Despite their theology, they have the right KJV mistakes.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A very silly KJVO argument...
- Thread starter robycop3
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Despite their theology, they have the right KJV mistakes.
Well, I'm glad that you believe it should be presented the way it is. Unfortunately, those modern translators you are arguing in favor of don't agree with you. They think they are smarter than every other bible reader that came before and "fix" what they perceive is an error. Again, this shows what they truly believe about preservation of scripture and how faithful they are to properly translate God's word.
Objection, your Honor. Conjecture. You cannot know the heart of another person.
Sustained.
I have read interviews with some of the translators of the modern versions and they do not ever think they are "smarter than every other Bible reader that came before". I'd like to see support for that statement. If it's true, there has to be support. Of course the KJV translators did the same thing - changed what had already been there. What do you say about them?
Paul in Galatians 3:16 Paul wrote this: "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith no, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to they seed, which is Christ."
His argument is based on "seed" in the promises of God to Abraham in Genesis to be singular. The modern scholars who are so faithful to God's word and know so much about original languages contradict Paul by placing a plural noun here. They know so much about Greek and Hebrew but so little about scripture.
They were faithful to the translation. Once again, you say they know so little about Scripture and I'd like to see that supported. Of course I addressed this in an earlier post - did you happen to read it? It was a quote from one of the NIV translators himself.
Again, I say this shows the way modern translators treat the scriptures. Again, I'm not opposed to a modern english translation, but not in the way these modern translations have come about.
By the way, what holes does the KJ have? I'm curious.
Again, I'm asking for proof that the modern translators were proud and pompous - what you are accusing them of. And that this issue of their hearts made them be dishonest in their scholarship and lie in the modern versions. Until I see such proof, I will not accept it.
In many instances the archaic language makes the KJV far superior to the MVs.
And this may sound like a silly reason to support the KJV, but the KJV is easier to memorize than the MVs.
I think anyone who tries to memorize the KJV and the MVs will easily find the KJV much easier to memorize.
Can I see some hard facts here? I can give you one hard fact: I've experienced with my 4 children that the KJV has been very difficult to memorize due to the fact that they do not understand it since it is not written in their language. However, they've had no problem memorizing from the NIV or ESV, the two Bibles that we primarily use in the home.
Despite their theology, they have the right KJV mistakes.
No, there are many errors shown there, and while I will not go over every verse he showed, I will point out a few errors he made.
1 John 5:7-8 contains additional text which was added to the original. "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." The italicized text was added to the original manuscripts. Most modern translations agree that this was an uninspired addition to the Latin Vulgate to support the unscriptural trinity doctrine.
The Worldwide Church of God denies the Trinity. You believe this correct?
Genesis 1:2 should read "And the earth became without form . . . ." The word translated "was" is hayah, and denotes a condition different than a former condition, as in Genesis 19:26.
This is an attempt to support the Gap Theory. Do you believe there was a gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 and that death was in the world before Adam's sin?
Leviticus 16:8, 10, 26 in the KJV is "scapegoat" which today has the connotation of someone who is unjustly blamed for other's sins. The Hebrew is Azazel, which means "one removed or separated." The Azazel goal represents Satan, who is no scapegoat. He is guilty of his part in our sins.
This is utterly false, scapegoat is correct. The scapegoat represented the people's sin being forgiven. Here is what Matthew Henry says of the scapegoat.
2. The goat was then to be sent away immediately by the hand of a fit person pitched upon for the purpose, into a wilderness, a land not inhabited; and God allowed them to make this construction of it, that the sending away of the goat was the sending away of their sins, by a free and full remission: He shall bear upon him all their iniquities, v. 22. The losing of the goat was a sign to them that the sins of Israel should be sought for, and not found, Jer. 50:20.
If anything, the scapegoat represents Christ who took our sins upon himself, and not Satan. Wow.
2 Kings 2:23, should be "young men", not "little children."
Here the writer assumes they were all male, and that they were much older than the verse says. While this was a miraculous event no matter how you look at it, it is much more difficult to believe two bears killed 42 men than children.
Matthew 27:49 omits text which was in the original. Moffatt correctly adds it, while the RSV puts it in a footnote: "And another took a spear and pierced His side, and out came water and blood." The Savior's death came when a soldier pierced His side, Revelation 1:7.
Here this writer claims Jesus died because a soldier pierced him with a spear, but the scriptures say Jesus willingly gave up the spirit and died, and that afterward a soldier observed he was dead and then pierced him with a spear.
John 19:33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.
I could go on, almost everything this writer said was error, or he was nit-picking at words. And note in the last example he draws his conclusion (which is error) from the RSV.
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, I'm asking for proof that the modern translators were proud and pompous
As I stated in an earlier post many of the new versions were birthed from greed and the lust of the flesh.
Can I see some hard facts here? I can give you one hard fact: I've experienced with my 4 children that the KJV has been very difficult to memorize due to the fact that they do not understand it since it is not written in their language. However, they've had no problem memorizing from the NIV or ESV, the two Bibles that we primarily use in the home.
Well, I quoted from someone else, but I agree generally with his conclusion, of course there are always exceptions.
As for your children, you gave the answer to your own question when you said the NIV and ESV are the "primary" versions you use in your home. Do you even attempt to get your children to memorize the KJV?
Oh, and do you still support that article you posted from the writer who belongs to the Worldwide Church of God?
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, I quoted from someone else, but I agree generally with his conclusion, of course there are always exceptions.
As for your children, you gave the answer to your own question when you said the NIV and ESV are the "primary" versions you use in your home. Do you even attempt to get your children to memorize the KJV?
Oh, and do you still support that article you posted from the writer who belongs to the Worldwide Church of God?
My homeschool curriculum is Bob Jones. It's all KJV. My children learn the verses in the KJV but then will take their own Bibles and memorize it in the version they choose (my 7 year old is using the NIV and my 9 year old uses his ESV).
As I stated in an earlier post many of the new versions were birthed from greed and the lust of the flesh.
Yet there's no proof here and this comment wouldn't hold up in a court of law at all. Speculation.
Yet there's no proof here and this comment wouldn't hold up in a court of law at all. Speculation.
Excuse me, your Honor. I didn't know court was in session. :laugh:
The proof is in their actions. The fact is neither the Jews, nor the classic translators like those that produced the Coverdale, the Geneva, and the KJ changed numbers in 2 Chronicles. In comes the modern translator who says, "there must have been a copyist error" and proceeds to fix that which those that came before did not fix. They exalt their own intelligence over those who came before and show that they do not really believe in preservation of the scriptures.
People say many things, but action is what counts. These people say they believe in preservation, say they are being faithful to God's word, say they are providing a faithful translation, but the facts prove otherwise.
People say many things, but action is what counts. These people say they believe in preservation, say they are being faithful to God's word, say they are providing a faithful translation, but the facts prove otherwise.
Apparently, Annsni is judge, jury, and executioner all in one :laugh:Excuse me, your Honor. I didn't know court was in session. :laugh:
Just kidding with you, Annsni!
And some who have the NIV, NASB, and some kids who have memorized Hebrew and Greek. You're right...it's kind of a rabbit trail.I won't go far into the whole memorizing issue, but I've known children who have memorized large chunks of the KJ.
But then again, this is a patch full of em, isn't it :laugh:
Excuse me, your Honor. I didn't know court was in session. :laugh:
Did you NOT hear the gavel????? Jeepers!
So now you're hearing things? :laugh:Did you NOT hear the gavel????? Jeepers!
Sorry, you opened the door for that one!!!!! :laugh:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.