A Whale of a Translation

[RaptureReady]

Originally posted by Scott J:
I know staunch KJVO's who do the same thing. KJVO leaders such as Ruckman and Hyles are hardly exemplary Christians. The biggest problems among KJVO's in my experience however has been bitter legalism and a very unloving attitude... salted with a good dose of hypocrisy.

Then your experience is really limited.

ScottJ: No you aren't. How pompous and prideful can someone be? We know where God's Word is. It is in the KJV, NKJV, NASB, Geneva, etc.

What is "etc." is that all the word of God is, a "etc?" Why don't you list all of them for us.?

The supposition that there must be a perfect translation in every language is erroneous and inconsistent with God's proven practice.”

So is the supposition that any translation has ever been perfectly worded with God chosen words.

Sorry but I did not say this.

Why do you follow them in their insistence that the Bible be withheld from modern English speakers?

What are you talking about? Noone is witholding the Bible from any one.

Really? Where does the KJV say or even imply anything that these people teach? It doesn't. They apply double standards and fool many of those who do not "prove all things."

No they don't and you say "prove all things," what are you proving them by?

God told us all of those things. He also told us that He inspired the Bible and preserves it to us.

What scripture/verses might you be using?

What He does not say is that the KJV is the singular manifestation of that preservation.

Nor does it say the NIV, NKJV, NASB, Greek, Hebrew, or anything else. This is were believe come in.

In fact, for most of Christian history there were no printing presses and ALL Bibles were different from each other as a result of hand copying errors. KJVO's demand something that God did not see fit to give His people in the previous 1600 years.

I don't know about these things, except that in 1611 God saw fit to inspire and preserve his word in the King James Bible.

 

[RaptureReady]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
If you spend time studying the word of God, then you should know that the word of God never teaches that the KJV is the only word of God.

Where does it say that it is not? Where does it say what you believe?

 

[Dr. Bob]

“God has always given His word to one people in one language to do one job; convert the world. The supposition that there must be a perfect translation in every language is erroneous and inconsistent with God's proven practice.”

That is not only incorrect, it is truly BAD theology. Anyone who teaches that is sadly mistaken.

(1) God gave His Word to reveal Himself. He gave it in Hebrew and Greek and this may be translated into thousands of languages across our planet. The racism of God giving His Word in only ONE translation (Jacobean English) is repulsive to me

(2) God NEVER gave His Word in English. Didn't do it, unless you believe that the Word was not complete in the Apostle's era and that God continues to reveal His Word (which most charismatics believe, but not most baptists)

(3) God NEVER promised a perfect translation. Man works at translating. Unless you believe in a second work of inspiration in 1611.

 

[RaptureReady]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob Griffin:
(1) God gave His Word to reveal Himself. He gave it in Hebrew and Greek and this may be translated into thousands of languages across our planet.

But it is not and if they did succeed in doing this, what would they use as a source?

(2) God NEVER gave His Word in English. Didn't do it, unless you believe that the Word was not complete in the Apostle's era and that God continues to reveal His Word (which most charismatics believe, but not most baptists)

God's word was completed in 1611.

(3) God NEVER promised a perfect translation. Man works at translating. Unless you believe in a second work of inspiration in 1611.

The King James Bible is inspired and preserved by God. BTW, why would God not give us a perfect Bible? It says in his word that we are to be perfect, so why not give us the tools to be perfect?

 

[Faith Fact Feeling]

Bob Griffin,

So God did not commit his Word to the Jews for roughly 1000 years as is claimed in Romans 3:2? I guess poor Paul was just “sadly mistaken”. And of course, God’s way of being selective about who He commits His oracles to, you find “repulsive” and deem to be “racism”. I’m sure you will probably even argue it with Christ some day. It will be a “short” argument. It is very logical and consistent with scripture that God’s preserved Word would be committed to the faithful in whatever race or language that God chooses. It certainly would not be contained in two heretical manuscripts that are written in a language that has been dead for 1000 years. God has preserved His Word and is working with a living remnant today, the rest are blinded spiritually.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by HomeBound:
Then your experience is really limited.

I don't really think so. I have known many KJVO's of many different stripes from every corner of the country and have lived in several areas of the country myself.

What is "etc." is that all the word of God is, a "etc?" Why don't you list all of them for us.?

I haven't investigated all of them so for me to attempt a comprehensive list about things I don't really know about would be ignorant- although I have noted that lists developed in this way receive favor among KJVO's.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />So is the supposition that any translation has ever been perfectly worded with God chosen words.

