HAS GOD'S WORD BEEN PURIFIED SEVEN TIMES?

[Logos1560]

Hi Rippon, you said: "JBH, William Tyndale was not a Baptist."

For all practice purposes he certainly was. Here is some historical evidence from part of an article as to the fact:
Certainly in his writings Tyndale expresses Baptist views using Baptist terms, such as"elder" instead of "Bishop" and recognizes clergy by the offices of "pastor" and "deacon."

"The King James Bible is the final translation, the 7th, that began with Tyndale's Bible, and is about 80% Tyndale's own work.

JohnHenry, are you suggesting that William Tyndale was more sound in doctrine than the Church of England makers of the KJV?

Does your argument imply or suggest that William Tyndale would be a more trustworthy Bible translator than the more doctrinally unsound Church of England makers of the KJV?

Are you inconsistent in what you suggest since you in effect trust and advocate the changes made to Tyndale's translation by the KJV translators even when they made changes to renderings in Tyndale's that favored congregational church government to make them more favorable to the Church of England's hierarchical episcopal church government views?

Did you skip over one of the characteristic renderings of Tyndale in his New Testament-- "congregation" where the KJV has "church"?

You skip to ignore and avoid the fact that one of the reasons for the KJV's differences with Tyndale's was the renderings that the KJV translators borrowed from the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims NT.

 

[Logos1560]

Certainly in his writings Tyndale expresses Baptist views using Baptist terms, such as"elder" instead of "Bishop" and recognizes clergy by the offices of "pastor" and "deacon."

Why did you avoid Tyndale's use of "congregation"?

In an introduction to an Oxford World’s Classics edition of the KJV, Robert Carroll and Stephen Prickett wrote: “Tyndale had incurred the wrath of the authorities by translating the Latin ecclesia as ’congregation’ rather than ’church’--thereby suggesting a much looser, more democratic and self-governing organization in the early Christian communities of the New Testament than the episcopally organized and hierarchical Anglican Church could tolerate” (p. xxvi). Stephen Prickett asserted: “William Tyndale’s perfectly scholarly translation of the Latin ecclesia as ’congregation’ rather than ’church’ was political dynamite, in that it implicitly handed over the organizational control from the clergy to the rank-and-file in the pew” (Hamilin, KJB after, p. 30). Jon Sweeney maintained that Tyndale’s “translation choices” such as congregation “undermined the longstanding institutional power from the central church (both in England and in Rome), instead empowering local believers” (Verily, Verily, p. 56).

De Hamel suggested that “a Roman Catholic Bible might opt for vocabulary like ’church‘, ’priest’, ’chalice’, and ’charity’” while “a Protestant Bible might translate those same words from the Greek as ’congregation’, ’elder’, ’cup’ and ’love’” (The Book, p.245). David Lawton asserted: “The official Catholic translation, naturally, is ’Church’” (Faith, p. 72).

In his introduction to his modern-spelling edition of Tyndale’s N. T., David Daniell noted that “what [Sir Thomas] More found heretical in the word ’congregation’ was the implication that there is not one hierarchical body, The Church, of which all churches are members, but rather, self-governing communities of Christians, led by the Spirit, with allegiance only to God through their experience of Christ: precisely the New Testament sense” (p. xxi).

 

[John of Japan]

Hi again John of Japan,

A little more about what you said about our ancient Baptist ancestors, the Waldenses:

You said, "Um, no. The Waldenses weren't around yet at that point until the 12th century. Soon after the Ascension, unknown individuals began translating the Scriptures into Latin. Those versions are called the "Old Latin." Then in the second half of the 4th century, Jerome revised and retranslated, producing the Latin Vulgate Bible."

History proves:

Theodore Beza (1519 - 1605), date the Italic church back to 120 AD? (Which Bible?, p. 208)

In 1524 the Roman Catholic Cardinal Hosius admitted that Anabaptists date back to the days of Constintine? (Housius, Letters Apud Opera, pp.112 - 113 as quoted in Trail of Blood, p. 3, Ashland Av. Baptist Church, Lexington, KY, 1933) Hosius further stated, "The Anabaptists are a pernicious sect of which kind the Waldensian brethren seem to have been ..."? (Hosius, Works of the Heretics of our Times, Bk. I. 431. Ed. 1584 as quoted by John T. Christian).

