question about God's "preserved" Word

It's not that we refuse to study, we just take God at his Word and believe it. Also, when you study, what is your final authority?

 

No Homebound, it is a lack of study. It is also a flat denial of reality because when this passage is studied, you will come to a different conclusion regarding this passage.

For instance, did you know that the Hebrew language uses masculine and feminine forms of words. Did you know that it is impossible for "them" to refer to "words" because of the gender differences? Did you know that? If not, shame on you for purposefully promoting your misinterpretation of the passage.

I have full confidence in the NKJV, NASB, ESV and don't fall for the conspiracy theories that float around on all of those ...tripod... ...geocities... ...angelfire... webpages. It is all just sad.

 

I have heard of these forms, but have not done a study. But, my final authority will always be the King James Bible.

Are you saying that KJVO people do not study enough to draw a conclusion as you have?

P.S. Is there not different types of Hebrew/Greek languages?

 

Thank you. That is exactly what I thought.

So, in light of facts that would disprove your position, you are content to not study because you wouldn't be able to promote your interpretation. You wouldn't be able to level guilt upon new believers. You wouldn't be able to play the part of Patriot for God's Word.

They have done the study. Here is the problem: when two sides look at the exact same information and come to different conclusions, there is something else to factor in. KJVO people go into study and superimpose those feelings on any passage (such as the one in discussion). I know because I used to be KJVO. The Lord gripped my heart and I don't believe that anymore. I am not ignorant of what I speak about.

Yes. The differences though are not as substantial as you might think. In greek, there is classical greek and common (koine) greek. We still determine our understanding though through usage.

Btw, I am against using anything but a literal translation.

[ October 25, 2002, 10:30 AM: Message edited by: Preach the Word ]

 

Pastor Bob 63 said:

How sad indeed.

But it is a ludicrous statement, Pastor Bob. Do these people mean to say that as long as a translator considers his work to be in the public domain, it could be the Word of God, and yet when he decides to claim copyright on it, suddenly it automagically ceases to be the Word of God - even if not one jot or tittle has changed in between?

In other words, "Word-of-God-ness" (for lack of a better term) is an attribute that can be switched on and off at will with zero regard to the content of the work itself.

"Ludicrous" is a nicer word than I would use for this kind of illogic.

[ October 25, 2002, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

daffney said:

This means, then, if our jr. church memorized and recited half of II John, they were breaking the law!

You confuse putting quotations in a fixed form (which copyright law covers) with public reading and recitation (which it does not).

The KJV is not copyrighted. All other versions are. This is why all other versions cost more to purchase.

A quick glance at the price tags at your local Christian bookstore puts the lie to this claim.

When a Bible is copyrighted, it ceases to be God's Word and becomes man's interpretation of what he thinks God's Word means.

Wow, somehow the Bible automagically ceases to be inspired without changing a single letter of the text! Amazing!

Ludicrous.

Our society has mastered the dumming down system.

I'm not going to even touch this one, for obvious reasons.

[ October 25, 2002, 10:46 AM: Message edited by: Ransom ]

 

HomeBound said:

I have heard of these forms, but have not done a study. But, my final authority will always be the King James Bible.

Translation: "Don't bother me with the facts, please, as they tend to contradict my beloved assumptions."

 

I believe the copyrighters of the Bible versions
to be far more reasonable than some of you
give them credit. Here's the deal:

I recently purchased a very expensive, very
heavy, very unique new Bible. I wanted it for
my studies in Hebrew, because the Hebrew in
it was large, clean, easy to read, and I am not
getting any younger. This particular Bible
(Tanakh only) also has the most trusted direct
English translation of the Tanakh known today
and a few minor notes.

Because it is too inconvenient to carry, my inten-
tion was to make copies of the necessary
pages for the sermon each week and take them
with me, rather than carry this whole Bible, but
when I read the copyright, this was absolutely
forbidden--even for strictly personal use.

Well, I did the right thing. I contacted the copy-
right holder, told them my reasons and intentions,
and requested written permission to make my
weekly copies. They gave it to me without any
further ado.

When I was a soloist, I wanted to redo the music
so that it was in my best range. I wrote, and the
copyright holders gave me permission to copy
and rearrange works that otherwise would have
prevented this. i received written permission.

