4/6/19

Why You Should Be King James Only: Because The Holy Ghost Is ... He Has Rejected All Westcott-Hort Versions [Video]


Modern 'Bibles' Rejected By The Holy Ghost

vidlink

Video embed code [adjust height/width as needed]:

<iframe src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/VPZyomhK0jar/" width="550" height="309"</iframe>


__________________________________________________

[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 from: The Holy Ghost The Original King-James-Only -- No King James, No Holy Ghost!

Compare also: According To The ESV, NASB, NKJV, NIV, Etc. The Gospel Message Is 'Foolishness' And 'Folly' - Danger Danger "The message of the gospel is foolishness and folly? Yes yes it is true. The message of the gospel is foolishness and folly and God is pleased. The 'bible' says so...if that is...you will believe the Westcott-Hort aka Nestle-Aland so-called modern bible versions. The gospel message is foolishness and folly - it says so right in 1 Corinthians 1:21..."


This image may be freely used, reproduced, posted, etc.

Rev. 18:4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Said the apostle Paul: 2Cor. 2:17 "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God..."

27 comments :

Anonymous said...

Mark 16:15
(ASV) And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to the whole creation.

(NASB) And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.

(KJV) And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

(NKJV) And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.

(MKJV) And He said to them, Go into all the world, proclaim the gospel to all the creation.

(LITV) And He said to them, Going into all the world, preach the gospel to all the creation.

(YLT) and he said to them, 'Having gone to all the world, proclaim the good news to all the creation;

(AMP) And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.

(NLT) And then he told them, “Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone.

(ESV) And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.

(NIV) He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.

(RSV) And he said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation.

(NRSV) And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation.

tom m. said...

In response to anon directly above:

...and use the KJV or you'll be doing it without the Holy Ghost.

Anonymous said...

And also in response to the anon at the top:

That good news that you are supposedly talking about, is called foolishness in the "modern versions". The KJV (a.k.a., the Bible) doesn't call the Gospel foolish.

Anonymous said...

Matthew Henry commentary in 1 Cor 1:18


II. We have the different effects of this preaching: To those who perish it is foolishness, but to those who are saved it is the power of God, 1Co 1:18. It is to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolishness; but unto those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God, 1Co 1:23, 1Co 1:24. 1. Christ crucified is a stumbling-block to the Jews. They could not get over it. They had a conceit that their expected Messiah was to be a great temporal prince, and therefore would never own one who made so mean an appearance in life, and died so accursed a death, for their deliverer and king. They despised him, and looked upon him as execrable, because he was hanged on a tree, and because he did not gratify them with a sign to their mind, though his divine power shone out in innumerable miracles. The Jews require a sign, 1Co 1:22. See Mat 12:38. 2. He was to the Greeks foolishness. They laughed at the story of a crucified Saviour, and despised the apostles' way of telling it. They sought for wisdom. They were men of wit and reading, men that had cultivated arts and sciences, and had, for some ages, been in a manner the very mint of knowledge and learning. There was nothing in the plain doctrine of the cross to suit their taste, nor humour their vanity, nor gratify a curious and wrangling temper: they entertained it therefore with scorn and contempt. What, hope to be saved by one that could not save himself! And trust in one who was condemned and crucified as a malefactor, a man of mean birth and poor condition in life, and cut off by so vile and opprobrious a death! This was what the pride of human reason and learning could not relish. The Greeks thought it little better than stupidity to receive such a doctrine, and pay this high regard to such a person: and thus were they justly left to perish in their pride and obstinacy. Note, It is just with God to leave those to themselves who pour such proud contempt on divine wisdom and grace. 3. To those who are called and saved he is the wisdom of God, and the power of God. Those who are called and sanctified, who receive the gospel, and are enlightened by the Spirit of God, discern more glorious discoveries of God's wisdom and power in the doctrine of Christ crucified than in all his other works. Note, Those who are saved are reconciled to the doctrine of the cross, and led into an experimental acquaintance with the mysteries of Christ crucified.

tom m. said...

To Anon (directly above)

Only posted this one comment of three - the other two being equally lengthy. A comment thread is not intended for posting long portions of bible commentaries. In this case, for one, it is somewhat off-topic to this post, and, the point you would make (you did not make one) is not clear. Anyway, this subject was the topic of this post on 1Cor. 1:21 (linked above also):

According To The ESV, NASB, NKJV, NIV, Etc. The Gospel Message Is 'Foolishness' And 'Folly' - Danger Danger

and in the comments for that post. Have a look if interested....

AV

Anonymous said...

As you wish. The point was the commentary, one of the best, clearly explains "what" is foolish, if you would have cared to read it. But you prefer to simply pound the table with your KJV only narrative, which is not correct. Whatever, I don't expect you'll publish this comment either.

