• 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!

New KJV

michelle

New Member
--------------------------------------------------
The bottom line is that she can't "win" the discussion based on the TR's own content. Nor can she "win" based on simple exegesis of the pericopes in John 5 and 8 respectively. She has to eisegete them and use Scripture to support her claim.

--------------------------------------------------


I guess you have a misunderstanding of why I come here to post. I do not come to these debate threads to "win" anything, but merely share the truth, and warn others out of great love, care and concern for the words of the Lord, and for my fellow brothers/sisters in Christ.


--------------------------------------------------
She has to eisegete them and use Scripture to support her claim.
--------------------------------------------------


We are, by the way, to prove all things by the scriptures.

1 Thess. 5

21. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22. Abstain from all appearance of evil.
23. And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
24. Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.
25. Brethren, pray for us.
26. Greet all the brethren with an holy kiss.
27. I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren.
28. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.


Acts 17

11. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
 

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Originally posted by michelle:
--------------------------------------------------
THink with the mind of Christ, not with the mind of the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The mind of Christ is humility.

This statement is an arrogant statement.

--------------------------------------------------


It is? Then if it is so arrogant, then how come it is in the scriptures? I am only giving the advice that is given in the scriptures:


1 Corinthians 2

1. And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
2. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
3. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
4. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit and of power:
5. That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
6. Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
7. But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
8. Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9. But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Certainly you are not implying that the Christians on this website are "without the truth". Paul was talking to groups who were disagreeing with the gospel or rebelling. He was not talking to Christians who were debating which manuscript was the most accurate to the original.

If taken literally I would think that you might be implying that you have the answer from the Lord and nobody else here does. IMHO this would be egotistical and arrogant.

I don't think I could ever put myself in the place of the knowledge that Paul had.

I am assuming this is incorrect, but straighten me out if I am wrong. Otherwise, I do not understand the reason you quoted that particular scripture as related to this thread.
 

michelle

New Member
--------------------------------------------------
Michelle, you're the arrogant one. I'm simply using my own credentials to show exactly how arrogant you are. I'm one of the ones here that has an extremely high level of understanding and ability with the English language. What's arrogant is for you to condescendingly insinuate as you did a few pages ago that we have no understanding of our native language, as if you have "credentials." All you're doing is assuming the truth of what Askjo wrote and defending it, and not very well at that. I know, I know, now we'll get an appeal to emotion or some claim that it's God's Spirit that's telling you this, blah, blah, blah.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1 Cor. 1

12. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
13. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
14. I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15. Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
16. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
17. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
18. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world
?
21. For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23. But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24. But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men
.
26. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27. But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28. And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29. That no flesh should glory in his presence
.
30. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31. That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
 

Bro Tony

New Member
I do not come here to be liked or respected by, nor to respect any man/person. I come here to share the truth, and expose the lie because I love the truth and others enouph to share it, and stand for it.
Well you have proved yourself faithful to your words in the first part of your above statement.

In the second part you reveal just how delussional you are. You spew forth words of condemnation for others, you speak against the very Word of God, you claim some mystical insight that everyone else has missed. It all goes back to your gnostic view of your own ability to understand what no one else can. You have again hijacked a thread that was having some good discussion. You are not worth any more of my time or effort. Someday maybe your eyes will be open, I hope it is not too late.

Good-bye,

Bro Tony
 

michelle

New Member
--------------------------------------------------
Certainly you are not implying that the Christians on this website are "without the truth". Paul was talking to groups who were disagreeing with the gospel or rebelling. He was not talking to Christians who were debating which manuscript was the most accurate to the original.
--------------------------------------------------


Please stop making it seem as though I am inferring something I am not. I am merely giving other christians advice, scriptural advice on how to approach this issue. Secondly, we are talking about the very scriptures themselves, to which has been shown, has ALTERED the truth in the scriptures, and made Jesus Christ to be a liar in that verse.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
 

michelle

New Member
--------------------------------------------------
If taken literally I would think that you might be implying that you have the answer from the Lord and nobody else here does. IMHO this would be egotistical and arrogant.
--------------------------------------------------


Yes, I do have the answer, because and only because God has given it to us in the scriptures. We all have the answer, but some choose to ignore it, or deny it or compromise it, and others stand by it and warn of those that change it. Call it what you will, but the scriptures say otherwise, and so also do the FACTS. Instead of taking this debate always as a personal attack, maybe it is more wise to look at this with the love for the truth in God's words, rather than going against your favorite version, and your loyalty to the translators of these versions. Our loyalties should be placed in the truth of Jesus Christ and the scriptures to which reveal HIM.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
 

pastorjeff

New Member
Well we have seen very clearly that the NKJV is different than the KJV. This means what. Atranslation is different than a translation. We are comparing the accuracy and reliability of a translation with another translation. "I prefer mine so yours is wrong". The original question is never going to be answered this way.
 

