers - pretty much the way it should go

   1    0
Show more

Up next