Originally posted by michelle:
It is hurtful to me to say the least, that you would compare me, who loves the Lord Jesus Christ and his word of truth, to a man that denied the Lord Jesus Christ and believed in a different Jesus and a different gospel. Is this your intention Phillip? To hurt me? If it was, then you succeeded. Not because it is true, but because you should know that I am a christian and that I dearly love the Lord Jesus Christ. It hurts that a fellow christian would think that of someone who is a fellow christian and it seems to me as if you doubt whether I am a christian or not.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
No Michelle, it is not my intentions to compare you to Joseph Smith. There is no intention to hurt you, nor to even question your salvation. I have no doubt in my mind that you are saved. THis has never been an issue between us and I hope you know that by now.
Let's move this away from you and I'll put myself in your place and maybe you can understand.
Let us assume that I interpret a scripture differently than others do. I believe with all my heart that God has led me to believe that interpretation. (Let us assume that I may or may NOT be right -- at this point, nobody knows--just for our example.) Now, I come up to Skan and I say, look Skan, I want you to believe what I believe because that has been revealed to me by God.
I think we both agree that Skan would not be very bright if he accepted my interpretation basing it on the fact that I tell him that God told me that it was true.
Now, how does Skan go about determining if I am correct? The first thing he must do is go to those documents which are closest to the original autographs to make a determination if they say what I tell him it says. He has no other choice, because he is reading the same Bible I am, but he is seeing something different and he believes God has told him that he is right.
By looking at original manuscripts that the King James was translated from, he is capable of reading that Greek and determining what it says.
I sincerely believe my interpretation has been correct all of these years, but I cannot expect Skan to accept the fact that I tell him that God told me it was true any more than I can expect him to believe that one of the Mormon missionaries believes their belief. This is NOT comparing me to a Mormon missionary, but it shows how a falacy could easily be made on Skan's part if he were to accept what I tell him on blind faith.
You are interpreting the "preserve them" to mean "words". Skan is going to the closest thing he has to the original manuscripts and also the underlying text to the KJV. He is even telling you that he believes the TR to be more accurate than the Alexandrian texts thereby nullifying your argument about "words/verses" left out of the MVs because they used Alexadrian texts. Skan is going to the original documents that are underlying the KJV, by agreeing with you that those particular documents (the TR) are closest to the originals. Then he is translating it.
You, yourself said the underlying documents to the KJV were what is important, that if a GOOD translation were made from the TR you would accept it. Skan is giving you the translation and you are not accepting it.
If you stick to the King James only, then you can also see where the word "them" does not have to mean "individual words". Taking a look at an MV, you will find that it may even interpret this more clearly.
God gave us brains; He tells us to question sources and doctrines; He does not expect us to believe something blindly. That is why Skan and other scholars study these issues. In your statements about Skan, you are putting him in the same category that you claimed I put you---that is---questioning your motives and questioning your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Just because Skan is a better scholar does not necessarily make him right, but he has a much better chance of proving something to us if we open our minds and look at the evidence he is laying before us.
For years, Christians (good Christians) argued that the Earth sitting in the center of the universe and when a scientist proved that we orbited the Sun, they could not accept it. Why? Because of a "preconceived notion" that we had to be in the center of God's creation. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that.
Again, you have a book that was last modified about 125 years ago. If you, must accept 100% word-for-word translation, you must throw out every other King James version since 1611. Why? You said so yourself 2% change is the same as 2% rat poison. There have been changes made. The KJV we hold today is probably much more accurate than the earlier printings.
In reality each one of the original KJ's hold the Word of God, even though there may be typos and translational errors, and possibly even background "textual" errors.
