Featured KJV 2

The OO doctrine (originals only) originates from man, and it is not in the Bible.

 

And God did not promise any perfect, word-for-word translation. And for mankind, it's impossible to translate ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, & Koine Greek word-for-word into English, which is a much-more-comples language, as are all modern languages.

 

give ONE reason WHY the KJV is the only man-made translation this is Inspired? What about the New World Translation? What criteria is bring used to determine what amounts to Divine Inspiration? Your argument is MOOT!

 

I haven't read the rest of the thread, either, but maybe I can help here. The Bible was originally given in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek by a miraculous process. Miracles are perfect and produce perfection. They are also instantaneous.

However, preservation is a process that is not miraculous, but takes days, months, years, even hundreds of years. In the case of the KJV--which I love and use--we have in 2021 the product of a process of translation (for which we do not have the original, handwritten manuscripts), proofreading, and revision. Therefore, since it is not miraculous, then it is not a perfect translation.

Anyone who thinks the KJV we have in 2021 is a perfect translation must point to a miracle that made it so. No one does that. Therefore, theologically, it is impossible for the KJV to be a perfect translation.

One more point. If the KJV is perfect, I'd like someone to tell me how to get our Japanese NT from the TR to be perfect. I just added corrections from a proofreader to Revelation, and boy did we make the mistakes!

 

You do not prove your assertion to be true or scriptural.

If you understood and interpreted the Scriptures consistently and soundly in the light of the whole counsel of God, it would be clear that the process of inspiration concerned only the original-language Scriptures given to the prophets and apostles. There are no scripture verses or passages that suggest that the giving of Scripture by the process of inspiration continued after the completion of the New Testament.

 

God created, & superintends, all languages, causing/allowing all changes that come in them. But I believe He wants His word to be understood in all of them. Thus, He causes new translations of His word to be made in many of them. (We see John of Japan & crew hard at work perfecting a new Japanese version.) I'm sure he has encountered "Old Version Onlyists" in Japan, same as we have KJVOs in English-using lands. Those Japanese are just-as-wrong as the KJVOs are here. GOD IS NOT LIMITED in how He can choose to present His word to man. As He allows the languages to change, He causes His word to be re-translated to reflect those changes.

 

Can we assert positively from either the Bible or a dictionary that Glenn's definition of preservation is correct?

 

John, I wanted to take this out of the context of the endless Bible Versions debate to discuss on its on merit. So I have created a new thread that can be found here:

Are miracles always instantaneous?

Thanks.

 

What about the disciples having access to the scriptures but not knowing what they said until Christ opened their understanding? The Pharisees who God blinded also could not understand what they said.

 

The Encarta World English Dictionary gave as its second definition of the word preservation: “A keeping of something unchanged” while its first definition was “protection from harm” (p. 1422).

In the book entitled Thou Shalt Keep Them edited by Kent Brandenburg, the following definition is given for preservation: “complete, inerrant protection and general accessibility of every writing (vowels and consonants, words, and orders of letters and words) of the Bible, the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments, for every generation of believers” (p. 13). Ken Brandenburg asserted: “The position taken by the men writing this book is that scripture teaches God has preserved every and all of His Words to the very letter, and these Words are available to every generation. This is verbal, plenary preservation. These Words are preserved in the Hebrew and Aramaic Old Testament and the Greek New Testament” (p. 23).

KJV-only author David Daniels wrote: “The definition of Preserved is: manuscripts that are the same as what the original writers wrote under inspiration by the Holy Ghost” (51 Reasons, p. 105).

 

When Jesus read out of Isaiah in Luke chapter four He was not reading the originals, but copies of copies of the originals which involved divine preservation by God’s providence. Theologically, and being that the doctrine of preservation is all throughout God’s Word, preservation involves the workings of a miracle-working God. So if you want to point to a miracle, your miracle is within the Scriptures itself. Is not Psalms 12:6-7 (in the KJV) a miracle within itself?

As far as translating the TR into Japanese I know this is a difficult task. However, I would recommend doing as Francaise by Nadine L Stratford did with her French NT. Her Francaise; Le Nouveau Testament King James is a faithful translation (word by word) of the English KJV into French, in order to make it available to the French-speaking world. She used the KJV as a primary source (being the KJV translators already did the hard work from the TR editions) and the TR as secondary. Even with that, there still remains several words that she is seeking for the French to incorporate as to line up with the KJV.

Nowhere in Scripture does it say a translation cannot be perfect, only science and scholarship claims this. We either believe “every Word of God is pure and perfect” (Psalms 19:7; Pro 30:5) KJV, in the year 2021, or we believe the ‘Masters of Divinity’ and the ‘science” of the scholars (Malachi 2:12) KJV. It all comes down to what we have been taught and whether we believe God's promises about His own Word, or man's doubts about it.

Is not our God a miracle-working God? Is not our God able to preserve every one of His Words for us in the year 2021? Is not God able to do this? Yes, yes, and yes, for He is quite able, not only able, but has done this great work for us today.

It is our job as ministers to minister ‘faith’ in God’s Word, not spread doubts and questions about it (I Tim 1:4) KJV.

"And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible" (Mark 10:27) KJV.

 

"And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible" (Mark 10:27 (KJV).

 

But God didn't do it.

 

Are you suggesting that you may have been taught your erroneous human KJV-only reasoning?

Since God has not made any promise that says the word of God is bound to the inconsistent textual criticism decisions, Bible revision decisions, and translation decisions of one exclusive group of doctrinally-unsound Church of England critics in 1611, perhaps you are not believing God's actual promises but instead you may be deceiving yourself to believe some non-scriptural KJV-only assertions that are not true.

Perhaps deception may be worse than reasonable doubts concerning human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning/teaching that are in agreement with scriptural truths.

I believe God's promises about His own word, but I wisely choose not to believe blindly your subjective, human opinions about it.

 

Fred Butler, a former KJV-only advocate, asserted: “It becomes evident that KJVO advocates believe their position with a subjective, blind faith” (Royal Deceptions: Exposing the King James Only Conspiracies against God's Word, p. 28). Fred Butler maintained that “it is a blind faith because KJVO advocates stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the many truths witnessing against their core presuppositions” (p. 12).
Would Sam Gipp describe KJV-only blind faith as being “’Coward’s faith’ which cannot be tested” (Is Our English Bible Inspired, p. 21)?

Can true safety and certainty be found by shutting the eyes to truth and by retreating to blind faith in KJV-only premises that cannot be tested or that cannot be proven to be true?

 

So what? You do not prove your negative to be true.

Nowhere in Scriptures does it say a post-NT translation will be perfect, only unsound KJV-only science or KJV-only scholarship claims this.

 

Forgive me, but I don't think you are understanding the difference between a miracle and providence. Preservation in Scripture is clearly a function of providence. Study it out. The terms "preservation" and "preserve" occur many times in Scripture.

Now, let me ask you. I am the lead translator of a new Japanese NT. Now, how can that translation become perfect like the KJV is (according to you)? Can I dispense with the proofreaders? (And the KJV was proofread many times.) How exactly--process or miracle, whatever--the the KJV actually, practically speaking, come to perfection in your view? Please give me steps that can be duplicated. It would be wonderful if we could have a perfect Japanese Bible, wouldn't it?

I have to run. Church time. But I'll be back tomorrow.