Question about KJV

1 John 5:7-8 (HCSB - Christian Standard Bible /Holman, 2003/ ):

7 For there are three that testify:* 8 the Spirit,
the water, and the blood--and these three are in agreement.

Footnote: * Other mss (the Lat Vg and a few late Gr. mss)
read: testify in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy spirit, and these three are one
8. And there are three who bear witness on earth

This HCSB tells us that the alternate reading found
in the Latin Vulgate and the a few lat Greek Manuscripts
reads like this:

7 For there are three that testify: testify in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy spirit, and these three
are one
8. And there are three who bear witness on earth
the Spirit, the water, and the blood--and these
three are in agreement.

IMHO this deeper truth, that there is a variance and
what the variance - the deeper truth is stronger.
However, those whose anti-Biblical doctrine is
IGNORANCE IS CLOSER TO GOD will not be able to explain.

 

You have asummed I'm a KJVO when I have never made such a statement and the only kinks throwed into this subject are not of God: I agree there are other translations that are the Word of God But not in the english language. I was Born in Bogota Colombia, a Roman Catholic since i can Remember but never understood Scripture or read a Bible, couldn't tell you the diffrence betwix(KJB, NIV, NASAB,etc...) or Qoute to you Scipture out of any Bible. But one blessed day, our cousin who was a Baptist preacher, witnessed to my wife and I on Thursday, and I got saved and have been now going on 18 years: and I havent been the same since; The First thing I did was I went to the Christian Book store and put on layaway a"WORD" Aouthorized KJB: the funny thing about it is that I Still Know the verses I memorized before I Backslid just until about 4 years ago.Since then I re- dedicated My life to Christ and still have faults,but I Know that my Redeemer lives in me and never gave up on me. By the way those verses are 2 corinthians 5:17,Psalms 119:11; since then I've managed to memorize a few more. All I'm saying is that Jesus Loves you man and God loves you so much that He would sacrifice His Only Begotten Son for the like of you and me.Amen

 

What in the world are you talking about? The bible worked fine for 1500 years prior to the KJV! And Emperor Constantine, who reigned in the 4th century, didn't have any manuscripts and the Wesleyans started in 1843!

I will give you the same advice I gave to Askjo. When you don't know what you are talking about the very best thing you can do is STOP TALKING!

Please, you are embarrassing yourself! </font>[/QUOTE]O.K. I will try to defend my self here, What I ment was that Ever since Constantine took over the Roman Catholic Church, the Word Of God has been and will always be a Mystery to the unlearned, Simpleminded, Not Spectacular, hard working folk who beleived the church and its lies; But not every one Beleived into it, since the tru Words of God were preserved&lt; Not by Some pope&gt; But by those same hard working people who ran away from the "Religious" and Hid the in caves , and ended up with the Weslyans and thatas where we get our KJB. Now thats how I see it, But I"m sure you have a Better one. Your Right From the 4th Century and even in the Garden of Eden The Word Has been Twisted and manipulated, So the hard working man has to rely on the Religious crowd to enlighten them. But it is hard to keep up with the Religious when you have a Family to support: Oh yeah you keep talking about the KJB when I never said any thing about it :sound to me that your ASSUMING everything I say is KJB and You Prejudge everything as kjvo What is you problem?what happenned to Mercy, Grace ,longsuffering,Temperance, Meekness,Charity,"Not puffed up"Thanx and goodby

 

William S. Correa: //... So the hard working man has to rely on the
Religious crowd to enlighten them. But it is hard to keep
up with the Religious when you have a Family to support:
...

Interesting. Why would one say that and dis
Religous Scholars like Westcott & Hort whose only crime
is taking known Greek Bible sources (for the N.T.) and
tryed to figure out which was likely the best original
reading (and documenting the differences)?

Yes, I'm 30 years on my present job working 50-60 hours
a week for 48 weeks out of each of those 30 years (I had
jobs before that also). I guess the clue is to read
'simplified' writings like that on this BB's Version/translation
Board. I know I have three books or so on various sources
for like the N.T., but they never seem to explain it
as good as Dr. TCassidy does. Or maybe it is that Dr. Tom
doesn't through all 400 pages at me all at the same time ???

 

John Wesley was converted after he heard the Gospel from Moravians, especially from Spangenberg, and Peter Boeler, the Moravian Missionary. He was converted on May 24, 1738, which is still commemorated by many denominations like, Anglican Church, Methodist, Wesleyan Church, and so on.
Wesley requested the Moravians for the help and they dispatched 26 missionaries to England in the beginning. If Wesley agreed with Church of England, he would not have departed from them.
Those Moravians have shared the same faith with Waldenese, Devois, Albigenes, Bohemian Brethren, Bogomil, etc. Even though Wesley departed from Moravians later, he was greatly influenced by them. Zinzendorf, Christian David, De Watterville, and more people at Herrnhut were important in their missionary as Moravians did so many things even though they were small in numbers.