In 1819 a study commissioned by the King of Holland determine that "... Baptists ... were originally Waldenses ... [who are] ... the only religious community which has continued from the times of the Apostles ..."? (The History of the Baptists by Thomas Armatage, p. 149)

You are entirely welcome to follow the Trail of Blood in your church history. But none of this proves a thing about Bible translation in history, which is the subject at hand. The Old Latin translations are completely anonymous. None of the manuscripts have a translator listed. And until the 3rd century, virtually all churches were Biblical, except for Marcion's followers.

You are right about Jerome, but he used Waldensian Bibles! On the order of the Pope he reluctantly removed readings from the Waldensian Bible to make it conform to Origen's Greek corruption.

There is absolutely no proof that Jerome used "Waldensian" Bibles. The history of Jerome's translation is quite clear, since he himself wrote about it in "Letter to Pammachius" and other documents. His task was to revise the Old Latin versions, but he went so far as to learn Hebrew from a Jewish rabbi, so it is clear that he did a new translation. One can compare the Old Latin to the Vulgate and see this for himself.

As for Origen, I'm not going to debate his influence on the Greek NT. My position is Byzantine priority, and I assume we agree to some degree there. And it does not speak to your theme, "the Bible purified seven times."

But again, don't flee my genuine query: how do you know the "Bible purified 7 times" is English and not Japanese? I'm the lead translator for a Japanese NT from the TR, so it would be quite relevant for me to know this.

 

[John of Japan]

Hi John of Japan:

"The Reformers held that the Waldensian Church was formed about 120 A. D., from which date on, they passed down from father to son the teachings they received from the apostles. The Latin Bible, the Italic, was translated from the Greek not later than 157 AD (Scrivener's Introduction, Vol. 2, p. 43.) We are indebted to Theodore Beza, the renowned associate of John Calvin, for the statement that the Italic Church dates from 120 AD. From the illustrious group of scholars which gathered around Beza, 1590 AD, we may understand how the Received Text was the bond of union between great historic churches. As the sixteenth century is closing, in Geneva Beza, Cyril Lucar, and later to become the head of the Greek Catholic Church, and Diodati, also a foremost scholar. As Beza astonishes and confounds the world by restoring manuscripts of that Greek New Testament from which the King James is translated, Diodati takes the same and translates into Italian a new and famous edition, adopted and circulated by the Waldenses. (McClintock & Strong Encycl., Art. "Waldenses.") Leger, the Waldensian historian of his people, studied under Diodati at Geneva. He returned as pastor to the Waldenses and led them in their flight from the terrible massacre of 1655. (Gilly, Researches, pp. 79, 80.) He prized as his choicest treasure the Diodati Bible, the only worldly possession he was able to preserve. Cyril Lucar hastened to Alexandria where Codex A, the Alexandrian Manuscript, is lying, and laid down his life to introduce the Reformation and the Reformers' pure light regarding the books of the Bible." (Source: http://textus-receptus.com)

The Waldenses were later branded as Anabaptists by the Roman Catholics.

I see your quote from textus-receptus.com, and raise the bid with another one from the same website:

"Waldensians, Waldenses or Vaudois are names for a Christian movement of the later Middle Ages, descendants of which still exist in various regions. Over time, the denomination joined the Genevan or Reformed branch of Protestantism. About the earlier history of the Waldenses considerable uncertainty exists because of a lack of extant source material. They were persecuted as heretical in the 12th century onwards, endured near annihilation in the 17th century, and were then confronted with organized and generalized discrimination in centuries that followed. There are active congregations in Europe, South America, and North America. The contemporary and historic Waldensian spiritual heritage includes proclaiming the Gospel, serving the marginalized, promoting social justice, fostering inter-religious work, and advocating respect for religious diversity and freedom of conscience. Modern Waldensians are gathered in the Waldensian Evangelical Church." (http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Waldensians)

Now, why is your quote from the website correct but mine is mistaken from the same website? After all, you don't even give the proper source on the website. I can't even find where your quote is from.

 

[rsr]

Hi Rippon, you said: "JBH, William Tyndale was not a Baptist."

For all practice purposes he certainly was.

Please read Tyndale's "The Obedience of a Christian Man" and "A Brief Declaration of the Sacraments" (and not just a stray quote here and there).

 

[robycop3]

1. Wycliffe Bible.
2. Tyndale Bible.
3. Coverdale Bible.
4. Matthews Bible.
5. Taverners Bible.
6. The Great Bible.
7. The Bishops Bible.
8. Rheims Bible.
9. The Geneva Bible.
10. King James Version.

Yep. 7 times. Uh. Wait a minute. 10 times. Not 7. 10.

