Originally posted by robycop3:
Originally posted by sanderson1769:
Didn't God promise that not one word would pass away?
Yes he did. But what has that got to do with the Kjv? There are more Sanskrit speaking people in the world than English speaking people. Where does the Bible say that God will preserve his Word in the KJV? That is an arrogant presumption. Since the KJV is only a translation all kinds of words have been "lost." Meaning is lost in translation. That is why it is necessary to have some knowledge of Greek and Hebrew. The proverbial "God forbid!" of Rom.6:2, where neither "God" nor "forbid" are found in the Greek is a good example. Perhaps the meaning isn't entirely lost, but the words certainly are. There is no God neither forbid in the Greek. Were the words lost? Actually they were added by the KJV translators, and all those words more accurately translated "May it not be," were deleted, "lost" by the KJV translators. The translators of the KJV "lost" the very words you said could not be lost.
So either Christ is lying, or your view of Scripture is wrong.
And didn't I say to apply some common sense to the verse...that Jesus said MILLIONS of words which DID pass away? But none of what he wanted preserved passed away.
This may be true of the Greek and Hebrew, but it certainly isn't true of the KJV. Have you ever thought why all those italicized words are in the KJV? Are they not the additions to the word of God, which are not in the original Greek. If the KJV translators had not put in the italicized "unknown" buefore tongues in 1Cor.14 there may have been less confusion about the tongues issue. But they added to the Word of God instead. They didn't preserve what God wanted to preserve.
If the King James Bible is in fact a perfect copy of God's Word, then why would we need to go back to a Greek text which we are not sure is God's word (there are many different versions even of the Textus Receptus).
OTOH, which edition of the KJV is the so-called inspired version: 1611 (which virtually no one can read and easily understand), 1729,? Which of the five or so editions is the correct one. God is perfect. His word is perfect. That which he inspired is infallible has no mistakes for God is perfect. Of course that position leads us to the conclusion that the only manuscripts that were perfect were the original ones which we don't have today. We have copies in which the Word is preserved, but that which is inspired was inspired through the holy prophets of the Old Testament and the apostles of the New Testament by the Holy Spirit.
Howdya know it's perfect, especially, with no SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for such an idea? Howdya know the GENEVA BIBLE isn't perfect? Or the NASB? Or the NKJV? Or the NIV? And WHICH EDITION of the Textus receptus is perfect? Howdya KNOW it is?
No translation is perfect. All translations lose meaning. No translation is either inspired or even preserved. The Word of God is preserved for us in the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, not in any translation.
I do not wish to debate with anyone who does not believe the King James Bible is the perfect word of God because
...You'll lose.
Then you don't want to debate.
And, you are closed minded before you even start.
And you will have absolutely no answer for the rest of the 90% of the world who doesn't speak English. You just condemn them to Hell right away because they don't speak English.
that is not the purpose of the article. The purpose of the article is to examine the question of why a person who believes that the KJV is God's word would feel the need to go back to the Greek and augment it.
Even the KJV translators felt that obligation
after they made their translation; why shouldn't we?
2. Because God is a God of order and not of confusion. We do things progressively. Every translation has errors in it. That is why the Greek and Hebrew, the languages which our Lord spoke are necessary. Christ did not speak in English. He spoke in Greek and in Hebrew or Aramaic. Meaning is lost in translation. If you don't know that then you don't have much knowledge of languages. I am a missionary fluent in a number of languages. I must also use a translator in some. I know well the pitfalls of translations, and how it is impossible to translate from one language to another. Thus, while the KJV may be a very accurate translation, even the most accurate translation, it is not perfect. No translation is perfect.
Because the KJV isn't as perfect as you think. It renders the Greek 'me ginomai'as "God forbid", for example.
A good example.
God transfers OT scriptures into Greek in NT quotations and still calls it God's word. God is obviously capable of transferring his word from one language to another.
God doesn't simply translate. God inspires. God never inspired the KJV. God inspired the original manuscripts. Those words that Peter, John, James, Moses, Samuel, etc. wrote, God inspired. He did not inspire what the KJV translators wrote. The KJV translators of their own admission said that their translation was not perfect and yet you say it is. Every translation can be improved upon. No translation is perfect. The reason that we have the Greek and Hebrew is that we have a standard from which we can translate the Bible into all languages.
And God is obviously capable of presenting it in multiple versions, regardless of those who think otherwise.
Not all versions may be good versions. But all nations are entitled to have a Bible in their language, and it won't be the KJV.
I speak several languages fluently, and my other contention was that the VAST majority of those who quote the Greek are not fluent in the language and are therefore unqualified to do so.
There are enough resources out there today that one does not have to be a Greek scholar to study the Bible. But it is necessary to go back to the Greek to find out the meanings of different words and phrases if one is going to do any serious bible study.
OK, then explain the above example.
That which is perfect is come, and that which is in part has been done away.
...This refers to our being in Jesus' physical presence in the future; it has nothing whatsoever to do with Bible versions.
I don't exactly which Bibles were used throughout the world pre-1611 because I wasn't alive and neither were you. I base what I believe on the word of God. I'll guarantee you that the perfect word of God was out there pre-1611.
The verse has nothing to do with versions.
I believe it has to do with the close of the canon which took place at the end of the first century. But it certainly has nothing to do with the KJV. To read that into it is fraught with ridiculous twisting of Scripture.
But the KJV is different from any of the pre-1611 Bibles. There can be only ONE PERFECT VERSION. Any deviation from it in the slightest is IMperfect. By your own admission, the KJV is NOT perfect because you say the perfect version was already out there.
There is not PERFECT translation! The KJV is only a translation. God promised preserved His Word, not a translation of His Word. Please understand that very important difference. The Greek and the Hebrew have been around since the time of Christ, and the Old Testament from before that time. The KJV came along over one and a half centuries later. God inspired the former not the latter. He never inspired an English translation. We don't join in with those that chime the chorus "If the KJV was good enough for Paul, it is good enough for me!
DHK