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Originally posted by michelle:
--------------------------------------------------
Certainly you are not implying that the Christians on this website are "without the truth". Paul was talking to groups who were disagreeing with the gospel or rebelling. He was not talking to Christians who were debating which manuscript was the most accurate to the original.
--------------------------------------------------


Please stop making it seem as though I am inferring something I am not. I am merely giving other christians advice, scriptural advice on how to approach this issue. Secondly, we are talking about the very scriptures themselves, to which has been shown, has ALTERED the truth in the scriptures, and made Jesus Christ to be a liar in that verse.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
Michelle, don't take my quote out of context, PLEASE, I was asking you if that is what you were doing, not accusing you of doing it.

What I don't understand is that you keep highlighting things such as "they didn't understand because they listened to man", etc. etc. It just seemed to me like your advice pointed to them as being in this position and you being in the position of Paul and his truth. If that is not what you are implying, then I appologize for saying that, but I am having trouble fitting the scriptures you quote into context any other way.

I think we have a clear example that a single Greek word, which is in the same context, is translated using two words with synomymous readings in the KJ and two words that ARE the same in modern versions. Obviously, the manuscripts stand on their own and it does not take a rocket scientist in the Greek language to know that since the word has an English equivalent, then that equivalent can be used in both places in the translation.

We may not understand exactly what God means in the scriptures (somehow I think even in the English that context is not being included adequately). The bottom line is, the manuscripts are written in the same way the NKJV is translated. Manuscripts ---&gt; NKJV.

This even relates to TR manuscripts. This is not a "words were left out in older manuscript" debate.

I have difficulty believing the baby-baptising, Baptist hating English translators would really understand Greek any better than a modern scholar; however, that is not important here. The importance is, a SINGLE WORD is used in the Greek. Therefore an accurate translation would be to use a single word in each place.
 

GeneMBridges

New Member
Michelle, you can name "definitions" all you like, but the bottom line is USAGE in the English of the period of the translating. The fact of the matter is that the word "record" can be found in Shakespeare as relating to oral testimony. It need NOT be a written item. I can be even mean "living testimony," e.g. memory. This can be seen in its usage in The Tragedy of King Richard II, Measure for Measure, and Sonet 55. Early Modern and late middle English is littered with usages of the word "record" in relationship to oral testimony as well as written testimony. This is important as James I was Elizabeth's successor, and Elisabethan language usage was the norm. To say use "record" as a reference to writing is, in fact, to change the usage of the term, because it imposes a more frequent usage of the word upon the understanding of the translators than what was there. In point of fact, the words "witness" (e.g. oral testimony, to give an oral account) and "record" (to make record, to recall memory) were interchangeable terms in 1611. You're right, the facts DO matter, and the usage is THE FACT. So, the conflict, if any is in the KJV, as if we follow "the definitions" as you say and the modern usage, then the KJV is the one that is the confusing translation, not the MV's. THAT is the fact from the history of the use of the words "witness" and "record" from the era in which the KJV was first translated. In other words, the words in 1611 English rendered as "witness...record" are, in fact, synonymous words. Your view on this passage and that of Askjo turns on the idea that they are not synonymous. You're right, they aren't...by MODERN English standards of use.

Likewise, the terms as rendered in the MV's are not only more faithful to the underlying TR, they reflect a more accurate usage of the word in question. This does not change the meaning of the text. For example the rendering of "testimony" and again "testimony" in place of "Witness...record" respectively show no contradiction at all...except in the minds of those that try to conjure one from thin air.

As for your constant prattling on about how you are right and everybody else is wrong...well, I think your motives are quite plain. YOu are out to get the last word and you can't admit you are mistaken. It's a simple as that, michelle. You yourself said elsewhere that you had a problem with this kind of thing, and, boy oh boy, have you made it evident here today.
 

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Originally posted by pastorjeff:
Well we have seen very clearly that the NKJV is different than the KJV. This means what. Atranslation is different than a translation. We are comparing the accuracy and reliability of a translation with another translation. "I prefer mine so yours is wrong". The original question is never going to be answered this way.
You are right. But in reality, whether anybody wants to admit it or not, the KJV uses words that are synonymous and the NKJV uses the same words. Technically, they are both right.
 

