-
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!
SIMPLY AMAZING!
- Thread starter RaptureReady
- Start date
Apparently not. You are wrong even in this statement. The KJV is most certainly Scripture, but it alone is not Scripture, as we have shown on many occasions.
The KJV was tainted by men just as others were, if that is your argument. They were all translated by men and hte KJV translators had nothing special that others translators do not have.
Never done ... false teaching ... attack on God's word.
No modern version that I know have has done this either. For all your efforts to show it, you have fallen flat on your face every time.
Try it ... put aside your bias against God's word and try it. I guarantee you, if I were not preaching, I would never carry the version the preacher is preaching from.
"Sense" is the word you are looking for and it doesn't matter. KNowing there are other versions out there makes you study more and prevents you from twisting the words to fit your own view. You know people will be checking up on you.
Virtually no one in my congregation knows them. But that is not the point. I talk about how it should be used because I use it. I don't talk to them about how it should be used because they do not. I rarely if even refer to original languages and then, I only make the most simple and obvious points, like places where the same word is used. This is a straw man. You think because people don't understand everything that they shouldn't understand anything.
I guarantee you that if you gave modern versions a fair chance in your personal Bible study and give yourself time to get over your bias and preconception, you would never go back to the KJV. Not because the KJV is not good; it certainly is. But because the KJV is not in our language. Find a good church and try modern versions for six months. Then come back and let's talk ...
Originally by HomeBound:
I believe that the more faithful translation is the King James Version 1611, but I will not say that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit which is in the Originals can be translated INTO the KJV.
Underlying manuscripts. </font>[/QUOTE]Which Greek manuscript(s) agree with the KJV 100% of the time? </font>[/QUOTE]From the Antiochian texts to the Byzantine texts, the KJV was derived and translated. </font>[/QUOTE]You have been around long enough to know that a) your statement is false and b) the "Antiochian texts" and "Byzantine texts" are not a whole bunch of identical mss. In simple bulk numbers, there are far more "variants" (ie. disagreements) between the 5000+ BT mss than there are in the few hundred AT mss.
You have also been around long enough to know that the TR and KJV go against the Majority/Byzantine text at times- sometimes to the degree of including readings that are not found anywhere in any Greek texts.
So your statement above is false and you have every reason to know that it is false. Why would you respond with something that you know to be untrue?
RaptureReady
New Member
So what else is Scripture? All MSS? All versions?
Sure they did, they had the Holy Spirit leading them. Though the men had sin in their lives does not mean that they are not capable of translating God's word. I'm sure they had better MSS than today and they definitely were not distracted by the things that we have today.
Never done ... false teaching ... attack on God's word.</font>[/QUOTE]Here is just one.
Colossians 1:14 NASV: "in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of
sins." KJV: "In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the
forgiveness of sins." (Why omit the blood?)
Though for me, this may be difficult to put on paper, but just take notice of all non-KJB churches. The message is basically God's love for the person, which is great, but God is more than just love, he's also an angry God whose wrath is shown daily as his love is. People need to know a Holy God, not just a loving God.
Now that makes a lot of since. Teacher, I don't like your math book so I'm using mine. I guarantee you would fail the class, just as you would fail to receive what God has given the preacher who preaches from another book than you. Why would you use another Bible than what the preacher is using? Are you afraid he is lieing? If you are, what makes you feel that why about the man of God? Sorry, but I trust my pastor to give me what the Lord has laid on his heart. Do I follow along word for word, you betcha.
Thanks for the spelling lesson. It does not take another version to make me study and through pray and listening to the Holy Spirit I do not twist the words to fit my view. If I continue to have a problem with a passage then I go to another saint, preferably a senior saint. You preach what God lays on your heart and you won't have to worry about people checking up on you and if they did, they would gain more trust.
No I don't think this. I just know that the majority of us sinners are lazy would rather do something else that read our Bible. Why? Because of the flesh. Is that okay, no it isn't, it's a fault.
