NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
If American English speakers are so faithful, why did God give the Bible in Elizebethan English instead of American English?
-
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!
KJVO Lies
- Thread starter DeclareHim
- Start date
--------------------------------------------------
Except that we've showed you over and over that Ps 12 refers to people and not words!
--------------------------------------------------
No, all that has been shown is your lack of understanding this scripture in it's context as well as with the rest of the truth in the scriptures, because you can't or don't want to face the truth. Just because you and others say it isn't the meaning is moot to me. Show me with other scriptures how this isn't the truth. Then you can rightfully judge me of being in error of the truth.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Except that we've showed you over and over that Ps 12 refers to people and not words!
--------------------------------------------------
No, all that has been shown is your lack of understanding this scripture in it's context as well as with the rest of the truth in the scriptures, because you can't or don't want to face the truth. Just because you and others say it isn't the meaning is moot to me. Show me with other scriptures how this isn't the truth. Then you can rightfully judge me of being in error of the truth.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
--------------------------------------------------
We already knew this.
The KJV translators already knew this before they began their work, before they translated Psalm 12 from the Hebrew Scriptures.
--------------------------------------------------
And how is it you know this Hank. Because this is what the translators thought it meant? Because this is what commentaries think? Where is it Hank that you get understanding from. God? or man?
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
We already knew this.
The KJV translators already knew this before they began their work, before they translated Psalm 12 from the Hebrew Scriptures.
--------------------------------------------------
And how is it you know this Hank. Because this is what the translators thought it meant? Because this is what commentaries think? Where is it Hank that you get understanding from. God? or man?
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
--------------------------------------------------
The "jots and tittles" (of the Law) are preserved only in the Hebrew Scriptures
--------------------------------------------------
And I am also one of God's faithful, to whom God gave his promise to in Psalm 12 and many other scriptures. I don't need to know the Hebrew language to get the jots and tittles that Jesus was referring to for they have been translated into my own language, considering I am to live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
The "jots and tittles" (of the Law) are preserved only in the Hebrew Scriptures
--------------------------------------------------
And I am also one of God's faithful, to whom God gave his promise to in Psalm 12 and many other scriptures. I don't need to know the Hebrew language to get the jots and tittles that Jesus was referring to for they have been translated into my own language, considering I am to live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Because it is what Jesus said and the Spirit of God has confirmed it in my heart.
I find jots and tittles in the Hebrew Torah.
I don't find them in the English text of the Books of the Law in the AV1611.
It wasn't too long ago that you asked me whether Jesus meant what He said (worded differently) about the jots and tittles and not one of them passing away.
I said yes because I found them in the Hebrew Scriptures where every word indeed that proceeded out of the mouth of God was in Hebrew not 17th Century Jacobean English where they cannot be found preserved. I prefer these preserved "jots and tittles" of the Hebrew Scripture rather than your "explanation" that they are somehow translated into this 17th century period English in spite of what Jesus plainly said.
But and even at that you did not address the fact that the KJV translators omitted the word "all" (which word contains a "tittle", but even if it didn't they blundered and left out this word from Deuteronomy 5:29 in the AV1611).
So in similar words in which you will be able to understand from the KJVO concept of the "poisoned-well" doctrine, I will ask this question which the MV supporters have been asked (or similar) "since the MV translators left out a word (or words), how can they be trusted? How do you know what else has been deleted"?
How is it that God guided them (KJV translators) to leave out this word (among several others)? If the AV1611 is "corrupted" by this error so then are all others down stream from it are suspect (according to the KJVO spokespersons whom you seem to claim that you don't follow after).
So, apart from this seeming denial, is the AV1611 the Word of God with this word missing (among several others) or the 1769KJV?
True they "corrected" it, thereby publicly admitting that they (or the preceding generation) had in there estimation made a mistake. Indeed, they had made other "mistakes" concerning which they had changed their minds more than once.
I said all that again to reiterate that no translation is semantically perfect and certainly not the AV1611 First Edition which has been proven several hundreds of times unless of course the "mistakes" were inspired. But the KJV translators (or their successors) turned to the "River of Life" the preserved texts of the Original Languages of the Greek and Hebrew for both translation and correction.
God.