Then, of course, there are quite a few English versions after the KJV, not to mention the thousands in other languages.

 

[robycop3]

Psalm 12:6 is a COMPARISON of God's words to 7-times-purified silver, the purest metal known in David's time. God's words are pure the instant He utters them. They never have & never will need any purifying!

The "7 times purified" thingie is simply a part of the false KJVO myth, and should be disregarded by all Christians.

 

[rlvaughn]

Please read Tyndale's "The Obedience of a Christian Man" and "A Brief Declaration of the Sacraments" (and not just a stray quote here and there).

The text of the former can be found HERE, and the latter HERE.

 

[JohnBaptistHenry]

The makers of the KJV borrowed a good number of renderings from the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament

Thanks for your input Logos1560.

Can you give me 1 or 2 examples of Rheims readings in the KJV?

Thanks,
JH

 

[JohnBaptistHenry]

Does your argument imply or suggest that William Tyndale would be a more trustworthy Bible translator than the more doctrinally unsound Church of England makers of the KJV?

Well, they certainly considered Tyndale trustworthy seeing that they let his work stand 80% of the time in the 66 books.

 

[JohnBaptistHenry]

Psalm 12:1-8: "Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men. 2 They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak. 3 The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things: 4 Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is lord over us? 5 For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him. 6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. 8 The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted."

Psalm 119:17: "Deal bountifully with thy servant, that I may live, and keep thy word."

Psalm 119:67: "Before I was afflicted I went astray: but now have I kept thy word."

Psalm:119:101: "I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep thy word."

Psalm:119:158: "I beheld the transgressors, and was grieved; because they kept not thy word."

John 14:15, 21, 23-24: "If ye love me, keep my commandments. ... He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. ... If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and We will come unto him, and make Our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the Word which ye hear is not Mine, but the Father's which sent Me."

John 15:10, 20: "If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in His love. ... Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept My saying, they will keep yours also."

John 17:6: "I have manifested Thy name unto the men which Thou gavest me out of the world: Thine they were, and Thou gavest them Me; and they have kept Thy Word."

1 John 2:3-5: "And hereby we do know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He that saith, I know Him, and keepeth not His commandments, is a liar, and the Truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth His Word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in Him."

1 John 3:22, 24: "And whatsoever we ask, we receive of Him, because we keep His commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in His sight. ... And he that keepeth His commandments dwelleth in Him, and He in him. And hereby we know that He abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us."

1 John 5:2-3: "By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments: and His commandments are not grievous."

Revelation 1:3: "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand."

Revelation 3:8: "I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept My Word, and hast not denied My name."

Revelation 3:10: "Because thou hast kept the Word of My patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth."

Revelation 12:17: "And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."

Revelation 14:12: "Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."

Revelation 22:7, 18-19: "Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. ... For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

2 Corinthians 2:17: "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."

 

[Logos1560]

Can you give me 1 or 2 examples of Rheims readings in the KJV?

Thanks,
JH

I had indicated some places to check on page 2 of this thread.

At Luke 23:32 and 23:29, the six English Bibles listed in the rule have the rendering "evil doers" while the KJV follows the 1582 Rheims' Latin-based rendering "malefactors".

At Acts 24:4, those six English translations have "courtesy" while the KJV follows the 1582 Rheims' Latin-based rendering "clemency."

At Acts 25:23, those six English translations have "chief men" while the KJV has "principal men" in agreement with the Rheims.

At Mark 13:22, those six English Bibles have "deceive" while the KJV has "seduce" in agreement with the 1582 Rheims.

At Luke 19:21, 22, none of those six English Bibles in the rule have "austere" which is found in the 1582 Rheims.

At Luke 19:23, "usury" is the rendering in the 1582 Rheims while those six English Bibles have "vantage."

At Luke 23:19, the six English translations have "insurrection" while the Rheims and KJV have "sedition."

Was the 1582 Rheims the source of the KJV's rendering "malignity" at Romans 1:29 since the six English Bibles in the rule do not have that rendering?

At 2 Corinthians 1:12, those six English translations have "pureness" where the Rheims and KJV have "sincerity".

See the 1902 book entitled The Part of Rheims in the Making of the English Bible by James Carleton for many more examples.

 

[John of Japan]

Psalm 12:1-8: "Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men. 2 They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak. 3 The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things: 4 Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is lord over us? 5 For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him. 6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. 8 The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted."