Wesleyans were separated from Methodists later because they disagreed about the slavery system around the time of Civil War. I believe that many of the literatures and the Bibles kept by Albigenes were eradicated by Roman Catholics but they used to preserve the same Words of God as Byzantine people preserved and there wouldn't be much difference each other.

 

I have not. I honestly forgot. However, since I am a beginning greek student, I'll have to do some research on that. Would you like to make your case in a thread, and I'll respond?

Yea, and I think you will admit that this is a very subjective statement. I'm glad you like it, but I feel the same way about the NASB.

 

From the Wesleyan Church website at www.wesleyan.org:

 

I have not. I honestly forgot. However, since I am a beginning greek student, I'll have to do some research on that. Would you like to make your case in a thread, and I'll respond?

Yea, and I think you will admit that this is a very subjective statement. I'm glad you like it, but I feel the same way about the NASB. </font>[/QUOTE]Among the scholars who argue against Johannine Comma, I have found none of them suggested the answer for the grammatical problem if it had not been for the Johannine Comma.
Many truth has been maintained because of KJV.

 

I am very sure that John Wesley was not converted by listening to the message from Church of England. How any person was saved is an important factor. George Whitefield was a co-worker for the beginning. The main influence came from Moravians.

Why did Zinzendorf depart from Lutherans? They must have learned the different teachings. They lived near Hungary. Comenius led the refugees from the White Mountain Battle, and Christian David whose parents were Catholic heard the Gospel from Schafer and influenced Zinzendorf very much. Zinzendorf heard the Gospel from August Hermann Franke who was influenced by Spener. In this discussion, whether any reformers belonged to Lutheran or Catholic or Anglican Church is not so important, because those people were not born again by belonging to them, but they were born again when they listened to the Gospels preached by the brethren, either Moravian Brehtren or Waldenese. There were Moravian believers before Zinzendorf but he allowed them to settle in his territory.


The fact that the most true believers were related each other was confirmed by Pilgrim Church by E Broadbent.
Some of the excerpts are here:

These "Friends of God" in Bosnia have left but little literature behind them, so that there remains much to be discovered of their doctrines and practices, which must have varied in different circles and at different periods. But it is evident that they made a vigorous protest against the prevailing evils in Christendom, and endeavoured with the utmost energy to hold fast to the teachings and example of the primitive churches, as portrayed in the Scriptures. Their relations with the older churches in Armenia and Asia Minor, with the Albigenses in France, Waldenses and others in Italy, and Hussites in Bohemia, show that there was a common ground of faith and practice which united them all. Their heroic stand for four centuries against overwhelming adversity, though unrecorded, must have yielded examples of faith and courage, of love unto death, second to none in the world's histories. They formed a link, connecting the Primitive churches in the Taurus Mountains of Asia Minor with similar ones in the Alps - see glossary of Italy and France. Their land and nation were lost to Christendom because of the inveterate persecution to which they were subjected:


Actually they are all related each other in their faith, among Devois, Waldenese, Bogomils, Bohemian Bruder Gemeinde, and so on.


As for Wesleyan, I must tell you that I was a member of Wesleyan Church before I joined Plymouth Brethren and often heard that Slavery was the main issue where they had to split from Methodists. As for the timing, I mentioned it around the civil war because some of the churches joined later, even though there may be a difference of 18 years.

Many literatures of DeVois were burnt or eradicated by RC, and therefore we can hardly judge their faith exactly, but I believe they shared the same faith with Waldenese, Bogomils, and used the Bible of Old Latin mainly as other believers did.

Important thing is whether they used the Bible without Johannine Comma? or Shorter ending of Mark? etc. I believe this truth has been handed over to Erasmus and KJV.

[ April 11, 2006, 04:02 PM: Message edited by: Eliyahu ]

 

Actually, I have read somewhere that explained the grammatical problem of the comma in defense of its exclusion. I will try and find that argument and post it here for you to examine. To be honest, I cant even pretend to know enough about Koine Greek grammar to argue intelligently on the subject, but I do know this: EVEN IF there is a problem with the grammar, that does not prove, even remotely, that the comma is genuine. It could only prove that something belonged there.

Based upon the evidence before me, I would tend to lean towards the possibility that we do not have a perfect understanding of Greek grammar, and this reading is an exception, which caused someone to add something in as well to make it sound better, rather than believe that and entire reading disappeared from the Greek record.

