Why has the KJV been so popular?

Would it be seeking to learn the truth to seem to avoid, dodge, or evade the actual facts concerning imperfections, blemishes, flaws, or errors in varying KJV editions?

It would be in agreement with scriptural truth to accept the correction of errors introduced by men in copying, in translating, or in printing the Scriptures.

 

You can go on a witch hunt or you can compare translations. I think it is safe to say the one who compares translations spends study time more wisely.

 

Really? You really want to say this? I have never, ever attacked you for using the KJV. I have only disagreed with statements you have made. If that is attacking you, we'd better shut down the whole BB.

Keep using it, then.

No, I don't, but how is that relevant?

I'm a linguist who has taught three different languages, and therefore have professional knowledge about how to ascertain the meaning of words.

 

Hello? Are you there? Did you pay any attention at all to my clear delineation between creation and preservation?

You don't say what text Heisler is discussing. Regardless of his weird interpretations (and weird "Naked Bible Conference"--really??), there are many, many passages where elohim is clearly about idols. Here are just a few in Genesis alone:

Ge 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Ge 31:30 And now, [though] thou wouldest needs be gone, because thou sore longedst after thy father's house, [yet] wherefore hast thou stolen my gods?
Ge 31:32 With whomsoever thou findest thy gods, let him not live: before our brethren discern thou what [is] thine with me, and take [it] to thee. For Jacob knew not that Rachel had stolen them.
Ge 35:2 Then Jacob said unto his household, and to all that [were] with him, Put away the strange gods that [are] among you, and be clean, and change your garments:
Ge 35:4 And they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which [were] in their hand, and [all their] earrings which [were] in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the oak which [was] by Shechem.

 

The only statements I've made are about God's providence making the KJV the most popular bible in the past 400 years. And those relating to this.

Unless you think and reason in the ancient languages of the bible, you use the same books I do for looking up definitions and grammar.

 

I explained how God created all for his good pleasure which means things are just as he would have them and preserve them.

I only quoted Jesus without comment. And Heiser who also sheds insight.

 

Yeah, that's my point. You are not interacting in the slightest with my very relevant points

I guarantee I'm not using the same books you are. Do you use the Blass/Debrunner, Wallace, and A. T. Robertson advanced grammars? The BAGD, Abbot Smith, and other advanced lexicons? The BDB Hebrew lexicon? These are professional level works.

I don't use Strong's and Young's.

 

Why has the KJV been so popular?

KJV
"The Knoweth Jesus Version has legions of disciples who herald it as the only legitimate form of the Scriptures, claiming that all others have been developed through a partnership between the New World Order and Satan himself in order to make sure they don’t knoweth Jesus. KJVers contend that modern Satanic versions intentionally obscure important Christian truths like the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, and the NASA flat-earth cover-up. Also a top choice for readability, memorization, and open-air preaching at sporting events."​

From: The Bee Explains: Main Differences Between Popular Bible Translations

 

Nope. I won't let you get away with a flippant, non-specific answer. Creation and preservation are two different things. Creation is miraculous, and miracles take place in an instant of time. Providence is a process, not a miracle. Until you distinguish between the two and tell how your supposed perfect preservation takes place, you are not being Biblical.

And again I'll ask, what text was Heisler discussing?

 

Everything I've said revolves around God providing the KJV over the past 400 years and not the others.

I use BDG and BDAG, Kittle, Louw Nida, Mounce, Robertson and some others.

 

Both creation and preservation (the unfolding of creation) aka the eternal decree and predestination are miraculous.

Much of Heiser's work centers on: “God stands in the assembly of El; in the midst of the gods he renders judgment.” (Psalm 82:1)

 

That is providential, but not miraculous.

Very well then. Stick to those and ditch Strong's and Young's.

 

Did you read my reply before posting this?

 

No reputable theologian says that providence is miraculous.

“By preservation we mean that God, by a continuous agency, maintains in existence all the things which He has made, together with all their properties and powers. In preservation we have, therefore, the first manifestation of God’s sovereign rule. Note what this definition implies: it implies that preservation is to be distinguished from the act of creation, for that can only be preserved which is already in existence; that the objective creation is not self-existent and self-sustaining; and that preservation is not merely a refraining from destroying that which has been created.” Henry Thiessen, Lectures on Systematic Theology, p. 174. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1949)

“The providence of God means the continuing action of God in preserving his creation and guiding it toward his intended purposes.” (Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998), 412.

“Preservation is that continuous agency of God by which he maintains in existence the things he has created, together with the properties and powers with which he has endowed them. As the doctrine of creation is our attempt to explain the existence of the universe, so the doctrine of preservation is our attempt to explain its continuance.” A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1907, pp. 410-411.

To be fair here, I consulted my Ph.D. scholar son, who says that Heiser is a genuine evangelical. Perhaps I should call him an "off the wall" evangelical, because his theory about elohim is unique to him. I disagree with it.

 

Everything is miraculous because God makes it happen for his glory.

 

So you've read every reputable theologian? And lead us into believing you have making this bold claim?

Heiser has much to say on our topic of interest.

 

Then you are redefining "miracle." If everything is miraculous than nothing is providential because there is then no difference between a miracle and providence. Study the NT usages of the term--the KJV if you will. Every single miracle/sign/dunamis done by Jesus and the apostles occurred instantaneously. There is not a single usage of the word "miracle" in the Bible wherein the event was a process. So your opinion that everything God does is miraculous is not based on the Biblical data.