My Words Shall Not Pass Away

  • Thread starter Thread starter Timothy
  • Start date Start date
T

Timothy

Guest
The King James Bible is God's Words. God tells us (in the Bible) that His Words will not pass away.

Below is proof that God's words will not pass away, in the past other details have been given as to why one can conclude the KJV are those words. If the King James Bible IS NOT the inspired words of God then we need to find them. Where are they? He said we would preserve them for us.

Matthew 24:35
"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Lord Jesus promised the Word of God will be preserved for mankind)

(God originally inspired His Words, and he tells us they are still inspired. All of it.)

2 Tim 3:16 "All scripture" (all - Gen-Rev) "is given" (didn't say was given, is given) "by inspiration and is profitable" (now, today, it is profitable, and right now, today, it is inspired)

(God has promised in his word to preserve his word. Without infallible preservation we are forced to conclude that Gods breath evaporated with the deterioration of the original manuscripts.)

(Originals are gone. The paper has deteriorated.)

Psalm 78:1-6
"Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words" (written words, not thoughts) "... That the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born; who should arise and declare them to their children:"

(In order for generations to learn the law of God that presupposes the law must be preserved so that generations can read it and know it.)

Psalm 105:8
He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations.

Psalm 119:89
For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.

Psalm 119:160
Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.

(God will judge us with authority. The Bible gives him authority to judge us.)

1 Peter 1:23
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth (inspiration) and abideth (preservation) for ever.
 
Timothy said:
2 Tim 3:16 "All scripture" (all - Gen-Rev) "is given" (didn't say was given, is given) "by inspiration and is profitable" (now, today, it is profitable, and right now, today, it is inspired)

There are other comments I would mention... but for the moment, I will cherry pick this one.

God didn't say "is given" (present tense) either. The word is an adjective in the Greek.
Adjectives do not have tense. They speak of the QUALITY of the object they modify.
That is, the Word of God has the "quality of inspiration." In other words, the Word of God are God's very words!
 
Not one of those quoted Scriptures have anything to do with translations being preserved. And hyper-literal interpretations are generally silly anyway.
 
Izdaari said:
Not one of those quoted Scriptures have anything to do with translations being preserved. And hyper-literal interpretations are generally silly anyway.

Are you saying that "word" in those passages are not referring to "The Bible" ?
 
Timothy.... Timothy....

Have you ever read in the KJV how this world is going to pass away..... and all things therein are going to pass away? In fact, you're ignoring the statement in the verse you posted.

Curious.... if you know this.... and you believe this..... They every Bible that has every been written will vanish from the scene. Gone. Including the KJV.

If what Christ said is true.....(which it is).... then what he said has nothing to do with pen and paper. It has nothing to do with temporal things.

I asked a KJVO this many years ago. He looked dumbfound for a few minutes and then said.

"I believe there is an exact copy of the KJV eternally preserved word for word in Heaven."

Now, if you believe that...... I won't say one more word to you.



 
Timothy said:
Izdaari said:
Not one of those quoted Scriptures have anything to do with translations being preserved. And hyper-literal interpretations are generally silly anyway.

Are you saying that "word" in those passages are not referring to "The Bible" ?

No. I don't have a clue where you're drawing that inference from.
 
Timothy said:
Izdaari said:
Not one of those quoted Scriptures have anything to do with translations being preserved. And hyper-literal interpretations are generally silly anyway.

Are you saying that "word" in those passages are not referring to "The Bible" ?

It can't. It is impossible to be a reference to any Bible.
 
Izdaari said:
Timothy said:
Izdaari said:
Not one of those quoted Scriptures have anything to do with translations being preserved. And hyper-literal interpretations are generally silly anyway.

Are you saying that "word" in those passages are not referring to "The Bible" ?

No. I don't have a clue where you're drawing that inference from.

What exactly are you saying is a hyper-literal interpretation? I thought you were referring to the word "word"
 
Timothy said:
Izdaari said:
Timothy said:
Izdaari said:
Not one of those quoted Scriptures have anything to do with translations being preserved. And hyper-literal interpretations are generally silly anyway.

Are you saying that "word" in those passages are not referring to "The Bible" ?

No. I don't have a clue where you're drawing that inference from.