This is easy to say than to do. That's like giving up meat for veggies for six months. It's not up to me to convince you of the King James Bible, that's the Holy Spirit's job.
Once again we have the statement that "the Holy Spirit led the AV translators", without any PROOF.
Can you PROVE the AV translators were led by the Holy Spirit, especially given that they sometimes called Him "it"? Can you PROVE that the HS did NOT lead any other translators in rendering the Scriptures into English? Without any proof, all we have is opinion formed out of thin air.
Can you PROVE the AV translators were led by the Holy Spirit, especially given that they sometimes called Him "it"? Can you PROVE that the HS did NOT lead any other translators in rendering the Scriptures into English? Without any proof, all we have is opinion formed out of thin air.
RaptureReady
New Member
2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. This is what I believe about the KJB translators. robycop3, can you prove anything of God? By faith I believe.
Scripture is what God inspired and what he has preserved for us. Scripture proper is found in the multitude of manuscripts and any faithful translation of them can rightly be called Scripture. Again, this is stuff that should be common knowledge. You should not have to be asking this.
Sure they did, they had the Holy Spirit leading them. Though the men had sin in their lives does not mean that they are not capable of translating God's word. I'm sure they had better MSS than today and they definitely were not distracted by the things that we have today.</font>[/QUOTE]The same is true of translators of modern versions. They had the Holy Spirit, just as the KJV translators did. Their sin did nto make them incapable. However, the manuscripts of today are better simply by virtue of numbers -- we have more of them.
First, notice your claim. You claim that the blood was taken out. That is a false teaching. The blood was never in Col 1:14. That was a transposition from Eph 1:7. So they did not omit the blood. To the contrary, just six verses later, Paul says "having made peace through the blood of his cross." It is in every single modern version. Quite clear, it is a lie to say that MVs omit the blood. They do not.
If you want to know why "blood" isn't in Col 1:14, ask Paul. He is the one who wrote it.
You haven't been in my church and you haven't been in other churches that use modern versions. This is a claim you cannot even substantiate. I do not deny that many churches do exactly what you say here. But that has nothing to do with the version they use. There are many churches that use modern versions that preach a faithful and true gospel. If you doubt it, just come and listen ...
However, none of that addressed the point you were supposedly responding to.
Now that makes a lot of since. Teacher, I don't like your math book so I'm using mine. I guarantee you would fail the class, just as you would fail to receive what God has given the preacher who preaches from another book than you. Why would you use another Bible than what the preacher is using? Are you afraid he is lieing? If you are, what makes you feel that why about the man of God? Sorry, but I trust my pastor to give me what the Lord has laid on his heart. Do I follow along word for word, you betcha.</font>[/QUOTE]You completely miss the point. I can hear what he is reading. My ears work just fine. I don't need to read and hear to hear him. I carry another version for the very simple reason that I can see how other translations translate it. It has nothing to do with likes or dislikes. I like it when people carry other versions. It gives me a chance to show how faithful these translations are.
I preach the Scriptures, and it doesn't bother who checks up on me. If I have a problem with a passage, I study it. There is nothing wrong with asking other saints. That is what I do. I ask them through translations, books, and articles. That is what you should do. I do not twist the words to fit my view. That is yet another baseless charge from you.
I agree with this, but it is totally irrelevant that what we were talking about.
Spoken like a truly biased person who is uninterested in the truth. Giving up your KJV for a modern version would be like giving up raw wheat for processed bread. You get the nutrition along with the great taste. The Bible was not intended to be hard to read.
I don't care what version you read. I can promise you if you started using a modern version you would find that what I am saying is true. But if you want to struggle to enjoy God's word and struggle to love him through his revelation, then so be it. But don't make stuff up and dont' attack God's word.
That is putting words in God's mouth. God never said that about the KJV translators. A verse from Jeremiah is a timely reminder:
Jeremiah 23:16-17 16 Thus says the LORD of hosts, "Do not listen to the words of the prophets who are prophesying to you. They are leading you into futility; They speak a vision of their own imagination, Not from the mouth of the LORD. 17 "They keep saying to those who despise Me, 'The LORD has said, "You will have peace "'; And as for everyone who walks in the stubbornness of his own heart, They say, 'Calamity will not come upon you.'