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Here we must ask the big question again. If the KJV and the Greek manuscripts vary, which are we to believe? :eek:
 

michelle

New Member
--------------------------------------------------
I think we have a clear example that a single Greek word, which is in the same context, is translated using two words with synomymous readings in the KJ and two words that ARE the same in modern versions. Obviously, the manuscripts stand on their own and it does not take a rocket scientist in the Greek language to know that since the word has an English equivalent, then that equivalent can be used in both places in the translation.
--------------------------------------------------


But the whole point being made, and the TRUTH and FACT that has been shown, and is being discussed is that it has NOT and that these two words have a DISTINCT DIFFERENCE - not synonomous to the context and truth, that has not been ACCURATELY translated in the NKJV, to which makes Jesus look like a liar.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
 

michelle

New Member
---------------------------------------------------
Here we must ask the big question again. If the KJV and the Greek manuscripts vary, which are we to believe?
--------------------------------------------------


I have already answered this and in detail, and on this very thread.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle
 

russell55

New Member
The fact of the matter is that the word "record" can be found in Shakespeare as relating to oral testimony. It need NOT be a written item. I can be even mean "living testimony," e.g. memory. This can be seen in its usage in The Tragedy of King Richard II, Measure for Measure, and Sonet 55. Early Modern and late middle English is littered with usages of the word "record" in relationship to oral testimony as well as written testimony. This is important as James I was Elizabeth's successor, and Elisabethan language usage was the norm.
I got out my really old and really big Oxford dictionary and found out that what you say here is true. Record could mean exactly the same thing as "witness" in the 1600's.

This is probably one of those places where the KJV translators were using what they perceived as synonyms to translate a single Greek word in order to add a bit of variety.
 

Askjo

New Member
Originally posted by TC:
You complain that Jesus contradicts himself in the NKJV and other MV's, yet, He does the same thing in the KJV. If you read it carefully, you will that in verse 5, in the KJV, "My witness is not true." And in the next one, Jesus says "yet my record is true:" You cannot put down the NKJV without putting down the KJV - for it does the same exact thing.
TC, you are right that I complain Jesus contradict Himself in the NKJV and MVs, NOT the KJV.

TC, you are wrong! Read CAREFULLY --

Witness = not true, but record = true! The KJV shows that Jesus did not contradict Himself. The KJV is clearest than NKJV and MVs.

Now, comes your real issue. Different Bibles use alternative English words for the same Greek word. So what? The KJV uses different English words to translate the same Greek word. Yet, you do not complain about the KJV not being consistant. If that is all you can come up with , better try harder (just like Avis car rental commercial) next time.
TC, did you read my previous post concerning a few English words for same Greek word?

The KJV said witness and record - no contradiction!

MVs said testimony and testimony; witness and witness. They contradicted reflecting to the doctrine of Jesus Christ.

So, are you saying that the English dictionary has more authority than the Greek dictionary (which I posted) in defining Greek words? I will take what the Greek text and Greek dictionary says over your interpretation of it.
Michelle has a good point because witness and record are for one Greek word; a Greek word for many English words. When you read witness and record, you understand what these words mean.

HankD quoted:
The word "witness" and "record" is the same in the TR Greek of both passages.
HankD, you are right. You know the definition difference between witness and record.
Nonsense!
I said that MVs contradict the doctrine of Jesus Christ. When MVs contradicted 2 passages, therefore Jesus Christ contradicts Himself.

Michelle quoted:
Just some insight for you TC - we speak, know and understand ENGLISH, even if one were to translate the Greek into ENGLISH. Quite clearly, these two ENGLISH WORDS that can be rendered for the SAME GREEK WORD, mean TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT things. Context my dear....context and truth. Modern scholars should know better the difference. They chose to translate that Greek word to the word that is contrary to context and truth.

What is nonsense, is the fact that it has been shown to you all the definitions of these two words, and how they are DIFFERENT enouph in meaning that makes a very important DISTINCTION. These words do not MEAN the same thing, nor is the SAME MEANING in the context and truth.
Michelle, you are correct. Amen!

Robycop3 quoted:
The Greek word that the KJV renders as both 'witness' and 'record' is 'martureo', which I assume is an infinitive, and it means "to bear witness, to testify, to give an accurate report", etc.(Dr. Bob, correct me if I've left out any other important definition) Actually, bear witness and bear record meant virtually the same thing in archaic English; I think the main difference being that the 'record' was always written
The KJV translators were wise to select right words for English-speaking people.

Michelle quoted:
It is not a King James Only argument. It is defending the truth of God's words of truth against that which has ALTERED it and made Jesus Christ who is the way, the truth and the life, to lie in the very scriptures themselves, which are the truth, and bear record that he is a liar, in the versions that have so rendered it as such.
I agree.

Robycop3 quoted:
The NKJV remains correct also.
Wrong! At my work I have a record book. Employee asked me to look at list of person signed. I showed him that RECORD. She found who did. Witness or testimony: ORAL response! You know the distinction between oral and written.

