-
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!
Did God Die In 1611?
- Thread starter Craigbythesea
- Start date
Daniel David
New Member
Nebuchadnezzar didn't know it was the pre-incarnate Christ though. He was a worshipper of false gods.
Regardless of what you believe about ole Nebby, the Bible was recording what was said, not giving the identity of the person. In other words, the Bible is historically acurate in what was said. The Bible was not trying to communicate who the fourth person was.
Regardless of what you believe about ole Nebby, the Bible was recording what was said, not giving the identity of the person. In other words, the Bible is historically acurate in what was said. The Bible was not trying to communicate who the fourth person was.
skanwmatos
New Member
Can you name one "old time scholar" who says that "kaphleuontes," which is the Greek word for "hawking" as a huckster hawks his goods, that "corrupt" is correct and "peddle" is wrong?
You have not proven, or even supported, your assertion that "old time scholars" disagree with "peddle." I don't think the English "peddle" is nearly as negative as the Greek "kaphleuontes," and that "corrupt" brings out that negativity, but "peddle" also brings out the "hawking/huckstering" idea which "corrupt" does not. And, of course, "corrupt" plays into the hands of KJVO who don't understand the verse and try to apply it to new versions, which the verse is not talking about.
Askjo:Interestingly, you disagreed with old-time scholars. They said this verse refers to the word, "corrupt," not peddle. Today scholars said, "peddle." Why change? Why did TODAY scholars disagree with the OLD-TIME scholars concerning this verse?
For the same reason doctors no longer chop a hole in the skull to relieve a headache: it's called KNOWLEDGE.
For the same reason doctors no longer chop a hole in the skull to relieve a headache: it's called KNOWLEDGE.
Originally posted by robycop3:
You didn't answer my question. With hindsight, WE know the 4th person in the furnace was Jesus, but why should we expect NEBUCHADNEZZAR to have known who He was?
Askjo:Do you deny NEBUCHADNEZZAR's knowledge toward God? MVs said, "a son of gods" because NEBUCHADNEZZAR saw ANOTHER God in a furnace.
Neb didn't know WHO he saw. He only knew he'd seen someone who was much more than a man.
Now, how can I say what went through the mind of a king who lived some 2600 years ago? From the context of the Scriptures. Neb's whole purpose for throwing the 3 men into the furnace was to punish them for refusing to worship his IDOL. Had Neb been knowledgeable about the REAL GOD, he wouldn't have erected an idol in the first place. He didn't stop to ask why his idol, if it were a god, couldn't punish its enemies itself. Neb didn't know GOD was orchestrating this whole event to show the king His power.
You didn't answer my question. With hindsight, WE know the 4th person in the furnace was Jesus, but why should we expect NEBUCHADNEZZAR to have known who He was?
Askjo:Do you deny NEBUCHADNEZZAR's knowledge toward God? MVs said, "a son of gods" because NEBUCHADNEZZAR saw ANOTHER God in a furnace.
Neb didn't know WHO he saw. He only knew he'd seen someone who was much more than a man.
Now, how can I say what went through the mind of a king who lived some 2600 years ago? From the context of the Scriptures. Neb's whole purpose for throwing the 3 men into the furnace was to punish them for refusing to worship his IDOL. Had Neb been knowledgeable about the REAL GOD, he wouldn't have erected an idol in the first place. He didn't stop to ask why his idol, if it were a god, couldn't punish its enemies itself. Neb didn't know GOD was orchestrating this whole event to show the king His power.
skanwmatos
New Member
No, as I said, which you simply ignored, Nebuchadnezzar thought the 4th figure looked like one of his pagan god's. At that point in his life he knew virtually nothing of the God of Daniel.
No, you still refuse to answer mine and make false accusations to cover up the fact you are UNABLE to answer. Why is is wrong in Mark but right in Matthew?
