KJVO Pastor Friend Bends a Little

If a Christian uses a modern version, how mature is he? Modern versions can expand your brian -- big understanding the perverting word of God! What about the conscience? Some Christians have absolute lousy testimony during using their modern versions because of the conscience that they lacked and negated. </font>[/QUOTE]Where does that put those for whom Wycliffe Bible Translators has just published a translation. They have never had the KJV nor a Bible translation.

I wonder what the Christians did in foreign countries who died for Christ without a KJV and maybe only a Bible in their own language. There are the onlies in Germany too. There are those who make the same claim about the Luther Bible.

How could anyone think that an English KJV is the only Bible that is any good. We need to throw those people in with the Germans who make the same claim about the Luther Bible. Anyone who knows about translation work knows that there is always loss in any translation. Some words do not translated from one culture to another. How do the KJVO's explain the fact that some words are not translated because they do not translate into English.

Someone who is KJVO should look up a word like conversation and tell someone if that best translates the word in the Greek. Someone mayhave just forgotten that the English language has changed since 1611 therefore making it a translation that is no longer correct.

 

Askjo says:

I do not talk about these pastors. I talk about these Christians in the nation. I viewed them in some states where I went to visit.

Higher percent shows that most Christians are not interested in what they practiced what the Bible said.

To understand the differences concerning Christians:

1. immature (babes in Christ) Christians

2. mature (strong Christians) Christians

3. carnal (worldly Christians) Christians

4. sinning (Sinful Christians) Christians

Most Christians lacked number 2 because they are number 1 and 3.

Surely you don't believe their choice of Bible versions has anything to do with what "kind" of Christian one is, do you?

That's equivalent to believing the KJV is corrupt because it's the bible of so many quasi-Christian cults. Neither of those views is correct.

 

Really, what part of the Bible has lost it’s meaning. Was it when God created the heaven and the earth? Or maybe Noah’s ark was not three hundred cubits in length? Where is the meaning lost? Is it when Christ died and rose again on the third day? Maybe he never died. Where is the loss of meaning?

And that’s way I thank God for giving us a Bible in English that we can believe in.

I say, if he spread the Gospel and souls were saved, praise God.

So what did your friend use to share the Gospel with the Ethiopians?

So unless you study and read the Hebrew and Greek you are wasting your time? What a bunch of B-O-L-O-G-N-A. Do you know how many people do not know Hebrew and Greek? When you go to church this Sunday, ask as many people you can to see if they know the H/G. I guarantee the majority will not. So all those people are wasting time? What a bunch of B-O-L-O-G-N-A.

 

Why? I believe I’m a child of God just like I believe the King James Bible is the word of God, by faith.

Correction, I use the 1769 edition.

 

What do you believe to be missing from the modern versions that would keep a child of God from reaching spiritual maturity? </font>[/QUOTE]There are hundreds, if not thousands of ommissions.

 

Homebound, could you give chapter and verse of one (1) ommission in the New King James that would keep a Child of God from reaching maturity?

HankD

 

And what is it about those omissions that would prevent the reader from growing into Christian maturity? What is missing that would cause the reader to become spiritually retarded?

 

Homebound: "So unless you study and read the Hebrew
and Greek you are wasting your time?
What a bunch of B-O-L-O-G-N-A."

Amen, Brother Homebound -- Preach it!

Of course, i believe that the Source of God's Written Word
that i read should be in the same language that i
learned to read and write which is 20th Century English
(NOT the English of the 17th century - i.e. 1611).

Thankfully God has preserved for us in the 21st Century
His blessed Written Word,
the Holy Bible in a number of good translations.
These English translations can be studied instead of
the original source language documents.

Homebound: "There are hundreds, if not thousands of ommissions."

This is not sufficient avoidance of the question.
Here is the question:

skanwmatos: "What do you believe to be missing from the modern versions that would keep a child of God from reaching spiritual maturity?"

