Is God settled on one Bible translation?

[Salamander]

Nice, Ehud. But you've failed to produce even one verse that indicates God is settled on a particular Bible translation. Just like other KJVOs all you've done is quote Bible verses that have nothing to do with the topic at hand - IS GOD SETTLED ON ONE BIBLE TRANSLATION?

Go back to the Bible and try to find one verse that even remotely suggests God is settled on one particular English Bible translation.

HINT: Don't waste your time. You'll never be able to find such a verse because it doesn't exist. You promote an extra-biblical and false teaching.

Go to your version and SHOW us by THAT verse that spells it out precisely that smoking tobacco will kill you!

Are you suggesting that the Surgeon General knows more than God?:BangHead:

 

[Mexdeaf]

Go to your version and SHOW us by THAT verse that spells it out precisely that smoking tobacco will kill you!

Are you suggesting that the Surgeon General knows more than God?:BangHead:

You want to smoke and use the KJV, fine with me!:laugh:

 

[Mexdeaf]

Some of us who are familiar enough with our Bible do NOT have to look up something EVERYTIME we read it!

Nice "strawman" asking for proof of a doctrine is "devil's logic".

I believe your remark is unfounded.

I have said that the harmony of the complete work is what proves it is the word of God.

My studies have PROVEN this NOT to be the case with any version we ALL KNOW is meant by an "MV". Calling the KJB an "MV" is utter nonsense. You don't work up to the Pinnacle of previous versions and then manufacture many other proceeding versions and call the Pinnacle a modern version.:thumbs:

Only introductions of fallacies bring about any question to the word of God. I have found enough inconsistencies in too many modern versions to keep wasting redeemable time with them.

In another thread it was remarked that I might be "KJP", YES! I prefer to have the word of God in the same harmony as God would have for anyone who speaks English, or in any other language.

What really is the tale-tale indication somethings is really amisss is the plethora of versions we have in English alone while so many other languages have NOTHING consideredd to be a "bible" in their ONLY tongue!

Look at Papua New Guinea and see if there might be a need for a translation into just ONE island's multiple languages? Last I heard it reported was somewhere around 800 totally different languages in such a small vicinity and we all argue over the plethora of English translations!

We already have the standard in English, what about all the other peoples in this world?:tonofbricks:

One man's 'standard' is another man's stumbling stone.

 

[gb93433]

Go to your version and SHOW us by THAT verse that spells it out precisely that smoking tobacco will kill you!

Are you suggesting that the Surgeon General knows more than God?:BangHead:

Prov. 1:5-7. "A wise man will hear and increase in learning, And a man of understanding will acquire wise counsel, To understand a proverb and a figure, The words of the wise and their riddles. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; Fools despise wisdom and instruction."

 

[Keith M]

Some of us who are familiar enough with our Bible do NOT have to look up something EVERYTIME we read it!

Nice "strawman" asking for proof of a doctrine is "devil's logic".

I believe your remark is unfounded.

I have said that the harmony of the complete work is what proves it is the word of God.

My studies have PROVEN this NOT to be the case with any version we ALL KNOW is meant by an "MV". Calling the KJB an "MV" is utter nonsense. You don't work up to the Pinnacle of previous versions and then manufacture many other proceeding versions and call the Pinnacle a modern version.:thumbs:

Only introductions of fallacies bring about any question to the word of God. I have found enough inconsistencies in too many modern versions to keep wasting redeemable time with them.

In another thread it was remarked that I might be "KJP", YES! I prefer to have the word of God in the same harmony as God would have for anyone who speaks English, or in any other language.

What really is the tale-tale indication somethings is really amisss is the plethora of versions we have in English alone while so many other languages have NOTHING consideredd to be a "bible" in their ONLY tongue!

Look at Papua New Guinea and see if there might be a need for a translation into just ONE island's multiple languages? Last I heard it reported was somewhere around 800 totally different languages in such a small vicinity and we all argue over the plethora of English translations!

We already have the standard in English, what about all the other peoples in this world?:tonofbricks:

Salamander, we're still waiting for someone to produce even one verse that hints God is settled on one particular English Bible translation. None of the drivel you or Ehud have posted is pertinent to the topic of discussion - is God settled on a particular English Bible translation?

:tonofbricks:

 

[Keith M]

Go to your version and SHOW us by THAT verse that spells it out precisely that smoking tobacco will kill you!

Are you suggesting that the Surgeon General knows more than God?:BangHead:

Another worthless straw man, Salamander. This drivel is so pathetic it doesn't deserve comment. It's definitely off topic. Try to stick with the topic for once, will you?

First you commented "It certainly sets those who promote the MV's in array against those of us who are as settled as God is on which English version. I'd call that harm."

Then, when you were asked to substantiate your claim with Scripture, you changed your position and ran like a scared puppy, saying "God has NEVER even suggested an English translation in His word!"

You contradicted yourslef, Salamander. Did God indicate He was settled on one particular English translation or didn't He?

Can you show us one Bible verse that even remotely hints that God is settled on one particular English Bible translation?

Since you made the first comment, Salamander, you've been running and trying to avoid the issue. Please produce something to legitimize your claim or else admit your claim, like the rest of the KJVO position, is extra-biblical and manufactured by men. Of course many of us will be dead and buried before you admit to the truth. I truly believe truth is hidden from you.