I answered it. Do you mean that God was not able to obscure the sun any way He wanted to? Is your God too small for that? Can't He make up his mind? Once again you duck, dodge, misdirect, and otherwise avoid answering simple questions, and by so doing make yourself and your position look exceedingly stupid. Is your position so stupid you can't defend it by honestly answering questions?
skanwmatos
New Member
So, are you admiting you lied and don't know of a single "old time scholar" who disagrees with the real meaning of kapheuontes?Originally posted by Askjo:
You have Bible tools such as the Bible study, commentaries, Bible software, etc,. There is where YOU can find it.
Here is what the "old time scholars" have to say, "We do not handle it craftily and covetously, or less sincerely than we ought. And he uses a metaphor, which is taken from hucksters, who used to play the false harlot with whatever came into their hands." Notes from the Geneva Bible of 1599.
"The word kaphleuontev, from kaphlov, a tavernkeeper, signifies acting like an unprincipled vintner; for this class of men have ever been notorious for adulterating their wines, mixing them with liquors of no worth, that thereby they might increase their quantity; and thus the mixture was sold for the same price as the pure wine. Isa 1:22, Thy wine is mixed with water, the Septuagint thus translate: oi kaphloi sou misgousi ton oinon udati. "Thy vintners mix thy wine with water;" that is, thy false prophets and corrupt priests adulterate the word of God, and render it of none effect, by their explanations and traditions.
The word has been used, both among the Greeks and Latins, to signify a prostitution of what was right and just, for the sake of gain. So Herodian, lib. vi. cap. 11; eiphnhn crusiou kaphleuontev, "Making peace for money." So cauponari bellum is, "To make war for money." In short, the word is used to signify any artifice employed to get gain by making a thing look more or better than it is; or mingling that which is excellent with what is not so to promote the gain of the adulterater.
It is used by Aristophanes, Plut. Act. iv., scene 5, ver. 1064, to express an old woman who was patched and painted to hide her deformity.
ou dht', epei men nun kaphlikwv ecei.
ei d' ekpluneitai touto to fimuyion,
oqei katadhla tou proswpou ge ta rakh.
Not at all; the old woman is painted:
If the paint were washed off, then you
Would plainly see her wrinkled face.
Where see the note of the Scholiast, who observes that the term is applied to those who deal in clothes, patching, mending, &c., as well as to those who mix bad wine with good. kaphlikwv ecei. panourgikwv. epei oi kaphloi criein kai anapoiein ta imatia eiwyasi, kai ton oinon de nwyuleuousi, summignuntev autw sapron. Vid. Kusteri Aristoph., page 45." From Adam Clarke's Commentary.
Pastor KevinR
New Member
Interestingly, you disagreed with old-time scholars. They said this verse refers to the word, "corrupt," not peddle. Today scholars said, "peddle." Why change? Why did TODAY scholars disagree with the OLD-TIME scholars concerning this verse? </font>[/QUOTE]yeah, how about those pre1611 versions? Tyndale and Matthew's says, "chop and change"; Geneva says, "make merchandise"....sounds like a conspiracy to me!
dave brauer
New Member
I have only used King James Bibles since I was saved. I have over 20 books and many pamphlets on the Bible version issue. Correction or Corruption makes a good point, as does the book Things That Are Different Are Not The Same.
Much could be said on this subject. I like the tract The Eye Opener, which points out some 200 verses that are completely ommitted out of some versions, such as the NIV. Some KJB preachers have messages using only these verses, which must be interesting for anyone with an NIV, etc.
I prefer the KJB because it is so clear, specific & concise to any other version I have heard or read. We have an excellent devotional that quotes from the NIV, but we always read from the KJB. Our children always comment on how the KJB states it best. From the mouth of babes.
Much could be said on this subject. I like the tract The Eye Opener, which points out some 200 verses that are completely ommitted out of some versions, such as the NIV. Some KJB preachers have messages using only these verses, which must be interesting for anyone with an NIV, etc.