Sorry but I did not say this.</font>[/QUOTE] OK then, do you believe that some of the KJV words are not perfect or that 17th century Anglicans somehow got it perfect without God's direct intervention?

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Why do you follow them in their insistence that the Bible be withheld from modern English speakers?

What are you talking about? Noone is witholding the Bible from any one.</font>[/QUOTE] Anyone who says that it is wrong for someone to have an accurate Bible translation in a form that they can understand is withholding the Bible from them. Many English speakers today cannot clearly understand Jacobean English. Folks who speak English as a second language are at an even greater disadvantage. People who do not speak English are hopeless.

Many readers today think they know what is being said when the KJV uses words like "let, prevent, communicate, conversation, and perfect" when in fact they don't.

No they don't

Yes. KJVO employs double standards constantly. If I remember correctly, you have been confronted personally about it.

and you say "prove all things," what are you proving them by?

First, by the what the Bible says and reveals. It does not say nor imply KJVOnlyism so I do not believe it.

Second, by a reasonable collation of the available facts. On this account, KJVOnlyism fails over and over. The history of the TR and KJV, the words of the translators, the facts about textual transmission,... all line up against KJVOnlyism.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />What He does not say is that the KJV is the singular manifestation of that preservation.

Nor does it say the NIV, NKJV, NASB, Greek, Hebrew, or anything else. This is were believe come in.</font>[/QUOTE] Not entirely. The KJV demonstrates internally that Jesus used an OT that was a different version from that used by the KJV translators.

On that part where belief comes in, I ask myself "Belief in what?" Emotion/tradition based opinions that is inconsistent with scripture and history or an explaination of the facts that is consistent with both scripture and history.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> In fact, for most of Christian history there were no printing presses and ALL Bibles were different from each other as a result of hand copying errors. KJVO's demand something that God did not see fit to give His people in the previous 1600 years.

I don't know about these things, except that in 1611 God saw fit to inspire and preserve his word in the King James Bible. </font>[/QUOTE]So since you don't know (but probably suspect that what I wrote destroys the very foundation of KJVOnlyism), you will simply close your eyes to very relevant facts? Nowhere in the KJV will you find an admonition to ignore the truth if you don't want to believe it.

What I stated above is truth. And it is truth that KJVOnlyism cannot reconcile.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by HomeBound:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dr. Bob Griffin:
(1) God gave His Word to reveal Himself. He gave it in Hebrew and Greek and this may be translated into thousands of languages across our planet.

But it is not and if they did succeed in doing this, what would they use as a source?</font>[/QUOTE] One of the original language texts.

God's word was completed in 1611.

God's Word was completed when John wrote Revelation. Everything else since has been a copy or translation- the work's of fallible men who were not Apostles nor divinely guided.

[qbThe King James Bible is inspired

[/qb] It is inspired by derivation in what it communicates.

and preserved by God.

Preserved from what source? It didn't exist prior to 1611. It has been preserved by men since 1611 and even made the only legal Bible at a point. However, it is not a direct descendant of the originals in any sense that the NKJV or NASB or NA27 is not.

BTW, why would God not give us a perfect Bible? It says in his word that we are to be perfect, so why not give us the tools to be perfect?

"Perfect" in that particular context means 'whole, fully equipped, sufficient to the purpose for which it was designed, not lacking in any essential thing'. The KJV is perfect in this sense as are the NKJV, NASB, and others. "Perfect" in this context does not mean 'measurably correct in every detail nor absolutely identical to the standard.'

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by HomeBound:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
If you spend time studying the word of God, then you should know that the word of God never teaches that the KJV is the only word of God.

Where does it say that it is not? Where does it say what you believe? </font>[/QUOTE]Do you never read????? We have been through this so many times. I have demonstrated time and time again that Scripture never refers to the KJV. It tell us without doubt that Christ and the apostle quoted things other than the KJV as the word of God. It shows us that the word of God was hidden for a while but was not less than the word of God because it was not available. On and on ... We have been through this. Stop retorting and start thinking ... It will great improve your chances of learning. I don't mind answering questions. But to answer the same thing over and over again simply because people are not paying attention gets old. You have been around long enough to have been through most of these conversations. You have no excuse not to know the truth. You should be doing better than this by now. I can understand a newcomer who has these kind of questions. I don't understand how someone who has been here a while keeps asking the same old tired stuff and keeps making the same old ridiculous points.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by HomeBound:

God's word was completed in 1611.

If I could show you an irrefutable example of how the KJV failed to preserve something that was indisputably present in the original language text, would you be prepared to admit that the KJV is *not* "complete?"