Again, I'll ask, why is the Word "purified seven times" English and not Japanese? Put up or shut up. Until you answer this I am going to assume that you are all about English and America, and have no burden to fulfill the Great Commission in any other language but English.

I just got an email from a pastor with a Japanese lady in his church who is asking about the Japanese Bible. What shall I tell her? do you have any wisdom about the Bible being preserved by God in other languages?

 

[JohnBaptistHenry]

John of Japan, if you would read the article you will see why it KJV has been purified 7 times. Many read Engilsh; few read Japanese.

 

[Rob_BW]

John of Japan, if you would read the article you will see why it KJV has been purified 7 times. Many read Engilsh; few read Japanese.

Well, then what about Mandarin, Spanish, Hindi...?

 

[Logos1560]

if you would read the article you will see why it KJV has been purified 7 times.

You fail to prove that the KJV has been actually purified seven times. It has been demonstrated that the KJV was based on more than six earlier English Bibles.

It was soundly demonstrated that you are misunderstanding or misinterpreting the phrase "purified seven times".

 

[Yeshua1]

John of Japan, if you would read the article you will see why it KJV has been purified 7 times. Many read Engilsh; few read Japanese.

Were the Vulgate/Geneva/Tyndale also "purified 7 times?" were they also scripture? So unless John of Japan uses the Kjv in japan, he would not be using the word of god to them?

 

[robycop3]

John of Japan, if you would read the article you will see why it KJV has been purified 7 times. Many read Engilsh; few read Japanese.

No, the KJV hasn't been purified ONCE. It has been REVISED several times by MEN. The KJV is a product of God's perfect word being handled by imperfect men, same as are all other Bible translations in any language. And the KJV does have man-made goofs in it, such as "Easter" in Acts 12:4.

And, are the Japanese any less-important to GOD than the British or Americans are?

 

[John of Japan]

John of Japan, if you would read the article you will see why it KJV has been purified 7 times..

So, I reread it. All I find are historical arguments that English is the language fulfilling the prophecy. (And by the way, that begs the question: how do you know that the Ps. 12 passage is even a prophecy? The Psalms are not generally prophetic, with few exceptions.)

Your main argument appears to be that English is a "universal language" (it is not) and therefore the fulfillment must be English. However, many Frenchmen take the position that French is the lingua franca of the world, and indeed French vies for first place in many places in Africa and elsewhere. In Cameroon, for example (where I have traveled as a Bible translation consultant), French is actually more prevalent than English, and Chinese is becoming well known. (I gave a Chinese tract to an African Chinese teacher in Cameroon.) Spanish also has a great claim to being the lingua franca of the world (your "universal language" which is not universal at all).

Note this chart: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-in-7-maps-and-charts/?utm_term=.b0c82837d7b3

There are 1.39 billion Chinese speakers in "all dialects." Now, while those dialects pronounce words differently, they can all read the same Bible. Tell me why the Chinese Bible is not the Word of God purified seven times. (I am not including versions that do not include the whole Bible.)

1. Robert Morrison's version
2. 遺詔全書, 1822
3. Lassar-Marshman Version (遺詔全書, 1822)
4. 神天聖書, 1823–1824
5. Morrison-Milne Version (神天聖書, 1823-1824)
6. Delegates Version (委辦譯本 or 代表譯本, 1854)
7. Chinese Union Version (和合本), 1904–1919

Many Chinese believe that the Chinese Union Version is the pure Word of God: "Union Only" believers, one might call them. Tell me why they are wrong and you are right. Why is the KJV and not the CUV the preserved Word of God for the world?

Many read Engilsh; few read Japanese.

Really? You consider 123 million to be "few"? (This does not include Japanese speakers outside of Japan, such as the huge number of Koreans forced to learn Japanese in WW2.)

 

[John of Japan]

Here is the Chinese Union Version John 3:16--神愛世人、甚至將他的獨生子賜給他們、叫一切信他的、不至滅亡、反得永生。

Here is our Lifeline Japanese NT John 3:16--なぜなら、ご自分の唯一お生みになった子を与えられたほどに、神はこうしてこの世を愛されました。それは、すべて子を信じる人が、滅びることなく永遠の命を持つためなのです。

I wonder if JohnBaptistHenry (or any other KJVO advocate) can tell me why the KJV is more worthy of preservation, or more likely to be inerrant than these versions. Chinese and Japanese people read these versions with joy and understanding. (There are currently 86,000 Lifeline John & Romans being distributed there.) I love the KJV, but I love these versions also.