What exactly are you saying is a hyper-literal interpretation? I thought you were referring to the word "word"

Without picking apart your exact words, because I don't believe in doing that...

Just the general impression that you're reading the Bible in an extremely literal way, which IMHO is a mistake. It contains many different literary genres, and there are parts of it that can be read that way without doing violence to the meaning... but only parts.
 
[quote author=Izdaari]...there are parts of it that can be read [hyper-literally] without doing violence to the meaning... but only parts.[/quote]

Like the psalms! Oh! And the parables! And all the apocalyptic writings!
 
This pastor (Norris Belcher, I presume?) seems to have the same hangup as our Biblebeliever: whenever he reads "word" in the Bible, for some reason he sees "the KJV."

Why should we buy into that baseless assumption?
 
Izdaari said:
Timothy said:
Izdaari said:
Timothy said:
Izdaari said:
Not one of those quoted Scriptures have anything to do with translations being preserved. And hyper-literal interpretations are generally silly anyway.

Are you saying that "word" in those passages are not referring to "The Bible" ?

No. I don't have a clue where you're drawing that inference from.

What exactly are you saying is a hyper-literal interpretation? I thought you were referring to the word "word"

Without picking apart your exact words, because I don't believe in doing that...

Just the general impression that you're reading the Bible in an extremely literal way, which IMHO is a mistake. It contains many different literary genres, and there are parts of it that can be read that way without doing violence to the meaning... but only parts.

Yes. I do take the Bible very literal.
 
Ransom said:
This pastor (Norris Belcher, I presume?) seems to have the same hangup as our Biblebeliever: whenever he reads "word" in the Bible, for some reason he sees "the KJV."

Why should we buy into that baseless assumption?

Because King has 4 letters which is only one more than 3 and James has 5 which is the number of grace (or maybe death, we don't know) and Bible has 2 "b"s and and "e", leaving only the "i" and "l", and if you combine everything they will tell you the exact day of Jesus' return or the winning lottery numbers or something like that.
 
rsc2a said:
[quote author=Izdaari]...there are parts of it that can be read [hyper-literally] without doing violence to the meaning... but only parts.

Like the psalms! Oh! And the parables! And all the apocalyptic writings!
[/quote]

lol, yes  :P
 
Ransom said:
This pastor (Norris Belcher, I presume?) seems to have the same hangup as our Biblebeliever: whenever he reads "word" in the Bible, for some reason he sees "the KJV."

Why should we buy into that baseless assumption?

Based on the promise from God to preserve His Word the conclusion is that the King James Bible are the preserved words. One looks at the legacy of the King James - 400 years. One looks at the simple fact it is translated from the "Textus Receptus". Alexandrian manuscripts don't agree are a small number compared to others that agree.

If the King James is not the preserved words of God, then where are they? Is God a liar?
 
Timothy... THANK YOU for this summary thread!
I am not telling you to not post links to sermons. Just give us a summary of the pertinent issues you want to discuss.

See how much more participation it gets?!
 
Timothy said:
Ransom said:
This pastor (Norris Belcher, I presume?) seems to have the same hangup as our Biblebeliever: whenever he reads "word" in the Bible, for some reason he sees "the KJV."

Why should we buy into that baseless assumption?

Based on the promise from God to preserve His Word the conclusion is that the King James Bible are the preserved words. One looks at the legacy of the King James - 400 years...

You should really toss your KJV then and get a Latin Vulgate.
 
FSSL said:
Timothy... THANK YOU for this summary thread!
I am not telling you to not post links to sermons. Just give us a summary of the pertinent issues you want to discuss.

See how much more participation it gets?!

I was amazed at how much extra stuff from the sermon really didn't need to be shared to get the point across.
 
Can we forget the KJV for a moment.

I ask this question. Does God promise to preserve His Word forever? or not?

It seems from the scriptures shared that he does. That seems clear to me anyway.

So - where is this preserved word? A Word that can judge people? A word that lives even after the earth passes away.

This is a valid question.
 
Timothy said:
I was amazed at how much extra stuff from the sermon really didn't need to be shared to get the point across.

Right on! And then we can see what exactly interested you in bringing it for discussion.
 
Back
Top