A Bible Doctrine of Preservation

[Michael Hollner]

"Pie in the sky by and by." The link you gave does not call English a "universal language." English is not the universal language nor will it ever be. Have you ever visited another country and tried to get by? Every people group has their "heart language" and deserves the Word of God in that language. You can go to most of the world and not be able to communicate in English.

All Japanese kids take 6 years of English (Jr. High & HS), but it's mostly grammar, so very few can actually speak it, comprehend it, or read the Bible (any translation) in it. The same holds true for all of Asia. I have lived with Asians, preached to them in several nations, currently teach several Asians in our Bible college and seminary. English is NOT the universal language any place in Asia, and not even the lingua franca.

There are nations where English is the lingua franca (some people groups in Africa, PNG, etc.). But that's not the same as "universal language."

Yes, I agree, perhaps universal was not the right word, but English is used and spoken in many nations. My associate visits China often and says a lot of Chinese people speak English over there and they even have English billboards and ads.

'Have you ever visited another country and tried to get by?'

Yes, I did missionary work in Venezuela in the 80s and learned Spanish the best I could. But I needed a translator when I preached out of my NIV. After one sermon a Spanish preacher came up to me and said my preaching was 'dry.' Then when I got back to the states in 84 and off to Bible college, I ditched my NIV for a KJV. Needless to say, I have not been told since that my preaching was dry.

John, despite our disagreements, I am glad you're trying to reach the Japanese people.

Blessings

 

[37818]

Because He said He would, and I believe He did. It all comes down to what we believe.

What did God actually promise that you are referring to? God is immutable so His word is immutable.

 

[37818]

The bible itself ONLY claims inspiration for the originals penned down by Apostle's and Prophets!

As the written word it claims "inspiration." . . . θεοπνευστος . . . .

 

[Conan]

Yes, there were various printing errors and typos that were all corrected over the years. But the text has remained the same and never changes, as in the annual updates we get now in our day from the modern versions.

Changes in the King James version

 

[John of Japan]

Yes, I agree, perhaps universal was not the right word, but English is used and spoken in many nations. My associate visits China often and says a lot of Chinese people speak English over there and they even have English billboards and ads.

Depends on where in China. Hong Kong residents are all taught English (I've been there), because of all of its years under England, and most speak it. However, I do not believe that is true in the rest of China.

Yes, I did missionary work in Venezuela in the 80s and learned Spanish the best I could. But I needed a translator when I preached out of my NIV. After one sermon a Spanish preacher came up to me and said my preaching was 'dry.' Then when I got back to the states in 84 and off to Bible college, I ditched my NIV for a KJV. Needless to say, I have not been told since that my preaching was dry.

Good to know. I'm glad you have a missionary's heart.

John, despite our disagreements, I am glad you're trying to reach the Japanese people.

Blessings

You will be glad to know that our Japanese NT from the Scrivener TR (first in Japanese history) has been competed, and is now at the printer, and my team is working on the OT (from the MT) now.

 

[Logos1560]

. But the text has remained the same and never changes, as in the annual updates we get now in our day from the modern versions.

You do not prove your claims to be true. The underlying text of the 1611 edition of the KJV has been changed to a different underlying text in some cases. 1 Corinthians 12:28 would be one example.
The underlying text for the 1611's use of "God" at Genesis 6:5 and some other verses likely was the Latin Vulgate or an English Bible influenced by the Vulgate while later editors changed the underlying text to the Hebrew by changing it to "GOD" or to "the LORD".

 

[Michael Hollner]

Depends on where in China. Hong Kong residents are all taught English (I've been there), because of all of its years under England, and most speak it. However, I do not believe that is true in the rest of China.
Good to know. I'm glad you have a missionary's heart.


You will be glad to know that our Japanese NT from the Scrivener TR (first in Japanese history) has been competed, and is now at the printer, and my team is working on the OT (from the MT) now.

That's the most positive news I have heard today. Please send me a link or info on how to buy a copy for I may not be back on here for a while.

Blessings...

 

[John of Japan]

That's the most positive news I have heard today. Please send me a link or info on how to buy a copy for I may not be back on here for a while.

Blessings...

It is being printed by Bearing Precious Seed at: Bearing Precious Seed. I'm not sure how they handle individual copies, but I'm sure you'll be able to get one.

 

[JesusFan]

"Pie in the sky by and by." The link you gave does not call English a "universal language." In fact, the figure it gives of the number of English speakers is only about 1/6th of the world's population. (Edited in: That website is not accurate, anyway. For example, it says that "there aren’t any gender-specific nouns" in Chinese. Not true. Chinese has male 他 and female 她 pronouns, words for man 男 and woman 女, etc.)

