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!
Yea!Originally posted by michelle:
This is a test to see if it works.
BOLD
No, some of the old English words have fallen completely out of use and were replaced with different words and even old English letters have fallen out of the modern alphabet. I will go back again to prove this if you force me to do so. Also the old English Luke 1:15 passage had 27 words, the middle English Luke 1:15 passage had 30 words and the 1611 Luke 1:15 had 33 words, the 1611 has 6 more words than the Old English which disproves your the last part of your statement "Obviously the words in Old English are not understandable to us today because of the spelling differences in the words,however they were the same words and meanings then, as they are today,". Why then did it take 5 more words in 1611 than in 1300 to say the same thing?I never said that it hasn't, or that it couldn't. What I have been saying is that it isn't. Present tense. Obviously the words in Old English are not understandable to us today because of the spelling differences in the words, however they were the same words and meanings then, as they are today, to which was my POINT. Your POINT was that this is the same difference that we see from the KJB to the mv's today, to which is NOT true.
I will get to this when you respond to my 1300 vs 1611 statements above.Your POINT was that this is the same difference that we see from the KJB to the mv's today, to which is NOT true.
I didn't say this exactly though I may have indicated or suggested the same because in fact it is at least partially true and it is completely true that the English language is currently changing not only as to the addition/deletion of words but as to the order, grammar and syntax of the language.Your POINT was that this is the same difference that we see from the KJB to the mv's today, to which is NOT true.
The site has several blurbs (under “site map”) under the banner of the changing English language.Is the English language changing?
Yes, and so is every other human language. Language is always changing, evolving, and adapting to the needs of its users. This isn't a bad thing
...
Word order also changes, though this process is much slower. Old English word order was much more 'free' than that of Modern English, and even comparing the Early Modern English of the King James Bible with today's English shows differences in word order. For example, the King James Bible translates Matthew 6:28 as "Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not." In a more recent translation, the last phrase is translated as "they do not toil". English no longer places not after the verb in a sentence.
So when you challenge me to a debate and you lose, suddenly the issue becomes irrelevant. Very convenient michelle.You are focusing on irrelevent things to this issue. God does not require me to know these things, nor you for that matter. WE live in the present, here and now. KJB vs. mv's. KJB has been known, used and believed as the infallible words of God in the Believing churches even until this present day. Those prior Bibles are irrelevant to this issue, and these little nitpicky and language issues have NOTHING to do with this issue today.
I think we have at last found an area of total agreement.Even if this was true, to which it is not in this present day, this still has nothing to do with the apparent and obvious errors in the mv's. The only thing you have shown, is that in the future, there may be a need for updating the KJB. I do not think this will ever happen however, because the Lord Jesus Christ is returning any day to call up his church - what a joyous day and I long for it.
And IMO, (if He tarries) it will be "derived inspiration" through able translators.The day of the Lord seems to be soon at hand. If the Lord decides to tarry, it is up to Him to inspire a better translation for the English language of the day accordingly.
Please show me where I have I done this michelle. Personally I believe and have told you so that you are an amazing person in terms of tenacity and faith. I have not come up short in pointing out your duplicity but I have never insulted you.We however, have not seen He has done this, nor has had a need to do this yet, as His faithful continue to know and understand what He has given to us already in the KJB. Yes, the ignoramous, every day common stupid people like me, and others (you all enjoy labeling us as being these things) still understand and know God's words today as God saw fit to give them.
You are almost there michelle, lose the accusations and judgments that belongAnd as many have stated, these type of changes in the modern versions are not necessarily the problem. The problem is with the alterations that affect the context of the passage and change the truth from the already established truth, that is the problem. Changing things that are not necessary to change. Word changes that are not necssary to change, or that have been known for generations even until this day, that have been changed to alter the message and/or cause confusion, or that change God's truth into a lie, or half truth. The omittion of long known and currently known, believed and taught verses or words. These are the problems, and show forth altering of the words of God under the guise that our language is currently changing. You have bought into their lies, hook, line and sinker.
You have addressed many things here michelle.Please tell me then Hank, how this statement is not reflective of the truth? Why is it that you turn to the modern versions for a better understanding of the scriptures, if this is not the truth? You have said that you understand the scriptures, but you sometimes turn to the mv's to give those you are teaching a better understanding, because they do not understand the KJB. Why go to these versions, if you understand the problem, and you also understand the scriptures? Why not expound to them the truth from the scriptures themselves and let the Lord give them understanding? You see, many do not have a misunderstanding of the English language in the scriptures. Many do not understand the spiritual language, truth and meanings in the scriptures. Why lead these souls to polluted waters to which will make them think that they are understanding and receiving pure water? They will then rely only upon the polluted waters, and neglect and reject the pure water, because they have been led to believe that the pure water is that to which is polluted. I am curious to know why, and I am not trying to judge you, even though you are taking it this way and I am sorry if you did/are.
Are you now saying that these people don't "have all their marbles"?Saying that we are Ruckmanites, or disciples of Riplinger, isn't exactly stating that one has all their marbles. It is an insult and an attack against not only our intellectual abilities, but our faith also and is quite simply untrue.
This is dfficult because the rules for "relevant" change from time to time. Sometimes before the thread has run it's course.It would be better if everyone avoided making "personal" comments, and instead dealt strictly with relevant issues.