I prefer the KJB because it is so clear, specific & concise to any other version I have heard or read. We have an excellent devotional that quotes from the NIV, but we always read from the KJB. Our children always comment on how the KJB states it best. From the mouth of babes.
Homebound, you haven't answered my second question. While you're thinking,here's another: which version of the Scriptures would you advise a Frenchman to read? Or a German?
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
Dave Brauer, this tract came from someone named J.J.Ray, who copied much of his material from a book written by a 7TH DAY ADVENTIST. And the problem with the "omitted" verses is that he totally ignored the possibility that they had been "ADDED" earlier, and might not have belonged in the first place.
If you & yours wish to use only the KJV, fine, long as you don't proclaim it's the ONLY valid English BV there is. That's false.
If you & yours wish to use only the KJV, fine, long as you don't proclaim it's the ONLY valid English BV there is. That's false.
2 Cor. 2:17 (KJV) - For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.
This verse answered your question, "Where did God say that?" </font>[/QUOTE]Assuming that your perverse abuse of this verse constitutes a valid interpretation for just one moment (which is alot more than you deserve)-
Please prove that the MV's have omitted and thus corrupted rather than the KJV adding and thus corrupting.
While you are at it, please explain why the KJV translators added the phrase "God forbid" several time in Romans. Is that not "corruption" since the text the KJV was translated from proves these words to be a dynamic equivalency at best?
skanwmatos
New Member
The jots and tittles are in the same place in both editions. The jots are still the crosses on the "t"s and the tittles are still the dots over the "i"s. Isn't it time to lay this lame argument to rest?Originally posted by Orvie:
...a simple comparison of the "Real KJV1611" and "Todays KJV1769" will demonstrate that argument...where are the "jots and tittles" of the 1611 when ya open your 1769?
skanwmatos
New Member
Askjo, you seem to have missed my response and still have not answered it. Here it is again.
No, as I said, which you simply ignored, Nebuchadnezzar thought the 4th figure looked like one of his pagan god's. At that point in his life he knew virtually nothing of the God of Daniel.
No, you still refuse to answer mine and make false accusations to cover up the fact you are UNABLE to answer. Why is is wrong in Mark but right in Matthew?
I answered it. Do you mean that God was not able to obscure the sun any way He wanted to? Is your God too small for that? Can't He make up his mind? Once again you duck, dodge, misdirect, and otherwise avoid answering simple questions, and by so doing make yourself and your position look exceedingly stupid. Is your position so stupid you can't defend it by honestly answering questions? </font>[/QUOTE]Are you going to answer?
skanwmatos
New Member
Well, Askjo, this is really strange! You seem to have overlooked answering this post too:
Here is what the "old time scholars" have to say, "We do not handle it craftily and covetously, or less sincerely than we ought. And he uses a metaphor, which is taken from hucksters, who used to play the false harlot with whatever came into their hands." Notes from the Geneva Bible of 1599.
"The word kaphleuontev, from kaphlov, a tavernkeeper, signifies acting like an unprincipled vintner; for this class of men have ever been notorious for adulterating their wines, mixing them with liquors of no worth, that thereby they might increase their quantity; and thus the mixture was sold for the same price as the pure wine. Isa 1:22, Thy wine is mixed with water, the Septuagint thus translate: oi kaphloi sou misgousi ton oinon udati. "Thy vintners mix thy wine with water;" that is, thy false prophets and corrupt priests adulterate the word of God, and render it of none effect, by their explanations and traditions.
The word has been used, both among the Greeks and Latins, to signify a prostitution of what was right and just, for the sake of gain. So Herodian, lib. vi. cap. 11; eiphnhn crusiou kaphleuontev, "Making peace for money." So cauponari bellum is, "To make war for money." In short, the word is used to signify any artifice employed to get gain by making a thing look more or better than it is; or mingling that which is excellent with what is not so to promote the gain of the adulterater.