I was the editor of a church newsletter. I wanted
to put a particular newspaper comic strip in the
newsletter on occasion. I wrote the author and
got written permission for each strip we used.

It is not a matter of their meanness or selfish-
ness; it is a matter of the law, of their work, of
their deserving compensation for their hours of
research, and of our personal responsibility
toward integrity before our God and before
humanity. A clear conscience is worth a lot and
is easily attained, but to fuss and battle over
something is sometimes easier than seeking a
solution.

Let me add: this is for personal use only that
I recommend this, not for use by an organization
or company.

[ October 25, 2002, 11:09 AM: Message edited by: Abiyah ]

 

What do you mean you WERE?

Curious, what facts are out there?

By the way, how do you know the things you study is fact or God given?

 

Questions by Homebound in bold.

What do you mean you WERE?

I bought the whole thing. If it differed at any point in the KJV, I rejected it. I didn't care what the point was. Are you that extreme? I was. You could imagine that it would take alot to convince me.

Curious, what facts are out there?

My friend and I did a 44 page paper (single space) on the issue. We consulted sources from both sides. Give me a particular issue. Ask me about a particular verse or something.

By the way, how do you know the things you study is fact or God given?

Again, I was of the KJVO mindset. I read the stuff. I knew what they said. I also consulted the other side. So, when the two sides accurately represent a particular point, I don't feel the need to question them both. On issues where one side disagrees with they other, I read more, research more, and see if there is anything that might conflict with the rest of Scripture.

I believe that the preservation of Scripture is implicitly taught because the church itself will not fail. If you believe in absolute preservation in one place, what happened to the originals? It is the KJVO crowd that calls into question God's ability to preserve his word. Surely the God-breathed scriptures didn't pass away in favor of copies? Perhaps that is not what is meant by preservation.

 

I wonder if any of the KJVO will ever answer that question. </font>[/QUOTE]KJVO answer: Yes!

 

God has given us today the Bible in English which I believe to be the King James Bible. I don't believe we need to study other languages to find out this point. I believe the Holy Spirit shows us this by carefully studying the scriptures.

I am sorry if I have sounded rude about which version is best. I just believe, as do some other people, I believe, that God did perserve his word in the King James Bible.

What I don't clearly understand is, you have arguments/studies for and against each and every bible version out there. Are all versions God chosen Word or is there one version that is? (I believe Pastor Bob 63 did a poll on this) I betcha there will always be a so-called better version made that people will defend. So who is to say their right or wrong? It will never stop till Christ comes back. God Bless

 

The jury is still out on this issue. I have studied and I'm not completely convinced yet. I have heard intelligent, logical arguements on both sides of the debate.

My stand at this point is this: Even if the literal translation does not speak of the preservation of the words, it certainly does by application.

 

I understand what you are saying. Look at it again though. You said, "I believe..." That is fine. Here is where you start though. Instead of drawing from the Scripture to get this belief, you start with it. You assume it as truth. Then, you proceed to logically deduce everything else. The logic is fine, it is just the premise that is off. Unfortunately, if the house is built on the sand...

 

Based on II Samuel 21:19 (modern versions), who killed Goliath?

 

I don't believe that I just picked up a bible and said, "this is God's word," if this is what you were implying.

The reason I deduce other versions is through study. Words left out, sometimes whole verses are gone.

 

Daffney, this is a discussion on the "preserved" word of God. If you want to hijack a thread, please ignore that impulse and start a new one.

Have you really done no study on this? Is there a satanic hebrew text out there also?

David killed Goliath. I know of at least two valid ways of understanding that passage. If you don't know them, you need to find out what they are. I am not going to deprive you of study.

I am willing to bet that you got that off of some KJVO site. I am shocked and speechless. Stop getting your arguments from men. God didn't show you that.

Btw, in your new thread, inform us how old Ahaziah was when he became king. The King James says 42 and 22. God doesn't lie...