Here is my answer to the question:
There is nothing missing from any Modern
Version that will keep a child of God
from reaching spiritual maturity.
There are some things "missing" from the
Modern Versions relative to the King James
Version 1769 edition. However, they were
added to the King James Version 1769 edition
relative to the source material.

 

You seem confused. Homebound stated he was a born again believer and KJV. You say that bothers you. Why? Isn't Homebound allowed to identify himself as he sees fit?

If the 1769 edition is not a KJV, what is it?

I did. You didn't.

 

Homebound, could you give chapter and verse of one (1) ommission in the New King James that would keep a Child of God from reaching maturity?

HankD </font>[/QUOTE]All the footnotes unnecessarily bringing doubt on God's Word. "Merely" in 1Peter 3:3. Yes, these aren't omissions, but still.

 

Does that include all the foot notes found in the original 1611 edition of the KJV? Or those found in the various later editions? Say the 1909/1917 Scofield KJVs? How about the other study bibles? Do their notes invalidate the KJV text?

 

It's a known fact the AV1611 had footnotes, i.e. alternate translations from the Anglican scholars. Did their footnotes destroy faith?

 

I haven't read every note, but generally speaking, no. They often give a more literal but more difficult rendering or a different translation allowed by the underlying Hebrew or Greek that is in their opinion less likely than the main one in the text.

 

Homebound, could you give chapter and verse of one (1) ommission in the New King James that would keep a Child of God from reaching maturity?

HankD </font>[/QUOTE]1 Corinthians 1:22
For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: (KJB)

For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; (NKJV)

Your Bible has the Jews requesting a sign to believe. My Bible says that they require a sign to believe. So, if we use your rendering, all the Jews have to do is request a sign to be saved, which would be something they would do, sounds like salvation by works to me.

 

KJV "...the Great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" Titus 2:13b The KJV obscures the deity of Christ here, while the NJKV is clearer and better "...our great God and Savior Jesus Christ." We can play this comparison game if you wish, by picking and choosing carefully chosen Scripture, but remember, it cuts both ways, you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

 

Timothy 1769: "All the footnotes unnecessarily bringing doubt on God's Word."

We note the hypocracy of this statement.

First:
The Original King James Version of 1611 (KJV1611, yes
reprints are available) contains two types of sidenotes:
references to similar subject verses
and translator notes. Translators notes are notes by
the translator of the second best translation.
King James Version Only (KJVO) hypocritically denies
it's own book. In fact, most KJVOs use the King James
Version 1769 edition (KJV1769)

Second: The statement ommits information that there are two
words of God:

1. The written word of God: God's Holy Bible
2. The living word of God: Messiah Yeshua (Christ Jesus).

In truth, the footnotes should not bring doubt on God's
Word but expand information about the Bible to the
users of the Bible. Withholding information about the Bible
reminds of the time when the Roman Catholic Curch (RCC)
killed people for making the scriptures available in
the local/common language.

 

How did it obscure. The great God refers to Jehovah in the OT and then the KJB lets us know that these two are the same. Jehovah is our Saviour.

 

But still what?

Apart from the fact that I don't see how this construction could ultimately bear upon a woman's spiritual maturity, I notice that the nKJV and NASB puts the word "merely" in italics. We could write a long book concerning the use of italics and the skewing (whether good or bad) of the meaning of verses in the King James Bible.

Also the First Edition of the KJB has marginal notes whose effect casts a measure of doubt upon the translation of certain words by giving alternatives.

But the subject is ommissions, of which no translation is perfect including the KJB.

For example:

KJV Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

NAS Hebrews 2:9 But we do see Him who has been made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God He might taste for everyone.

The KJV omits the words of the TR "little while" giving the impression that Jesus has always been lower than the angels, put this together with "my Father is greater than I" and we are all arians and the JWs are correct.

True the nKJV omits "little while" but as I said no translation is perfect.

Just in passing and as for 1 Peter 3:3 in this case I would probably agree that leaving the word merely out all together would be better.

Personally, I think version one-ups-manship has some value, not much but some.

HankD

 

By adding "our", it makes an unnessary distinction between "the Great God" and "Saviour Jesus Christ"