Anonymous said...

And I posted mark 16:15 as an example for your readers to determine (and think) for themselves, whether or not the "KJV only" narrative is the correct one. I don't expect this comment to be posted either.

tom m. said...

The "message" itself being foolish, or, the "foolishness of preaching" - this question was addressed, and answered, in the linked post (and comments) 3rd comment above.

Two entirely different things. One is plainly heretical. Some do refuse to accept what is plain to others though. Likewise with the subject of KJV vs. the Westcott-Hort`s.

The person of the Holy Ghost mia in WH's not a huge problem? Might want to rethink that.

Anyway, you recommend Matthew Henry's commentary on this verse/passage. By all means...compare and contrast all.

Anonymous said...

It is not foolishness to preach the message. In fact, we are commanded to do just that (please see again, Mark 16:15). To those who are perishing, the message (yes, of the gospel) APPEARS to them to be "foolish". They (the unsaved, who are perishing), consider that message, and it's content, to be "foolish". They consider it "foolish" due to their pride (among other things). By the grace of God and the Holy Spirit, some will come to believe. Salvation is open to anyone. Whether the Holy Spirit is called the Holy Spirit or the Holy Ghost is of no matter. They mean exact.y the same thing.

Instead of your "KJV only" preaching, it would be wiser, and more profitable (as well as correct) to teach your readers how to compare MULTIPLE translations, as well as the verses in each that may not be worded best.

Anonymous said...

It seems to me people here are more interested in using human intellect to seek out supposed flaws in different versions of the Bible instead of seeking the Lord and his guidance in the matter. It also seems to me the person who placed this blog needs to be more informed about the word of God. While it is true the NIV leaves out parts of the Bible, and the same is true about the roman catholic bible, the mormon's bible ( 7th day Adventist's ) and the Jehovah's witness's bible in which these churches all have deliberately taken from the word of God and added their own MAN MADE teachings. I am not an expert in the word of God, I am just a believer in the Lord trying my best to follow him faithfully. But it is clear to me that such cults, (and yes I called the R.C.C., Mormon's and J.W.'s cults because they follow man made teachings, NOT the teachings of the Holy Spirit), are such as which the Holy Spirit is warning us to 'come out from them' if we/you are such people following these man made taught cults. While I am struggling in my faith at this time, I would say to those in these cults, that it seems to my conviction this verse is for you - "Come out of them.....!"

tom m. said...

To anon (above two comments)

See: 2Kings 4:38-40. The 'modern' versions you are advocating for are the 'wild gourds' of Westcott and Hort. The result has been 'death in the pot'.

The difference between the KJV and all others, the WH 'bibles', is this: the KJV is living, the others, all of them, are "death in the pot".

No truce is possible between what is living and 'death in the pot'. The two positions are irreconcilable. Furthermore, no comparisons are needful, or even helpful. Another gospel (death in the pot WH versions), wrote Paul the apostle - let him be accursed who preaches another gospel - Gal. 1:8-9

Anon you are fighting for wild gourds and death in the pot - and another gospel.

The last part of 2Kings 4:40 tells us this about the wild-gourd stew: "And they could not eat thereof"

Anyway, you've had your say, and like last time, time to give it a rest.

For the record, to those that do have ears to hear, reject, as has the Holy Ghost, wild gourd stew.

AV

Anonymous said...

Yes, let's end this thread then with your ridiculous nonsense as the last post...

HFHP said...

Thank you for continuing to expose everything false and the evil abounding today.
Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord. 1Cor 15:58

tom m. said...

Some differences in the KJV vs. Westcott/Hort - an example: missing words

The KJV has 783,137 words
***
NKJV: 770,430 words (-12,707)
Twelve thousand seven hundred seven words missing in NKJV
***
NIV: 727,969 words (-55,168); another NIV: [there have been many NIV revisions] 726,109 words (-57,028)

Fifty five thousand one hundred sixty eight - or - fifty seven thousand twenty eight words missing in the NIV
***
ESV: 757,439 words (-25,698)
Twenty five thousand six hundred ninety eight words missing in the ESV
***
Tens of thousands of missing words, including many whole verses, in the Sinaiticus-Vaticanus Westcott Hort`s.