HankD
I read some posts concerning the "confusion." I experienced with that because I never forget what I learned from some members at my church. I was a S.S. teacher there. I shared with them with the KJV. They looked up some verses in their MVs and asked me questions. One said what the KJV says is not what her modern versions said. She asked me Why they differ each other. I answered her question, "That's main problem!" She was confused with 2 versions. It is the confusion in the church because they saw the difference between MVs and the KJV. When I use the KJV during teaching S.S. lesson in a class, it causes uncomfortable to any members at my church. I explained why I use the KJV. I shared with them upon the Bible issues, but I saw something wrong there. See something wrong in my church? Yes, it is the confusion. This can lead to little or more arguement.
Michelle:"Not one of you can show me where my understanding is wrong in the scriptures. It has been shown to you all, with scripture that God will preserve his words for every generation."
Charles Meadows:Except that we've showed you over and over that Ps 12 refers to people and not words!
Mr Meadows, she is one person who insiste "this is it' and simply REFUSES to admit to the truth. I continue to dialogue with her only to keep newer Christians to be taken in by her codwallop.
Charles Meadows:Except that we've showed you over and over that Ps 12 refers to people and not words!
Mr Meadows, she is one person who insiste "this is it' and simply REFUSES to admit to the truth. I continue to dialogue with her only to keep newer Christians to be taken in by her codwallop.
--------------------------------------------------
Charles Meadows:Except that we've showed you over and over that Ps 12 refers to people and not words!
Mr Meadows, she is one person who insiste "this is it' and simply REFUSES to admit to the truth. I continue to dialogue with her only to keep newer Christians to be taken in by her codwallop.
--------------------------------------------------
No, you refuse - as I have said:
:"Not one of you can show me where my understanding is wrong in the scriptures. It has been shown to you all, WITH SCRIPTURE that God will preserve his words for every generation."
If my undersanding of Psalm 12 is wrong, please show me using OTHER SCRIPTURES to show my error. Otherwise your OPINION is meaningless.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Charles Meadows:Except that we've showed you over and over that Ps 12 refers to people and not words!
Mr Meadows, she is one person who insiste "this is it' and simply REFUSES to admit to the truth. I continue to dialogue with her only to keep newer Christians to be taken in by her codwallop.
--------------------------------------------------
No, you refuse - as I have said:
:"Not one of you can show me where my understanding is wrong in the scriptures. It has been shown to you all, WITH SCRIPTURE that God will preserve his words for every generation."
If my undersanding of Psalm 12 is wrong, please show me using OTHER SCRIPTURES to show my error. Otherwise your OPINION is meaningless.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
--------------------------------------------------
So in similar words in which you will be able to understand from the KJVO concept of the "poisoned-well" doctrine, I will ask this question which the MV supporters have been asked (or similar) "since the MV translators left out a word (or words), how can they be trusted? How do you know what else has been deleted"?
--------------------------------------------------
Hank, you should know very well that these differences DO NOT COMPARE - differences in them and reasons for them! God did not provide us scriptures today, 350 years later to tell us they are not scripture anymore. He is not taking out verses of scripture. He is not changing important and well known words to new ones. He is not making Jesus Christ a liar. He is not weakening the testimony of and deity of Jesus Christ. He is not sowing doubt and confusion in the churches.
--------------------------------------------------
I said all that again to reiterate that no translation is semantically perfect and certainly not the AV1611 First Edition which has been proven several hundreds of times unless of course the "mistakes" were inspired. But the KJV translators (or their successors) turned to the "River of Life" the preserved texts of the Original Languages of the Greek and Hebrew for both translation and correction
--------------------------------------------------
And one will only conclude this if they have first doubted and denied the evidence of and the providence of God concerning his words and the promises he made to ALL faithful. If I am in error, then there should be plenty of scripture to show my error, and then it may be rightfully considered a man made myth.
I would also like to see your scriptural support that God said he would only preserve his words in the origional languages He gave them.
Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
So in similar words in which you will be able to understand from the KJVO concept of the "poisoned-well" doctrine, I will ask this question which the MV supporters have been asked (or similar) "since the MV translators left out a word (or words), how can they be trusted? How do you know what else has been deleted"?
--------------------------------------------------
Hank, you should know very well that these differences DO NOT COMPARE - differences in them and reasons for them! God did not provide us scriptures today, 350 years later to tell us they are not scripture anymore. He is not taking out verses of scripture. He is not changing important and well known words to new ones. He is not making Jesus Christ a liar. He is not weakening the testimony of and deity of Jesus Christ. He is not sowing doubt and confusion in the churches.