 

[Keith M]

You want to smoke and use the KJV, fine with me!:laugh:

Sal's cigarette just may burn his straw man if he isn't careful. :laugh:

 

[robycop3]

Go to your version and SHOW us by THAT verse that spells it out precisely that smoking tobacco will kill you!

Are you suggesting that the Surgeon General knows more than God?:BangHead:

Just read 1 Cor. 3:16-17, 6:19. God has given us the ability to know what is harmful, & shouldn't be brought into our bodies, which HE sez are TEMPLES. While tobacco wasn't known to the people of that time/place GOD wisely covered it in the verses I cited.

Now, there's *NO* such implication supporting KJVO. That doctrine is entirely MAN-MADE. Betcha can't prove any differently!

 

[Abell]

Just read 1 Cor. 3:16-17, 6:19. God has given us the ability to know what is harmful, & shouldn't be brought into our bodies, which HE sez are TEMPLES. While tobacco wasn't known to the people of that time/place GOD wisely covered it in the verses I cited.

Now, there's *NO* such implication supporting KJVO. That doctrine is entirely MAN-MADE. Betcha can't prove any differently!

Using this same principle allow me to illustrate. The Bible clearly teaches that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2). Therefore any translation that claims the quote found Mark 1:2 is from Isaiah cannot be from God. That quote is found in Malachi as most footnotes acknowledge.

Neither did Elhanan kill Goliah as many translations say he did. David killed Goliath. Therefore any translation that lies about who killed Goliath cannot be from God.

There is no verse that claims the KJV to be the word of God, but through reasoning, we can determine the translations that are not.

 

[Mexdeaf]

There is no verse that claims the KJV to be the word of God, but through reasoning, we can determine the translations that are not.

Salamander's gonna have a hard time with this one!!!:laugh:

Reference: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1298584&highlight=reasoning#post1298584

 

[gb93433]

Using this same principle allow me to illustrate. The Bible clearly teaches that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2). Therefore any translation that claims the quote found Mark 1:2 is from Isaiah cannot be from God. That quote is found in Malachi as most footnotes acknowledge.

That quote was found in the scroll named by the major prophet Isaiah.

 

[annsni]

Using this same principle allow me to illustrate. The Bible clearly teaches that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2). Therefore any translation that claims the quote found Mark 1:2 is from Isaiah cannot be from God. That quote is found in Malachi as most footnotes acknowledge.

Neither did Elhanan kill Goliah as many translations say he did. David killed Goliath. Therefore any translation that lies about who killed Goliath cannot be from God.

There is no verse that claims the KJV to be the word of God, but through reasoning, we can determine the translations that are not.

What do you say about Matthew 27:9-10 where Matthew attributes the reading to "Jeremy" when it is also in Zechariah. I guess that's lying too?

Oh, and ADDING words to the text is OK? Since "the brother of" is in italics, it's not inspired - it's not in the original languages. I'd say that's lying too.

So since the KJV has lies in it, it's not from God. Right?

 

[BaptistLady02]

I don't think God is "settled" on any one Bible translation. I'd say that he approves of most of the mainstream Bibles out there. Of course, I believe that only the originals are totally inerrant.

 

[Keith M]

I don't think God is "settled" on any one Bible translation. I'd say that he approves of most of the mainstream Bibles out there. Of course, I believe that only the originals are totally inerrant.

Amen, Sister BaptistLady02! Preach it!

 

[Mexdeaf]

That quote was found in the scroll named by the major prophet Isaiah.

Don't go getting all scholarly on us now!!:laugh:

Some folks are so narrow-minded it hurts them to think!

 

[Keith M]

Don't go getting all scholarly on us now!!:laugh:

Some folks are so narrow-minded it hurts them to think!

Others are so narrow-minded the truth can't possibly get through. In some cases, getting the truth through is like trying to drive a car through the tube paper towels are sold on. :laugh:

 

[gb93433]

Others are so narrow-minded the truth can't possibly get through. In some cases, getting the truth through is like trying to drive a car through the tube paper towels are sold on. :laugh:

Consider the ant.

 

[Logos1560]

The Bible clearly teaches that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2). Therefore any translation that claims the quote found Mark 1:2 is from Isaiah cannot be from God. That quote is found in Malachi as most footnotes acknowledge.

Are you claiming that some old translations that are placed on the KJV-only view's line of good Bibles or stream of pure Bibles such as the Syriac Peshitta, the Old Latin Bible, and 1300's Wycliffe's Bible "cannot be from God?"

 

[Logos1560]

Neither did Elhanan kill Goliah as many translations say he did. David killed Goliath. Therefore any translation that lies about who killed Goliath cannot be from God.

Are you implying that the Hebrew Masoretic text "cannot be from God?" The Hebrew Masoretic text does not have the words added in italics found in the KJV.

 

[Logos1560]

There is no verse that claims the KJV to be the word of God, but through reasoning, we can determine the translations that are not.

You seem to be admitting that the KJV-only view rests on human reasoning. Is your reasoning entitled to the same respect as the statements or declarations of Scripture?