source: word count
~~~~~~~
Luke 4:4 'And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God'

tom m. said...

Some differences between KJV and Westcott/Hort`s - missing (words) half-verses (that destroy critical doctrine). One example of many:

KJV speaking of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in Colossians 1:14 tells us this:

'In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:'

NIV: 'in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.' [no blood, no 'even']

NASB: 'in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins' [no blood, no 'even']

ESV: 'in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins' [no blood, no 'even']

Redemption not "through his blood"?

A blood-less gospel is 'another gospel'. Another gospel comes only by 'another spirit'. It is not the work of the Holy Ghost.

tsisageya said...

Which is it, experts? A camel through the eye of a needle, or a rope through the eye of a needle? Does it even matter? Each one says it no matter what the jot or tittle is.

Help me Jesus.

Strait? Narrow? Straight? Treacherous? This is ridiculous. You are ridiculous.
Your argument is moot. But go ahead with yourself, you fake.

You've got nothing that exalts Jesus Christ.

lila said...

Thank you Tom for contending, and remaining faithful to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I'm almost positive you are quite younger than I, but you have been insightful, and helpful to me in my yearning for the things of God (out of the mouth of babes). I turn my computer on, so I might find like minded people, pursuing the things of God, and I believe that's why the Spirit of God leads me back each time to your website. Where I may find a truth that will help me to keep seeking HIM,along with reading my bible(kjv), and prayer. I believe it shows in your communications here that you truly love the Lord Jesus Christ, as I do.

Anonymous said...

Lila, AMEN!

tom m. said...

*not all that young Lila

Linda said...

We are to tell the truth about all things. the old Catholic translation Dounay has about 80 translation of Holy Ghost.

Handal was also Lutheran so it is very, very likely that he was baptized as an infant and witnessed infant baptism which is mention by many church fathers positively, also many many children used to die in childhood.

Handal almost certainly kept Lent if he was Lutheran as was Bach. it is how they learned about our Lord Jesus Christ. I was brought up on KJV in the Lutheran church school I went to and if mainstream denominations had not for centuries taught from KJV it would have gone out of print and the ones who don't attend church would not have KJV.

tom m. said...

Linda yes let us tell the truth. The Catholic Douay does have Holy Ghost. The Douay actually pre-dates the KJV (pre-1611). As far as I'm aware all English bibles before the KJV had Holy Ghost, for instance the Geneva, the Bishops, all the way back to the very first English bible the Wycliffe - about 1382 or so.

Here is the thing about that - regarding the 'KJV-only' debate - none of these bibles are even in that conversation. The Geneva and the Bishops were good translations for the time, but are not used today. The KJV has replaced them. Perhaps a few people still have them but they are not generally used. Some few Catholics may still use the Douay but - note - it is only used by Catholics.

Here a distinction is necessary to answer the issue you raise. This would be a distinction between what we might call the 'Catholic world' and the 'Christian world'. The two are different, and they do not intersect - although many are trying to bridge them. Catholicism is a religion unto itself. It has it's own doctrines - none of which are scriptural by the way - and it has it's own Catholic-only bible. It used to be the Douay, now replaced by 'modern' also Catholic-only versions. The Douay has never (or the new versions) been recognized by the 'Christian world' as a legitmate bible. That is just a fact.

Interesting thing - the KJV translators knew about this Catholic bible and rejected it, even to the point of referencing it negatively in the preface to the KJV, calling the translation "the obscurity of the papists":

"We have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their ‘azymes’, ‘tunik’, ‘rational’, ‘holocausts’, ‘prepuce’, ‘pasche’, and a number of such like, whereof their late translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof it may be kept from being understood." ("The Translators to the Reader," King James Version, 1611 ed.)

This to make the point - the Douay (very different than the KJV) has never been accepted in the 'Christian world' as legitimate, and consequently has never been used by the 'Christian world'. The Douay is a Catholic-only bible, thus a Catholic-only conversation (and little if any used these days).

As far as the KJV-only debate goes, the 'Catholic world' does not have any such debate. This is a 'Christian world' debate only. The Catholic-only Douay is not and never has been in that conversation - any more than the Jehovah's Witnesses bible is actually.

Again, 'Catholic' and 'Christian' these are two seperate worlds (so to speak).

As for infant baptism and lent - these are two perfect examples of totally unscriptural Catholic doctrines. What Handel may or may not have done 250 years ago can not be used to prove anything. If you want to make a case for these Catholic things you will have to start by finding scripture proof. This you will not be able to do.

Catholicism truly is another spirit, another gospel.

Last point of telling the truth - in answer to your last statement - the KJV exists today not because of anything man has done, the KJV exists today because the LORD God keeps his own Word himself.

Rev. 18:4

Martha said...

I burnt my KJV only version of the bible as it was translated by those were not educated in the Holy Word of our LORD Jesus Christ. I am in awe (not in an inspired way) of those who claim it is the literal word of a god.

