KJB1611reader
Active Member
First, I wish to share this link that talks about Stephanus and others confirming 1 John 5:7 in codexes.
-
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!
Is it okay to use the NKJV?
- Thread starter Guido
- Start date
I did not claim that God lost it. Perhaps your own KJV-only reasoning/teaching seems to suggest that God failed to preserve the same exact original-language words of Scripture He gave by inspiration to the prophets and apostles well enough for them to remain the standard and greater authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations before 1611, in 1611, and after 1611. The KJV translators themselves maintained that the preserved Scriptures in the original languages were the standard and authority for the making and trying of all Bible translations, and I agree with them. I believe a consistent view of preservation that would be true before 1611, in 1611, and after 1611 instead of an inconsistent modern non-scriptural KJV-only view.
The preserved Scriptures in the original languages today are found in the same multiple, varying original-language manuscript copies of Scripture as they were before 1611. God's promises concerning preservation did not change in 1611 or in 1769 or in 1900 [PCE] as KJV-only reasoning inconsistently implies.
Layman
Member
It would seem that Shawn has been banned. I guess he will be keeping his opinions to himself from now on.
No they do not . That is false witness. Mark the person who told you that as unreliable.
Thank you for your kind evaluation of me.
This collection of various readings in the margin distinguished Estienne's third edition as the first Greek text with a critical apparatus, and greatly enhanced the reputation of the text. It was thought by many that Estienne had edited his text directly from these manuscripts, and indeed Estienne's preface promotes this idea. But in more than a hundred places all of Estienne's manuscripts are cited together for readings which differ from the text, and in several places the text follows Erasmus alone against all known manuscripts. It may also be observed that in the one place above all others where the various readings were likely to be consulted, that is, in 1 John 5:7, an error in the placement of brackets led readers to believe that all seven of the manuscripts collated by Estienne for the General Epistles included most of the disputed clause relative to the three heavenly witnesses, when in fact none of them contained the clause at all.
"You" is intended to be a plural, including all who take the prevalent position of producing more and better Bibles. You are probably a nice enough guy for those who know you personally but the opinions we express defines our views of God.
For context, the year 1901 seemed to be a transition year for Christianity in the West. The first of a long line of American and English language Bibles began to be published with the ASV. The same year the modern Pentecostal movement was birthed in Topeka Kansas from members of main line denominations and after a season of great revival in the West.
That was the beginning of new Bibles and new denominations. The Pentecostals even developed a paraphrased version of themselves called the modern Charismatic movement where anything goes and there are no parameters . Considering Bible prophecy and the devices of the adversary that we should not be ignorant of, it is hard for me to believe there was not a powerful designer behind all of this.
Corruption is everywhere. There are no coincidences. but a real spiritual war. You must take sides.
Mt 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
You are blaming all that on a Bible translation? Pretty sure those Pentecostals were using KJVs.
I don’t see why not