 

D-d,
I understand. Especially in case of COMMA, the refusal is understandable, but the quotations by Cyprian and others, Latin Bible, then some Greek texts as well support it and there are some reasons for the disappearance like Arianism, Sabellianism etc.
The reason why I pointed out that matter was that we should respect the other party too, when you respond to KJVO's, because they may not bring the evidences quickly enough despite their convictions.
Again I believe that KJV has some errors, but that it is more accurate than any other versions or translations on doctrinal issues and it has contributed quite a lot on the controversial issues.

 

&lt;Sigh&gt; The dissenting churches did not preserve the Greek textform which underlies the KJV. That was done by the Byzantine churches, better known as Greek Orthodox or Eastern Orthodox. And the Wesleyans did not descend from the dissenting churches. The Wesleyans descend from the Methodist Episcopal denomination (in 1843) which came out of the Church of England in 1739. The Church of England came out of the RCC in 1536 when the Pope refused to allow Henry VIII to divorce his wife, Catherine of Aragon. And, of course, none of that has anything to do with the descent of the KJV.

Again, please, stop embarrassing yourself. You are not only making yourself look foolish, you are making all Christians look like a bunch of ignoramuses. </font>[/QUOTE]Im sure there are Ignorant Crhistians every where, thats why we rely on the "Religious" that try and teach us. I'm glad you respond with authority, and are sure of your self. But what if you are wrong about all you have learned and taught, how many people have listed to you and turned from traditon? You say it had nothing to do with the KJB all that History you know, but were you there? I wasn't: I was there when God saved me. I happen to beleive "All things work together for good" and all things are related. What if you were there and threw you monkey wrenches in the mix and we probably would have all be communists. Maybe it is "foolishness to them that are perishing" I wonder why Paul said that now that I have had the honor in trying to debate or apologize to the best of my ability with The Majority. "Broad is the way and narrow the gate" Love you man!

 

Anti-MV-ite speaking of Modern Versions:
//But not all agree.
like Acts 8:37 NIV Ommited, the blood, missing where it
should be and many ommitted texts tha are vital to the faith.
I will not bow down, I am not for sale' and wont compramise; OK?
I dont have to defend the Word "it will defend itself"
If only God would open some blind guides eyes,lest we all
fall in the ditch we should stick to tradition and sound doctorine.
That's the one thing that has kept Fundamentalism from crumbeling.//

There is a problem with telling what the NIV says, without having
an NIV to check and see if that it what it really says -
that makes one look like they don't know how to debate.
Here, where it is obvious that one missed out on the
verse addy & verse content match (Acts 8:37 does not contain
the world 'blood' in the KJV1769 Version). Of course, this is
probably just a typeo (Acts 8:37 on one line, 'the blood' on another
line), but it points out one possible problem with NOT CHECKING
to see if your source correctly quoted the Bible.

For example, the same anti-MV-ite says:
//2 Timothy 2:15 ...
"Study to show thyself approved,a workman
that needed not to be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth"AV 1611//

We have discussed on this Versions board at lenth that
the proper way to say this (that is true also):

2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV1769 Edition):
//Study to show thyself approved,a workman
that needed not to be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth"//

The KJV1611 Edition says some other words and has other
puncuation.

Anti-MV-ite: //I dont have to defend the Word "it will defend itself"//

Then why do some anti-MV-ites feel it is necessary to malin
Dead Brothers Wesctott & Hort? Why is it necessary for some
anti-MV-ites to misquote Wescott & Hort and commit
character assassination by ellipsis (...)
Acutaly the local posters are quoting from some other
source who is committing character assassination by ellipsis (...).
But those who don't check their sources are parties to the
crime NOt to mention that this Forum has often shown the
true quotes and how the character assassination by ellipsis (...)
took place. But still some want to come to this board and
spread evil gossip about Westcott and Hort making these simple
Greek source compilers out to be Satan's BOSS. I can't figure
out why???

// ... the only place in the Holy Bible it tells us to Study but they
had to "Change"and"Change".//

The only place where the KJV says it? Interesting.
How much of your doctrine is based on ONE VERSE? Unfortunately,
when you argue with Ed about this, you are arguing with the
guy who is documenting "Misunderstandings of the KJV that
mess up Folk's doctrines". This is one of them.

The Greek Word translated "study" hear is better translated
in 2006 by the English word "be diligent". (In 1611
'study' meant 'be diligent' as well as study meaning it's
current mening 'look at carefully'.)

Here is a translation of the TR on the matter:

2 Timothy 2:15 (HCSB = Christian Standard Bible /Holman, 2003/ ) :
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God,
a worker who doesn't need to be ashamed, correctly teaching
the word of truth.

This passage is for TEACHERS not for STUDENTS.

