Psalm 12:6,7

Are 6,500 adulterated words in NIV preserved by God? No!

Are 4,000+ adulterated words in NASB preserved by God? No!

Is John 1:1 in NASB, NIV and KJV preserved by God? Yes! Because they identified with the wording of the apographs/autographs

 

What is your assumption here? How do you determine 'adulterated' words?

In Christ,
Neal

 

neal4christ: "What is your assumption here?
How do you determine 'adulterated' words?"

Ms Riplinger said it,
i believe it,
and that settles it

 

Amazing, the convoluted and misplaced logic in order to prove one's pet ERROR!

No matter what Psalm 12 says, it said it in HEBREW!

Jesus talked about jots and tittles, even the KJV has preserved the fact that Jesus reffered to the HEBREW letters not English letters.

Some good advice for the KJVO brethren:

Proverbs 30
5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

HankD

 

Psalm 12:6-7 refer to the Greek and Hebrew MSS. We have 2 families of MSS: Traditional MSS and Alexandrian MSS. They disagreed each others a few thousand times.

 

Askjo, Psalm 12:6-7 would be referring to the Hebrew. However, since it is not about the words, but the fact that God would preserve the righteous forever, it is not a problem.

 

Surely you know that your KJV has no jots or tittles in it. Not a one of them has been preserved. Not only that, but there are many textual variants which show that the "exact words" are not known in every case. Since we do not have the originals, we are left making decisions between two or more readings in many cases.

Most orthodox evangelical Christians disagree with you by faith. But the real issue is that these various Greek texts do not differ enough to make any real difference. To say that one is corrupt and the other not is 1) unprovable and 2) unproductive. There are not significant differences that affect any doctrine. There is no "vast difference between the text that underlies the KJV and the modern English versions." If someone told you that there was a vast difference then they were not telling you the truth.

That means that the TR cannot be the word of God because it differs from itself in its various versions. You see this argument falls apart because the various editions of the KJV are different and the various editions of the TR are different. By your own argument, you have removed the possibility of the word of God from anyone.

 

Correct (although the OT TR is the Masora text).
I believe the TR (The Scrivener text in particular) is the virtual reproduction of the NT.
That is, it is the reproduction of the koine NT given in the originals as far as is humanly possible.

Psalm 12:6-7 is the model by which scribes are to reproduce the Word of God and in the limits of the receptor language, it is the model for translation as well.

This is evident in that these words are to be "purified" (Hebrew zaqaq) or refined.
God gives His Word perfectly with no need of improvement, we must continually work at refining out of the text human errors due to mispelling, homeoteleuton, etc. as well as willful manipulation by heretics and foolish men.

As in EVERY human endeavor we have not succeded perfectly in this task which is also evident in the KJV. No sooner had it been published than errors were detected and refined out then and over the centuries. It has been so long now that the KJV English is no longer the "koine" common English of the English speaking people.

Even at that there are weaknesses in our beloved KJV which no amount of misguided double-speak can remove, such as "Easter" of Acts 12:4.

HankD

 

Jack Moorman does not tell the truth about a number of these things. But the question is, How does he know that these words are "missing"? The evidence shows that Jack Moorman started with the wrong text. These 2886 words were more likely added, not taken away.

2886 out of the tens of thousands of words is not vast, not by any definition I know of. On top of that, these words are not all of equal weight. Missing an article (which is many of these differences) is not a "vast difference."

Another man not known for his honesty in this matter.

List a few. I have seen many lists like this but have yet to see one doctrine that is affected by it. I have read much of the material available from both sides and have yet to see anyone show even one doctrine that is affected.

The bottom line is that unless you, Moorman, or Waite recently came across the autographs, you have no way of knowing whether or not your KJV is word for word. The evidence that God has preserved shows that it is not and that evidence is all the evidence there is. Let's be honest with the facts and quick making stuff up.

 

Pastor Larry made some excellent point in response to this. I hope you consider them.

But regarding your "VAST DIFFERENCE", let me put something into perspective for you:

First, the number includes the word count for Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53 - 8:11. In the KJV, there are 783,137 words. A difference of 2,886 words is 0.36%, or 3.6 words per 1000. If we don't include the word count for Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53 - 8:11, because these passages ARE included in "modern versions" anyway, that minute number drops to 0.32%. If we were to look at this percentage as a test score, is there a "VAST DIFFERENCE" between, say, a score of 99.58% and 99.94%?

But even if we, instead of compare to the whole English Bible, just compare to the Greek Textus Receptus of the New Testament (Moorman's numbers use the 1550 Stephanus edition), we see that because the TR (1550 Stephanus) has 140,521 words, the "VAST DIFFERENCE" you are talking about is 2.05% - are two test scores, 97% and 99%, a vast difference? Again that difference includes Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53 - 8:11 as a difference. If we don't include this in the calculation, the difference drops to less than 1.8%.

Can you say "mountain out of a molehill"?

How do you know this 2% difference has been "removed" from the critical text, instead of added to the received text? And I echo Pastor Larry's challenge for posting doctrines affected - this challenge has been made before here on the Baptist Board, and to my recollection no one was ever able to find any.

 

One other calculation for you to consider:

Going purely by word counts, the difference between the critical text and the received text is 2,886 words (if you include Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53 - 8:11). However, what if we compared the received text (1550 Stephanus) to the English NT as rendered in the KJV, we find an even larger difference. The KJV NT has 180,552 words, resulting in a word-count difference of 40,031 words! This is **13.87 times larger** than the "VAST DIFFERENCE" you are attacking in the critical text.

 

Many naturalistic scholars including you said same thing. Let me show you what doctrines are on these passages:

Luke 4:8

NIV -- "Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only."

NASB -- "Jesus answered him, "It is written, 'YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND SERVE HIM ONLY."

ESV -- "And Jesus answered him, "It is written, "'You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve."

CEV -- "Jesus answered, "The Scriptures say:
`Worship the Lord your God and serve only him!"

KJV -- "And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."

Do you deny the doctrine of Satan?

Matthew 25:13

NIV -- "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour."

NASB -- "Be on the alert then, for you do not know the day nor the hour."

ESV -- "Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour."

CEV -- "So, my disciples, always be ready! You don't know the day or the time when all this will happen."

KJV -- " Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh."

Do you deny the doctrine of Jesus Christ is affected by any modern versions?

Modern versions destroy the names of Jesus Christ:

Jesus in NIV 38 times! in NASB 73 times! in Nestles 82 times! in W/H 78 times!

Christ in NIV 43 times! in NASB 43 times! Nestles 44 times! W/H 43 times!

Lord in NIV 35 times! NASB in 35 times! Nestles 37 times! in W/H 36 times!

Why did they not reverence the name of Jesus Christ? And you?

 

Pastor Larry, you can't deny the evidence what Jack Moorman showed.

I already show you a few verses affected by modern versions.

Are many naturalistic scholars honest to tell the facts?

 

If you would check out Matt. 16:23 and Mark 8:33 in the NIV or other MV's, you will see that there is no attempt to deny the doctrine of Satan in this episode. The issue is not doctrinal; rather, it is what did the Holy Spirit moved Luke to write?

Andy

 

OK, let's talk about Psalm 12:6-7. You can't just claim by dogmatic assertion that these verses refer to the preservation of the words of Scripture. You have to take into account the Hebrew grammar and the context, both of which point away from your view. You have to have an answer for why the KJV translators specifically point out that these verses refer to the preservation of the godly. Take a look at Spurgeon and Matthew Henry, two men who commented on this passage before the modern controversy. What do they have to say about the passage?

Andy