--------------------------------------------------
I said all that again to reiterate that no translation is semantically perfect and certainly not the AV1611 First Edition which has been proven several hundreds of times unless of course the "mistakes" were inspired. But the KJV translators (or their successors) turned to the "River of Life" the preserved texts of the Original Languages of the Greek and Hebrew for both translation and correction
--------------------------------------------------
And one will only conclude this if they have first doubted and denied the evidence of and the providence of God concerning his words and the promises he made to ALL faithful. If I am in error, then there should be plenty of scripture to show my error, and then it may be rightfully considered a man made myth.
I would also like to see your scriptural support that God said he would only preserve his words in the origional languages He gave them.
Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
The confusion is not a result of having two different versions (although your church should at least on some level standardize) but of a lack of proper training on
1. How to study that Bible
2. Bibliology - how the English text we have came to us.
That is the real issue. When you properly explain what the truth is, people understand it. We are going through the Baptist Distinctives in my Adult Bible Fellowship class, and we are spending a few weeks talking about the history of the Scriptures, and the overwhelming evidence that we have a very sure foundation in the Bible. I fail to see any confusion in my own experience (seeing that is the evidence you presented in your post, I guess thats all I need too)
From a public domain website which says that if two books say different things, or they say inherently contradictory things, or one says more than the other, "they cannot both be God's word. This is simple, basic logic...".
1769 KJV Matthew 16:16 ... Thou art the Christ...
1611 KJV Matthew 16:16 ... Thou art Christ...
1769 KJV Deuteronomy 5:29 ... keep all my commandments...
1611 KJV Deuteronomy 5:29 ... keep my commandments...
"they cannot both be God's word. This is simple, basic logic..."
http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts.html
Which is the Word of God and how do you know?
HankD
--------------------------------------------------
Which is the Word of God and how do you know?
--------------------------------------------------
Yes I do. He has made it evident. And you know too, you are just being stubborn and argumentative.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Which is the Word of God and how do you know?
--------------------------------------------------
Yes I do. He has made it evident. And you know too, you are just being stubborn and argumentative.
love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
First you answered a question I didn't ask. You said "Yes I do" which is the answer to the question "do you know which one is the Word of God?". The question I asked is "Which is the Word of God?" Which you didn't answer, and "how do you know" which you also didn't answer.
Stubborn maybe, argumentative, I don't think so.
You will never be effective in your contention until you have thought out and answered all the questions that have been presented to you with a credible answer. This is the best way to learn, under fire. BTW I thought your answer concerning the jots and tittles carrying over into the words of the translation credible. Not the best answer but credible.
When you run out of facts and and/or your convictions are threatened you resort to ad homimens, insult, intimidation and innuendo.
VERY inneffective as well as unscriptural michelle (although you are doing better in this realm IMO).
HankD
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Then you should construe that
my opinion, though fact, is meaningless to you.
Psalm 12 does NOT show that God preserves
His blessed written word for all time.
THERE ARE OTHER SCRIPTURES THAT show that
God preserves His blessed written word for all time.
I believe that God's Holy Written Word is
available for our Generation in the
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) and
that the footnotes are as much the preserved
God's Holy Written Word as are the main
text. God is bigger than those people who
try to dictate the details of how, when,
and where He can providentually preserve
His Holy Word.
BTW, please use "He" has a pronoun when
referring to God the Father, God the Son,
and God the Holy Spirit. Thank you.
But I love to praise Jesus in 17th Century talk:
You haven't shown anything. All you did is say "If it ain't the KJV, it ain't right!" IMHO, the best tranlation of these verses in Philippians 2 is in the New Living Tranlation (NLT). The NLT clearly states that Jesus was God - in agreement with John 1:1 - and that he became a man just like us.
Pastor KevinR
New Member
I am curious Michelle. If you've answered this elsewhere, please direct me...
If God has preserved (pickled) His Word for us as English speaking people in the KJV (whether 1611 or 1769), wouldn't that by default make Him to be a respecter of persons? i.e. why would He do so for our language, and not every language? I don't see God as so inconsistent. That's why Christians by and large see Him as preserving His Word in the very languages He chose to inspire; Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.
If God has preserved (pickled) His Word for us as English speaking people in the KJV (whether 1611 or 1769), wouldn't that by default make Him to be a respecter of persons? i.e. why would He do so for our language, and not every language? I don't see God as so inconsistent. That's why Christians by and large see Him as preserving His Word in the very languages He chose to inspire; Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
I am asking that question here Pastor:
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/4/1726.html#000004
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/4/1726.html#000004