Anti-MV-ite speaking againts the local dignities*:

// Its Sad; but when I got called
to preach I never thought that the "Wars and Rummors of wars"
would be in our own back yard. I bet you any thing that Phillip
has got his finger on the delete button as I'm wrtting this, ... //

* be sure to look up scriptures in the KJV1769 that
have the word 'dignities' in them (especially 2 Peter 2:10, read
the context). As far as I can tell, the moderator/dignity, Phillip,
was getting rid of the debasement of OTHER PEOPLE's BIBLES,
not trying to squash discussion. Recall that my Bible,
the HCSB and nKJV were both TR preferred translations and
both MVs. BTW, I also use DAILY two different KJVs:

1. the KJV1611 Edition
2. The KJV1769 Edition (with Strong's numbers)

As well, I use a third KJV on a weekly basis:

3. The KJV1873 Edition (may well be a KJV1850 Editon???)

Anti-MV-ite: //The NIV is not an Translation, it is a vesion.//

Ed Edwards: //Please delineate your definitions of 'translation' and
of 'version' such that your statement is correct. Thank you
for helping us understand what it is you are saying. //


Anti-MV-ite: //OK, The KJB is TR; and all other MV's are not!
They may contain words that have some TR, and some LV,
and some GB, But not all agree.//

Thank you for your response. At least I know more about where you
are coming from and where you are at versionially speaking.
However, you didn't discriminate between 'translation'
and 'version'.

-----------------------------------------------
My Definitions:

TRANSLATION - the changing of the words of the Bible in
one language to the words of another language

VERSION - the changing of the words of the Bible into
a language which already has the words of the Bible
written in that langauge.

As you can see, my definition of 'Version' makes it a subset
of 'Translation'. My definition also makes the "King James Version"
a proper name given on many KJVs. For when the KJV was
first translated, it was into a language where Bibles already
existed.

Using my definitions, this statement is false:

//The NIV is not an Translation, it is a vesion.//

The NIV is both a Translation and a Version.
I'm still trying to figure out a set of known definitions
of the two terms in which the statement is true.

-----------------------------------------------
Let me see:

Strawman definition: TRANSLATION
- the changing of the words of the Bible in
one language to the words of another language

Strawman definition: VERSION
- the changing of the words of the Bible into
other words within the same language

With these definitions, I have two versions, no three:

1. The KJV1769 which is a version of the KJV1611
2. The KJV1873 which is a version of the KJV1769
3. The READER'S DIGEST BIBLE which is a version of the NASB.

But even with these definitions, the following statement is false:

//The NIV is not an Translation, it is a vesion.//

With these ammended definitions, the NIV is a translation
not a version.
-----------------------------------------------

 

William,

I just have one question: Are you serious?

I mean really.....you might wanna stick with debating me, cuz you are sinking fast. Actually, selfishly I hope you keep talking so that anyone reading will see the merits, or lack thereof, of the KJVO position. The more you type, the more people are set free from KJVO.

I suggest you meet me in the thread as we agreed, or if you wish, continue here, and no one will ever respect anything you type again unless it is a direct quote of scripture, and they most likely will check even those.

 

If you are relying on the Religious crowd to teach you I am beginning to understand your problem!

I am not sure of myself. I am sure of the Lord and I am sure of the facts.

What if I am wrong about the Gospel? Then I, as Paul said, am of all men most miserable. But I don't think I am wrong about the Gospel for it comes right out of the Bible and I believe the Bible is the word of God. How many people have "listed" to me? I really don't know. But I know I have preached the Gospel to many thousands and many of them believed and were marvelously saved. I don't regret that a bit!

No, I was not there. But neither was the KJV. The KJV was completed in 1611 long after most of that history took place.

I wasn't there. I don't own a monkey wrench, and why in the world would you want to be a Communist?

I am sorry but I don't believe you love me. My Bible says, in John 13:35, "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." When you lump me with those who are perishing (the lost) and suggest that I am on the "broad way" that leadeth to destruction you are saying I am lost because I have studied church history. When you attack my salvation, you also attack the Savior who shed His Own precious blood on Calvary's cross to atone for my sin.

You can attack me all you please, and I don't care. You can lie about me and my motives and I don't care. You can slander me all you want to, and I don't care. But when you slander my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, then, YOU BETTER BELIEVE I CARE!

Shame on you! The Lord rebuke your pride filled and hateful spirit! </font>[/QUOTE]What Bible is that? seems to me your the one haten! I dont Know you But I Know all men are Liars, all men are lazy,and all men are inexuable. If you are defending the Word of God and if you own a KJB then my apologies. Judge not lest ye be judged, did I srtike a nerve? No apology if you defend W/H and all MV's . Shame on you you havent proven any thing! whited wall.