 

I would like to thank all those who took the time to respond to my VERY FIRST POST EVER. THis is also the first chat or board I've ever seen or been involved in. I had only a few minutes between a funeral and another appointment to share my thoughts yesterday. Thank-you to the gracious scribes who took the time to "proof" my spelling and other "ludicrous" errors and mistakes.
A boy about 10 years old asked me years ago - "who killed Goliath?" I responded, "why, David did, of course." Then he asked me about II Samuel 21:19. He told me that one Bible must be right...and one Bible must be wrong. I agreed. One Bible must be true. One Bible must be false. (We're obviously talking two different versions here.)
In several areas, the modern versions are different than the KJ. One is right and one is wrong. One is true, one is false. It MUST be because God, who is the Author of salvation, Maker of the Universe...has promised repeatedley that He would keep and preserve His Word. I believe He is able, I believe He has kept that promise.
When we read the preface of the RSV, they write on the first page..."the KJV has with good reason been termed "the noblest monument of english prose." "Its revisers in 1881 expressed admiration for its simplicity, its dignity, its power, its happy turn of expression. " And etc.

But, when you turn to page 2 of the preface, we read - "Yet the KJV has grave defects. By the middle of the 19th century, the DEVELOPMENT OF BIBLICAL STUDIES AND THE DISCOVERY OF MANY MANUSCRIPTS....MADE IT MANIFEST THAT THESE DEFECTS ARE SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS AS TO CALL FOR REVISION OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION." (Emphasis mine.)
The modern versions are NOT trying to make it easier to read! (They praised the KJV for its simplicity.) THE MODERN VERSIONS ARE TRYING TO CORRECT THE "GRAVE ERRORS AND MISTAKES". This is why, one version reads 4 years, and the modern versions read 40 years. (II Samuel 15:7)

Modern versions and the KJV read differently on facts. One is right. One is wrong. One is true. One is false. Am I to understand the KJV IS full of errors and mistakes?

When the prefaces of ALL modern versiosn refer to "Biblical studies and recent Discoveries" ie. dead sea scrolls, that is an implication of two things;

1. God kept His Word hid until the mid 20th century until these discoveries (dead sea scrolls) occurred.
2. That tomorrow, when MORE discoveries are made...we will have to correct and improve our Bibles once again. (Which might be handy for publishing houses.)

"OK folks, get new improved Bibles. We found new discoveries. We didn't have God's word until now. Thank you to the higher and lower critics who are providing the proper renderings for us."

 

Thomas Nelson Publishers - PO BOX 141000
NKJV

I. General statement
A. Uses not requiring written permission.

Printed, visual, and electroni uses:
"Up to 1,000 verses may be quoted in printed (e.g. book, brochure, magazine, newsletter, LESSON OUTLINE {emphasis mine}), visual, and electronic forms as long as the verses quoted do not amount to 50% of a complete Book of the Bible and do not make up more than 50% of the total text of the work in which they are quoted."

Audible uses:
Up to 250 verses may be quoted in audible (e.g. audio recording, sermons, radio and tv) form without written permission as long as the verses quoted do not amount to 50% of a complete Book of the Bible and do not make up 50% or more of the total text of the work.

B. Uses requiring written permission.

Printed, visual, electronic, audible and musical uses:

Use of the NKJV text beyond the verse limits of Section A above requires written permission. Requests for rights or permission should be made in writing to Thomas Nelson publishers (I am not going to type out the whole address.)

Requests should state 1) the exact portions to be quoted. 2) The estimated percentage of the total text of the work made up of the NKJV text. 3) the use in which the NKJV will be quoted (e.g. book, computer product, AUDIO CASSETTE {emphasis mine} musical composition); 4) any material to be included in the work, such as additional text, illustrations, photos and etc.; 5) the purpose, number of copies, and distribuion of the use in which the NKJV is quoted; and 6) the sale and lease price of the work or other income to be received.

Are we all aware that 17% of the Books of the Bible have less than 57 verses?

Are we all aware that to quote 50 % of one of these Books...to record a sermon on tape doing so, is a violation of copyright law?

 

[God] used man to write those words to comfort one another with these words. God is perfect, therefore we have a perfect Bible. That has been proven to be the King James Version.

No, God inspired men to write. The idea that these writers simply dictated what God told them is a fundamentalist fallacy. Divinely inspired does not mean divinely dictated. God has authority over his words, but his words to not have authority over him (to quote CC).

I'm curious to know how the KJV has been "proven" to be perfect, when it errors contained within it are constantly posted, yet costantly ignored by the KJV-only folk. The KJV misinterprets a wild ox as a unicorn in numerous places.

Little is said about the fact the the KJV translation was not well recieved by many when it was published, due to the fact that the language was archaic even for folks of 1611.

[ October 25, 2002, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]