It is used by Aristophanes, Plut. Act. iv., scene 5, ver. 1064, to express an old woman who was patched and painted to hide her deformity.
ou dht', epei men nun kaphlikwv ecei.
ei d' ekpluneitai touto to fimuyion,
oqei katadhla tou proswpou ge ta rakh.
Not at all; the old woman is painted:
If the paint were washed off, then you
Would plainly see her wrinkled face.
Where see the note of the Scholiast, who observes that the term is applied to those who deal in clothes, patching, mending, &c., as well as to those who mix bad wine with good. kaphlikwv ecei. panourgikwv. epei oi kaphloi criein kai anapoiein ta imatia eiwyasi, kai ton oinon de nwyuleuousi, summignuntev autw sapron. Vid. Kusteri Aristoph., page 45." From Adam Clarke's Commentary. </font>[/QUOTE]Are you going to answer it this time?
So, are you admiting you lied and don't know of a single "old time scholar" who disagrees with the real meaning of kapheuontes?Originally posted by skanwmatos:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Askjo:
You have Bible tools such as the Bible study, commentaries, Bible software, etc,. There is where YOU can find it.
Here is what the "old time scholars" have to say, "We do not handle it craftily and covetously, or less sincerely than we ought. And he uses a metaphor, which is taken from hucksters, who used to play the false harlot with whatever came into their hands." Notes from the Geneva Bible of 1599.
"The word kaphleuontev, from kaphlov, a tavernkeeper, signifies acting like an unprincipled vintner; for this class of men have ever been notorious for adulterating their wines, mixing them with liquors of no worth, that thereby they might increase their quantity; and thus the mixture was sold for the same price as the pure wine. Isa 1:22, Thy wine is mixed with water, the Septuagint thus translate: oi kaphloi sou misgousi ton oinon udati. "Thy vintners mix thy wine with water;" that is, thy false prophets and corrupt priests adulterate the word of God, and render it of none effect, by their explanations and traditions.
The word has been used, both among the Greeks and Latins, to signify a prostitution of what was right and just, for the sake of gain. So Herodian, lib. vi. cap. 11; eiphnhn crusiou kaphleuontev, "Making peace for money." So cauponari bellum is, "To make war for money." In short, the word is used to signify any artifice employed to get gain by making a thing look more or better than it is; or mingling that which is excellent with what is not so to promote the gain of the adulterater.
It is used by Aristophanes, Plut. Act. iv., scene 5, ver. 1064, to express an old woman who was patched and painted to hide her deformity.
ou dht', epei men nun kaphlikwv ecei.
ei d' ekpluneitai touto to fimuyion,
oqei katadhla tou proswpou ge ta rakh.
Not at all; the old woman is painted:
If the paint were washed off, then you
Would plainly see her wrinkled face.
Where see the note of the Scholiast, who observes that the term is applied to those who deal in clothes, patching, mending, &c., as well as to those who mix bad wine with good. kaphlikwv ecei. panourgikwv. epei oi kaphloi criein kai anapoiein ta imatia eiwyasi, kai ton oinon de nwyuleuousi, summignuntev autw sapron. Vid. Kusteri Aristoph., page 45." From Adam Clarke's Commentary. </font>[/QUOTE]Are you going to answer it this time?
The jots and tittles are in the same place in both editions. The jots are still the crosses on the "t"s and the tittles are still the dots over the "i"s. Isn't it time to lay this lame argument to rest? </font>[/QUOTE]I wasn't aware that the "t's" and the "i's" were in the Hebrew and Greek! I wonder what the jots and tittles are in French, German, Patios, Swahili, Mongolian, Russian, Italian, etc, etc, etc....sorry friend, I believe that the jots and tittles only apply to the language our Bible was originally inspired in...Originally posted by skanwmatos:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Orvie:
...a simple comparison of the "Real KJV1611" and "Todays KJV1769" will demonstrate that argument...where are the "jots and tittles" of the 1611 when ya open your 1769?