I used to be KJV-only, now I'm not and boy how the Lord has blessed my Bible studying

Sorry, Jim, but the "Easter" thingy speaks for itself as a MONUMENTAL goof, as does "the image of" in Romans 11:5, or the numerous "God forbid"s, "slew & hanged" in Acts 5:30, and many others which have been brought to our attention. How one can say those goofs aren't really goofs after reading a lexicon/concordance suth as Stronger Strong's is beyond me. But "wisdom is justified of her children".

 

I have never understood the concept why people are so afraid of studying the Greek text and explaining what it actually means? I mean the NT was wrote in Greek. But I guess that must makes too much sense to me.

 

PastorSBC1303. I started a thread asking if we should have Greek classes in churches capable of doing so. An overwhelming majority of those who have taken Greek were for it and an overwhelming majority AGAINST, by those who have not taken Greek.

 

Those who are perfect are still working on getting that all inspired version.

 

_________________________________________________

Yet, there's lil' ol' me who HAS taken three semesters of Greek who sees NO NEED for it since we have reliable English Bibles from which to preach!

Ok, continue on with the thread...

In HIS service;
Jim

 

av1611jim, you get "two points"

 

And I flunked Spanish in High School(did just fine in English...go figure) so you think I want to tangle with Greek?Nope...my KJB is fine with me and I have my Strongs and my Websters.I'll make do just fine I think.Might even hire tbc1611 as my personal bodyguard...LOL

Greg Sr.

 

Time to wander in here

This is so old and wore out -

1. The context of the chapter is ROMAN - Herod was under Roman rule - Rome's religion was Babylonian - they celebrated Easter - Easter was a pagan holiday and pagans celebrated it - just like "christianity" celebrates it today, unfortunately. So, Easter was put there to show the ROMAN context - the passover was not the issue. If some folks still think Easter is a "Christian" holiday they need to read Hislop's "Two Babylons". Without cut and pasting and dragging this out just go to a simple link (one of many) to see the research:
http://www.biblebelievers.com/Gipp/gipp_answer_02.html
Now, I'm sure some will just bash it anyway.

2. Finally - Do you really think the AV translators were that stupid and careless?!?!? It appears you and others think so. Don't you think they noticed that and don't you think they discussed it? don't you think they had a grasp of the ancient languages? You think they missed it - all the translators!!!! Do you think they let it slip through and then later said, "Gasp, look what we did!!!"

Using Easter to prove there are errors in the King James Bible is so sad.

Have a nice day now

 

Gregory Perry Sr.: "Nope...my KJB is fine with me and I have my Strongs and my Websters."

All the items you have are plural.

1. Which KJB do you use?
I have the KJV1611 edition
KJV1769 edition, and the
KJV1873 edition.

2. Which Strongs' do you use?
I have only one strongs:
STRONGEST STRONG'S in paper.
But on e-Sword i have a strongs
in KJV+. (it is much easier to use,
I'm 61 now and those pages are getting
harder to turn and the print is getting
smaller than it used to be)

3. Which Webster's do you use?
I have a Websters Dictionary called:
WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF THE
AMERICAN LANGUAGE, SECOND COLLEGE EDITION
(William Collins, 1976)

 

Uh, English didn’t exist until around 800-1000AD.

The “Roman” Bible had it thus:

Vulgate
Acts 12:4 quem cum adprehendisset misit in carcerem tradens quattuor quaternionibus militum custodire eum volens post pascha producere eum populo

So until about the year 1000 (evolution of Anglo-Saxon) into English, Acts 12:4 was “pascha” (and still is in the extant Greek mss) until 1611 when the King James translators received an “advance revelation” and the “Only word-for-word English translation" changed the inspired word from “pascha-passover” to “Easter”.

This seems to be your position.

If not how did then they know that "pascha" (which in all other cases they translated as "passover") was really "easter" in disguise?

HankD

 

It's not how much one been through, but how much has been through them. When I was in seminary I saw students come from other colleges and universities who had two years and some of us had one. But those of us who had one with a particular professor were much further ahead than anyone else.

 

Yeah we surely wouldn't want to actually know what the original language says....thats just dumb

 

Wish I would have taken greek when studying for my B.S. They did not offer it on Saturdays or at night though.

 

I have to agree with that Spoudazo, I took several hours of Greek (10 or 12) and I can hardly do anything now.

Of course, I have trouble learning ANY language. As an engineer, I deal with concepts and it is difficult for me to learn words that have no reference (with the exception of an English equivalent for words or phrases). It is EXTREMELY hard for me to memorize anything, but I can remember concepts and theories very well because they relate to something. Our minds are all different and mine certainly is not an exception.

 

KJV only here...find and read "The Final Authority" - I don't like watered down Bibles...I want the closest thing to the Greek that I can get. Compromise on this is like any other compromise in this shift to the world.

 

Be it only a "scratch the surface" education, it is sufficient to support my point.

In other words, I am NOT ignorant of the language, nor of its inherent difficulty. I got me a purdy gud handle on English tho.! an I don't need no edjumicashun to preach God's Book!

In HIS service;
Jim

 

That last post was mockery for they who missed it.
Mockery of they who seem to think somewhat of their education vs the leading of the Holy Spirit in preaching Truth.
Please take no offense. I just get so sick and tired of folks who seem to think their view is the ONLY right view without allowing a brother in Christ to disagree.
I am by no means guiltless in this respect. I surely would like to see a bit more grace on these kinds of threads. Debate yes, but at least do it gracefully without the constant put downs.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Ok Hank, it appears you disagreed with the link or others like it - fine what about:

"2. Finally - Do you really think the AV translators were that stupid and careless?!?!? It appears you and others think so. Don't you think they noticed that and don't you think they discussed it? don't you think they had a grasp of the ancient languages? You think they missed it - all the translators!!!! Do you think they let it slip through and then later said, "Gasp, look what we did!!!"

Thanks and may God bless

 

FWIW, I believe "Easter" in the KJV is correct, if rightly divided. It is the KJV-only interpretation of it that is completely wrong.