Questions for KJV critics

That has to do with the underlying texts. </font>[/QUOTE]You might want to read the passage again JYD. It doesn't say that He was speaking independently much less adding to the quote. It says He was reading from Isaiah and what He read is different from what the KJV says.

What He reads here is critically important because it shows Him fulfilling prophecy. Adding to the writings of Isaiah would have invalidated Him as the fulfillment.

 

So you're saying that the passage in Isaiah (Luke 4:17 says that what he read was written in Isaiah) was written one way in Jesus' time, and reads differently now? How does that not go against the type of preservation KJV-only is dependent on?

 

Just like I stared before, He is God. He can add to if He wants;take that up with Him.Jeremiah 36:32 testifies to that.

 

Yes, he is God. He can do what he wants. So why do you think God took that phrase out of Isaiah in the KJV?

 

JYD said:

Well,Jesus is God(John 10:30)He can add to a verse if He wants;what error?

It doesn't say Jesus added to a verse while he was reading it. It says, "he found the place where it was written" (KJV). Where are the words, "and recovering of sight to the blind" to be found in the KJV at Isaiah 61, or the Hebrew Scriptures as found in the Masoretic text?

If this is not a piece of genuine Isaiah, then the New Testament lies when it says Jesus found it written. If it is, then the KJV-onlyists are wrong about the Scriptures being preserved in the KJV.

 

It would appear He added it to Luke.Again, ask HIM..I looked up this "contradiction" in a NIV it has the same.

 

It would appear He added it to Luke.Again, ask HIM.. </font>[/QUOTE]No, it wasn't added to Luke. In the passage in Luke it says *it was written in Isaiah*. Why was it written in Isaiah *then*, but not written in Isaiah in the KJV *now*? Why did God take it out of the KJV? If God is in the habit of adding and taking away things from the scripture, how can you even use the word "perservation", since by definition that means unchanging?

 

The MV's has the same rendering..Why dont you ASK HIM WHY He did it???????

 

I will. But I'd also like your opinion. Also, I would like to hear how you explain how word changes like this is not in direct opposition to the basic KJV-only understanding of "preservation". This phrase wasn't "preserved" in the KJV-only sense, as you agree because you say God took it out. Regardless of the reason why it was taken out, you are still left with the issue of a breakdown of "preservation", are you not?

 

Brian, my opinion why God does certain things is irelivant;I wish I could help.

Like I said, even the MV"s has this rendering.But I am not a advocate of the MV's

Not me, I have no problem with preservation or final authority.

 

You seem to have no problem sharing you opinion in every other post you make. Why the change of heart now?

I'm not saying you have a problem with it, I'm asking how it is "preserved" in the KJV-only sense if it has also "changed"? Doesn't "preserved" mean "unchanged"?

 

just trying to help;take it for what it is worth.

 

JYD, I'm asking how it is "preserved" in the KJV-only sense if it has also "changed"? Doesn't "preserved" mean "unchanged"?

 

And I told you that the MV's also have this rendering;now how can you claim they are preserved?? do you claim this??

 

And I told you that the MV's also have this rendering;now how can you claim they are preserved?? do you claim this?? </font>[/QUOTE]Because I don't believe "preservation" means the same thing you do, ie. word-for-word like KJV-onlyism does. And thus my question, which AGAIN you avoid answering. How it is "preserved" in the KJV-only sense if it has also "changed"? Doesn't "preserved" mean "unchanged"?

 

And I told you that the MV's also have this rendering;now how can you claim they are preserved?? do you claim this?? </font>[/QUOTE]JYD, why are you avoiding answering this question? What are you afraid of? Wouldn't it be more honest to accept the historical, orthodox view of scripture that assigns verbal inerrancy only to the originals than to continue kicking against the pricks?

Also, since when are the MV's the standard by which the KJV is judged?

To answer your question, when you accept that God preserved His Word while the original words were subject to the frailty of sinful, human copyists, this passage ceases to be a problem. At some point, this phrase was lost in the transmission of the Hebrew text. Whether Jesus was using a Greek text or a Hebrew text is academic, He read the passage as it was originally.

 

On the contrary,the KJV is the standard by which the MV's are judged.I was simply trying to prove a point;take it for what it is worth..

 

On the contrary,the KJV is the standard by which the MV's are judged.I was simply trying to prove a point;take it for what it is worth.. </font>[/QUOTE]Is this the only part of my post you can answer? Please explain these two passages that do not agree but are said to be the same thing by the Bible.

Why are you avoiding this? Just so we can be sure what the questions are- In the KJV:

Are words omitted from Isaiah 61:1?

Are words added to Luke 4:18?

or, Are Jesus actions misreported in Luke 4:17 so that He wasn't actually reading scripture He was speaking it into existence?

 

As usual, as a KJV onlyist to explain another passage that shows the error of KJV onlyism and they all become mute and unable to respond.

Following the postings of many of these KJV only users shows a distinct pattern. They continually spew forth the same thing, ususally the writtings of preachers the caliber of Peter Ruckman.

When they are finally presented with a specific passage of scripture to deal with that shows the fallacy of their position, all of a sudden they are AWOL.

 

Just like I said in another thread the Pharasees were quizing Jesus about divorce,Jesus directs them to Deut 24:1-4 and tells them what Moses wrote down,THEN he ADDS TO WHAT MOSES SAID IN DEUTERONOMY;see MAtt 19:7-9. Now like I said before,Jesus is God & He can add to His Word if He so desires,Jeremiah 36:32 is another fine example of Him doing so.My question is, what will be your response to HIM adding to His Word???