Are we limiting God?

I opt for the latter 366/7/25!!
Rather than trusting on Bibles whose foundational texts were compiled by Gnostics(Origen,Esubius,and others)or Necromancers(W&H)and such..

 

Conversely, Dr.Bob;
Let's have scripture for THIS;
"Lets see. We have the Word of God in 5500 Greek/Hebrew manuscripts which must be evaluated and spiritually discerned for accuracy and authenticy. It is work sifting. It is science hard thought. It is theology. Baptists and evangelicals working on it."

What's good for the goose...
__________________________________________________
Just one verse to support this is all that is asked. But never answered.

THEREFORE, it is not only "illogical" but "without Scriptural support".
__________________________________________________

"Things that make you go hmmmm..."
BTW, who determines "accuracy and authenticity" if you do not have the original autographs?
Baptists and Evangelicals?
They can't even agree on the Essentials!
In HIS service;
Jim

 

Well, let's see...JESUS recognized the current OT canon as Scripture, but He read aloud from a version of Isaiah in Luke 4:16-21 which was NOT the text translated into the KJV's Book of Isaiah.

He also said Scripture cannot be broken. And the OT canon had been recognized as such several hundred before Jesus' carnal lifetime.

He also said His words shall not pass away. Common sense tells us He likely said millions of words during His ministry.(Low estimate...6K words a day, about 1260 words a day) and not ALL of them are preserved. BUT...I will state without hesitation that every word He WANTED preserved IS preserved.

So actually, there's MUCHO Scriptural proof that the Scriptures were preserved in the languages of the times & places where God gave them to man.

 

God does.
KJV Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Be logical James. Would God grant you the new birth and then cast you into the lake of fire in the end?

In the second place my view is that God has logically preserved His Word in the original language text as He originally gave it as the KJV translators believed and gave witness. Personally I would rather believe them than the second-guesses of the KJVO and their pope and popess who say they really didn't mean what they said because they didn't understand what they were saying and/or that the inadvertent mistakes they made were also "inspired".

Certainly, it is perfectly logical. To teach Israel to trust Him and not their army.
BTW He could have pared it down to 1 as He did with David, in this case He didn't.

And yes, He could have done as the KJVO have said and inspired the KJV at the exclusion of all other Bibles including the Greek and Hebrew.

But where is the Scripture in the KJV itself that supports translation Onlyism of this or any other kind?

History shows the folly of Onlyism (the Vulgate).

Every objection that the KJVO make concerning the MV's has a corresponding element that could be leveled against the AV as well.

People are saved and sanctified who use other than the AV.

Again:
The Scripture to support KJVOism (or any "Onlyism") is not there.

Neither is the evidence, the AV1611 itself fails the test(s) the KJVO bring against MV's.

The logic of KJVOism (English corrects the Hebrew, Greek sources, "advanced revelation", etc.) is totally flawed IMO.

Finally, using your logic of God's logic (or illogic), I could take any version of the Bible including the NWT for instance and proclaim it as THE Word of God and then proceed to knock down any argument to the contrary as illogical because God defies logic.

HankD

 

A commitee like the KJV translators translate from the extant original language texts and existing translations. Then they proceed to correct their mistakes through several revisions and/or editions. Nothing has changed in that respect.

Nether could the 1611 Church of England who couldn't decide whether they were Roman or Anglo-Catholic, flip-flopping between the two with attendant bloodbaths.


HankD

 

The Bible is filled with examples of good coming from bad situations/acts. Whether God can use any Bible version to instruct a Christian, or to convert an unbeliever is unquestionable. That does not mean that every Bible version is pleasing to God, or an accurate representation of His word. I don't think you could show that God's hand was on every translation. Rather, you would have to show that God's hand was not on the KJV translators to any great extent. The whole argument of multiple versions vs KJVO is more or less a discounting of any supernatural involvement by God in Bible translations other than the same every day involvement that you or I can expect from Him in our lives. While the Lord has done wonderful things in my life, I would hardly presume He wanted to use me to bring the next great English Bible into the world.