It is no wonder that abuse against born again women exists in the church world, for the abusers use the KJV against women as a weapon. Jesus sees and will punish the wicked for their lying interpretations.

Set free from the KJV in the Name of my Savior, Jesus Christ! Alleluia.

And Tom, you can insult and minimize me until the cows come home using your so called knowledge. But my Savior's Word (the non-kjv) will protect and sustain me.


Martha...….a non-Catholic, and a non Lutheran....but in truth, a born again believer in Jesus Christ

tom m. said...

to Martha (above comment)

...burnt your KJV?

That's what Westcott and Hort did too -

Tried to conform the Word of God to their liking.

Matthew 4:4



Anonymous said...

Martha, you sound like an angry feminist. Perhaps the following will appeal to you...

Tired of seeing their holy texts used to justify the subjugation of women, a group of feminist theologians from across the Protestant-Catholic divide have joined forces to draft “A Women’s Bible”.

So now you have something to replace the KJV you tossed in the trash.

2 Tim. 4:3-4, "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears. 3) And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."

Anonymous said...

Martha, correction...you burned your KJV! A lot of anger had to have been behind that action rather than just tossing it in the trash. When I learned about all the errors and ommissions in the NIV, I simply tossed my NIV into the trash; never occurred to me to burn it. Did you enjoy watching your KJV Bible burn to ashes? Just curious. I've never read a comment like yours before.

Linda said...

Tom, Do you think Lutherans are Christians? or Methodists or Episcopalians or any liturgical church?

Christians had to struggle with how to apply the things Jesus commanded, infant baptism usually had Godparents who vowed to help this child learn of Jesus Christ and live according to the Bible. Before people had to travel and move so often for their work and Godparents lost track of their Godchild it was a good system for helping the next generation of Christians.

St. Paul mentioned a very strange thing, he said why is there baptism for the dead if there is no resurrection, do you have any ideas on what he meant. I have read that new Christians at that time were often killed by the Romans so quickly that there wasn't time to be baptized and that at that time Christians believed that if they sinned after baptism there was nothing that could help them obtain forgiveness so they put it off til near death. Don't know if that makes sense but neither does baptism FOR the dead which Paul mentioned at the same time as why did I wrestle with the beasts at Epheses if there is no rising from the dead which shows how vicious the efforts of the Pharisees were so early on.

If you don't mind sharing your beliefs on communion, I would like to hear about how you think of Christians receiving the Bread of Life and if you believe in water baptism, many people online don't One person wrote that Jesus who did not have any sin was baptised with water and that was good enough for her/him. Some people say that the washing of the word is what is meant.

tom m. said...

re: Lutherans are Christians? or Methodists or Episcopalians or any liturgical church?

Revelation 2 and 3 are widely accepted as giving a prophetic overview of church history. The last church mentioned is Laodicea [Rev. 3:14-22]. This passage draws a picture - as it were - of the final stage of church history. The most significant thing revealed here is in the 20th verse. In the 20th verse we find the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ - not in the church - but outside of the church. He is at the door knocking. Those on the inside do not not even know that he is not inside, or hear him knocking. The Lord Jesus though is calling to the individual - if any man in there can still hear - to come out unto him [Rev. 3:20]. On the inside all is apostasy - that is the meaning of these prophetic verses. The entire outward-professing church today - Christendom - is that church of Rev. 3-14-22. It is apostate Laodicea. This is the prophecy, and it is the case today. The Lord Jesus is outside - that's where believers must be too.

re: baptism for the dead if there is no resurrection

This verse is in a passage in 1 Cor. 15 [1 Cor. 15:29]. The apostle Paul was writing in defense of the fact of resurrection. There was opposition, some claiming that it was not true [1 Cor. 15:12]. One point of that defense is what he brings up in the 29th verse. Apparently there was some sort of religious sect in Corinth at that time (not Christians) - that were known for practicing a certain ritual - namely 'baptizing for the dead'. The writer Paul is making the point to those who were challenging the truth of the resurrection to say that the concept of resurrection is not so strange or unthinkable as you would make it - for look - even the heathen believe in resurrection which is the reason they do their ritual.

re: water baptism

Clearly biblical, believers clearly instructed by scripture to be water baptised; see Acts ch. 8 Philip and the man of Ethiopia a eunuch. After Philip "preached unto him Jesus" [Acts 8:35] the man asked about baptism. Philip led him in a confession of faith [Acts 8:37] and then took him down into the water [Acts 8:36-38]. Water baptism, fully immersed. Baptism is not for infants. Can an infant make a profession of faith? Baptism must be with understanding of what it means.

re: communion

Believers are also clearly instructed in scripture to partake of communion, the bread and wine (grape juice commonly used) are symbols. This is the difference between the catholic doctrine which says the bread and wine magically 'transform' into the actual body and blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. That, as you surely know, is the catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. This is a horrible false teaching, a great heresy.