Bro Tony quoted:
In fact the case could be made that the NKJV translators showed more integrity in their translation
More integrity? Absolutely not.

HankD quoted:
Let me repeat michelle, the word in the original Greek is the same, there is no “these two words” in the inspired text, it has not been "ALTERED".
Incorrect! The KJV translators were wise to select right different words for one SAME Greek word. NKJV translators are unwise to select SAME words for SAME Greek word.

SAME = Same = Contradictory!

Different = same = no contradoctory!

Michelle quoted:
the NKJV has rendered the Greek word to an INACCURATE English WORD that shows that Jesus Christ is lying
Amen!

C4K quoted:
The KJV translators knew Greek and Hebrew better than English? I would LOVE to see evidence for that!
They were very wiser than "TODAY" translators of MVs and NKJV.

Russell55 quoted:
The bottom line is that the TR uses the same word in these verses, so when the NKJV uses the same word to translate them, you can't claim that shows the NKJV doesn't follow the TR.
Wrong! They translated incorrectly.

C4K quoted:
I think it is unfortunate that people could see Jesus as a liar in these verse
MVs did, not the KJV.

Bro Tony quoted:
The Greek says what it says and the translators of the NKJV were faithful to the text
That is misleading and mis-information! They were not faithful to the text because of 2,000+ infected words including 40% non-TR.

Michelle quoted:
My hatred is toward those things that have altered and corrupted the words of the Lord. You have proven with your very own statements, that your loyalty is with the translators who have INACCURATELY translated the words of the Lord and have made Jesus Christ a liar, because of it. And you say you love the words of God and truth? Baloney! You have made is apparent that you love compromise.
Michelle, you are right! Amen!
thumbs.gif


GeneMBridges quoted:
Actually, you are the one blinded by your ignorance of the context of the passage and your desire to tow the party line rather than simply admit that Askjo posted a spurious remark.
Spurious remark? Please read CAREFULLY my previous posts and THINK doubly!

Ziggy quoted:
Sounds good, Askjo, UNTIL anyone looks at the Greek of the TR (*any* edition) that underlies the KJV:

Jn 5:31 KJV = I bear witness / TR = MARTURW (for Robycopy: Present Active Subjunctive, 1st person singular in context following “if”); my witness = MARTURIA MOU

Jn 8:14 KJV = I bear record/ TR = MARTURW; my record = MARTURIA MOU

Unfortunately for your hypothesis, Jesus said the *exact same words* each time....and it is the “words” that are preserved, right, Askjo? You *do* continue to appeal to the TR, Askjo -- is the TR *wrong* here?
Anyone using the KJV do not read the Greek words here! They need to understand what they read in ENGLISH.
 

pastorjeff

New Member
We are to believe the MSS. This in no way negates the authority of modern translations ( I include the KJV because compared to the MSS., it is modern) as the Word of God. God has promised to preserve His word, but never said it would be in one "copy" in any given language. I preach on Sunday mornings from the KJV, do High School Sunday School from the NIV, and have a short Devotion at prayer meeting from the NASB. I have not received "Word" from God that thiss was unacceptable.
This may be off track, but it sure is thought provoking
 

russell55

New Member
these two words have a DISTINCT DIFFERENCE
But they didn't have a distince difference back when the KJV translators first used them. Back then, they were used synonymously. I looked them up. 'Tis true. The KJV translators were using what were then synonyms.

The meaning of "record" has changed since then, and now means pretty much soley "something that is set down in writing, or on disc, or something", meaning. Back then, that wasn't the case.
 

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Originally posted by Askjo:
Anyone using the KJV do not read the Greek words here! They need to understand what they read in ENGLISH.
So we have to ask again. . . you say "Jesus is not a liar in the KJV"....you say "Jesus is a liar in the NKJV"....AND you say "Jesus is a liar in the Greek manuscripts. . . ?
 

Phillip

<b>Moderator</b>
Originally posted by pastorjeff:
We are to believe the MSS. This in no way negates the authority of modern translations ( I include the KJV because compared to the MSS., it is modern) as the Word of God. God has promised to preserve His word, but never said it would be in one "copy" in any given language. I preach on Sunday mornings from the KJV, do High School Sunday School from the NIV, and have a short Devotion at prayer meeting from the NASB. I have not received "Word" from God that thiss was unacceptable.
This may be off track, but it sure is thought provoking
Oh, you wicked, wicked preacher. Don't you know that those Anglican translators were "inspired"? :rolleyes:
 

russell55

New Member
They need to understand what they read in ENGLISH.
Shouldn't you be understanding those words in the English of the KJV translators though? And if they used them as synonyms, isn't that the way we should understand them?
 
Top