English is not the universal language nor will it ever be. Have you ever visited another country and tried to get by? Every people group has their "heart language" and deserves the Word of God in that language. You can go to most of the world and not be able to communicate in English.

All Japanese kids take 6 years of English (Jr. High & HS), but it's mostly grammar, so very few can actually speak it, comprehend it, or read the Bible (any translation) in it. The same holds true for all of Asia. I have lived with Asians, preached to them in several nations, currently teach several Asians in our Bible college and seminary. English is NOT the universal language any place in Asia, and not even the lingua franca.

There are nations where English is the lingua franca (some people groups in Africa, PNG, etc.). But that's not the same as "universal language."

Since KJVO would view the kjv as being THE translation of God for and to us, would that mean majority of the world that does not speak English God will not give them a reliable version to hear and to read?

 

[JesusFan]

So all of a sudden some KJVO types get excited about this thread, but not one of them chooses to interact with the theology I have given.

If someone who believes in a perfect KJV would like to interact, they must prove at what time the KJV became perfect. It had to be through a miracle, as I have shown with solid theology. The KJV authors never claimed inspiration, they never claimed perfection for their work, they never claimed that they translated miraculously.

The 1611 translators were not KJVO!

 

[JesusFan]

Because He said He would, and I believe He did. It all comes down to what we believe.

Blessings....

He was speaking of His originals, and not any translations yet to come!

 

[JesusFan]

As the written word it claims "inspiration." . . . θεοπνευστος . . . .

Yes, but that only applies to the Originals given to and penned down by His Apostles and prophets!

 

[John of Japan]

Since KJVO would view the kjv as being THE translation of God for and to us, would that mean majority of the world that does not speak English God will not give them a reliable version to hear and to read?

There is a logical disjunct there in light of the Great Commission, which all Bible believers must acknowledge and obey. Matthew 28:18-20 demands Bible translation.

 

[JesusFan]

You do not prove your claims to be true. The underlying text of the 1611 edition of the KJV has been changed to a different underlying text in some cases. 1 Corinthians 12:28 would be one example.
The underlying text for the 1611's use of "God" at Genesis 6:5 and some other verses likely was the Latin Vulgate or an English Bible influenced by the Vulgate while later editors changed the underlying text to the Hebrew by changing it to "GOD" or to "the LORD".

The Updates in MV are due to latest linguistic and textual evidences, but is not changing the Original language texts!

 

[JesusFan]

It is being printed by Bearing Precious Seed at: Bearing Precious Seed. I'm not sure how they handle individual copies, but I'm sure you'll be able to get one.

Never heard of them, but glad to see them getting out the word of God, even if they might be KJVO!

 

[JesusFan]

There is a logical disjunct there in light of the Great Commission, which all Bible believers must acknowledge and obey. Matthew 28:18-20 demands Bible translation.

Amen! As the church is commanded to make sure that all people groups get the word of God to them in their native languages, not just in English!

 

[JesusFan]

God forbid. The KJV has been translated in many languages all over the world since 1611 due to missionary efforts and still to this day translators are getting the word out to many nations.

Are the translations made off the hebrew and Greek texts and not 1611 kjv text valid for them to use then>

 

[John of Japan]

To continue thinking about preservation and textual criticism, and to narrow it down some, the doctrine of providence says that we can and should look for God's providential guidance in textual criticism. That historical stream leads me to the Byzantine textform as being closest to God's plan of preservation. I don't have time to develop this further right now, since I'm at a meeting of Bible college faculty from a bunch of schools, but I welcome input here to help me think through it more.

 

[37818]

Yes, but that only applies to the Originals given to and penned down by His Apostles and prophets!

Oh, so you deny we have God's preserved word today. So the OT Hebrew & Aramaic and NT Greek texts as passed down are really lost. That is too bad.

 

[John of Japan]

My position of Byzantine priority does not mean that I agree with those who condemn original language critical texts (Alexandrian based, such as the UBS, Nestle's, etc.) as not being the Bible or being morally corrupt. The Word of God is not abrogated that easily. It is powerful and eternal (Hebrews 4:12). You can't simply leave out a word, phrase, or even a verse, and by doing so destroy the power and truth of the Word of God.

In this regard, the term "corrupt" is problematic. It was originally borrowed from secular textual criticism, and was then used to describe ms or readings in the textual criticism of the Bible. It is a technical term, not a moral term or religious term. In textual criticism it simply means a mistake in the copying. I categorically oppose the idea that any ms or translation of the Bible can be corrupt in a moral or Biblical way, though a ms or document may have copyist mistakes (ms) or translation mistakes (Bible translation). This is not just something said by KJVO people. I have a pamphlet, mentioned in my thread on books on Bible translation: M. L. Moser, Jr. The New English Bible, Satan's Polluted Translation. As poor as that translation is, it is not a product of Satan.