 

The question is not whether you can know God, but whether you can know God's perfect will. Did God leave us a perfect set of instructions? If you were to tell your German friend that he could know God equally well in either translation, you might be right. But what do you say when he asks why either one is OK? The correct answer, if we are to hearken to modern scholarship, is that there is no perfect bible, and the best we can ever have is a 'close enough' bible. Is 'close enough' close enough?

2Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Do we have scripture today? Is it given by inspiration of God? If we don't know for sure what God said in the originals, how much faith can we have in the Bible that we are holding? What is more disheartening: you might have to study to know the fullness of God's revelation to man, or you can never know the fullness of God's revelation to man?

 

Scripture does not say that a sole translation is required to know God's perfect will.

Scripture does not say that God's perfect set of instructions are found in only one translation of scripture.

There is no English translation that is a perfect translation. It is not a problem in translations, it is a problem with differences between kione Greek and English, or OT Hebrew and English.

Yes. We have the same source texts used by the KJV translators, as well as source texts that they were not aware of.

Translations are not given by inspiration of God.

OTOH, if one holds up a translation as being authoritative over its source texts, one becomes guilty of versionolatry.

It is not God's fault that we decided to abandon the language that the scripture authors wrote in. Interestingly, many KJVOists insist that we should just study KJV English, yet, they typically eschew the study of koine Greek and Hebrew. Since study of scriptural source texts in their original languages refutes KJVOism, it is not surprising that KJVOists would adhere to such thought.

 

Seeing as we now trust the Holy Spirit to guide us, how can we discount the testimony of a spirit-filled Christian who claims that they have been led by the Holy Spirit to believe that there is a promise in the Bible to preserve His word, and that He has done so in the KJV? If one prayerfully accepts that this might be so, and prayerfully seeks to know if it is so, what do we do if we are convinced it is so?

I hear the burning bossom analogy thrown out often, and it is a great argument to compare a KJVO advocate with a Mormon, that always sends the new believer running straight from the KJV into the waiting arms of the greek scholar. But it is really apples and oranges. The book of Mormon is obviously not biblical, as it is by definition extrabiblical. and the burning bossom, while arguably a real phenomenon as attested by many mormons and former mormons, is not quite how many KJVO advocates would describe their convictions, regardless of what some people say about their testimony.

I believe that God does reveal things to people who are genuinely seeking His will. And sometimes to people who aren't.

 

James...can you truthfully hold ANY Bible translation and say it's absolutely perfect, without the slightest error?

Only GOD can present His own word perfectly. Man cannot translate it 100% perfectly. One very valid reason for such is that many Koine Greek, Hebrew, & Aramaic words/phrases have several possible meanings in English, and in several other languages also. Often, but not always, the correct meaning for a given usage is dictated by the context. And a meaning in English may not be relevant to someone who speaks another tongue and/or is unfamiliar with Middle Eastern civilization. For example, the AV men called the hebrew 're'em' a "unicorn" because they didn't know the exact meaning, but they knew the re'em was some kind of large, powerful horned wild animal...andthey figured that every Englishman was familiar with the horse-like unicorn. However, in the Australia of a coupla hundred years ago, unicorn would be meaningless to all but a few people. And now we know the unicorn is fictitious, so it would be quite silly for any Bible translator to use that word today. And today there are many peoples to whom "wild bull" would be meaningless.

God is fully aware of all this, and a whole lot more. He provides His word, AS HE CHOOSES, in an understandable manner, to most of the world now, and soon He will have reached every people on earth with His word in their language. Even now, the Bible is being translated into spoken words for peoples who have no written language, such as the Waironi(pronounced, war-DONNY) in South America, and the Fore(pronounced fo-RAY) in the Philippines)

The making of a new BV does not nullify the validity of the older ones, just as the AV didn't nullify the validity of the GB. Nor has GOD ever declared any one version in any language as the final and "official" version. (Those peoples/languages which only recently have had the Bible in their own tongues naturally have but one version, but they ARE in their CURRENT languages!) The KJVO just cannot escape the history of what God has REALLY done concerning His word.

 

Plase provide scriptural support for KJVOism, or for that matter, single-translation-onlyism of any translation. This is my 48th request for scriptual support oon this board, and no one has ever been able to give me any.