Jeremiah 23:31 31 "Behold, I am against the prophets," declares the LORD, "who use their tongues and declare, 'The Lord declares.'
When you say "God says" and then insert your own teachings, God is against you. You should not be listened to.
2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. This is what I believe about the KJB translators. </font>[/QUOTE] Then you are simply wrong. The KJV translators were neither prophets nor "holy men of old". They were Church of England scholars commissioned by King James to make a new translation. James found the "people's" Bible of his day, the Geneva, objectionable. There is no testimony whatsoever of them being particularly holy in doctrine or practice. In fact, there are examples to the contrary.
Yes. According to I Thess 5:21, Romans 1:16-23, and Acts 17:11, you can have proof and assurance through tangible things.
KJVOnlyism isn't by "faith". Faith doesn't require us to drop all regard for reality. It may not be completely proven by what is tangible but any apparent inconsistency between true faith and true reality... is just that, "apparent". KJVOnlyism is by superstition.
RaptureReady
New Member
So all MSS are Scripture?
More or older does not mean the best.
The Blood may not be in your book, but it is in my Bible. I'm sorry W/H took it out of yours.
Sorry, but I enjoy God's word immensely. I'm not attacking God's word, I didn't say one thing bad about the King James Bible.
2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.[/i] This is what I believe about the KJB translators.{/b]
robycop3, can you prove anything of God? By faith I believe.
______________________________________________
Once again, you evade the issue. The AV translators were not prophets. They were NOT given Scripture that God hadn't already presented. These gents did NOT claim to be inspired. I asked for PROOF that they were inspired , and that other English translators were NOT inspired equally. You're batting zero so far. Without any proof, such statements about "Divine inspiration" cannot be true. You simply refuse to see that KJVO is a man-made humbug, a fact that most Baptists have recognized for years.
robycop3, can you prove anything of God? By faith I believe.
______________________________________________
Once again, you evade the issue. The AV translators were not prophets. They were NOT given Scripture that God hadn't already presented. These gents did NOT claim to be inspired. I asked for PROOF that they were inspired , and that other English translators were NOT inspired equally. You're batting zero so far. Without any proof, such statements about "Divine inspiration" cannot be true. You simply refuse to see that KJVO is a man-made humbug, a fact that most Baptists have recognized for years.
RaptureReady
New Member
How was it added?
I don’t think I’m attacking, just defending.
RaptureReady
New Member
I understand that the KJB translators did not claim to be inspired, but that does not mean that God did not work through them. A example from Dr. Gipp's book "The Answer Book:"
When John the Baptist was accosted by the Levites in John chapter one and asked if he was Elijah (John 1:21) he answered that he was not Elijah. Yet in Matthew chapters 11:7-14 and 17:10-13 Jesus Christ plainly stated that John was Elijah.
Did John the Baptist lie? No. Did Jesus Christ lie? Of course not. The answer is very simply that John was Elijah but he didn't know it! Thus we see from our Bible example that a man can have God working through him and not know it. Likewise, God could easily have divinely directed the King James translators without their active knowledge.
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
Dr. Gipp has absolutely no credibility on this subject, nor do the rest of the folks at Chick Publications.
Or Jerome and the Latin Vulgate, or Wyclif, or Tyndale or Coverdale...
Personally, I'de rather believe the translators than this theory because to do so would have God allowing translator and printing errors into the text.
You would have the KJV translators defying the Holy Spirit of God by issuing a revision to correct "plain and clear errors" to the "inspired" text as early as 1613.
HankD
RaptureReady
New Member
Dr. Gipp has absolutely no credibility on this subject, nor do the rest of the folks at Chick Publications. </font>[/QUOTE]But a Baptist in Richmond does huh.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
This kind of thread always amazes me (SIMPLY AMAZING)in that some feel like its either "my way or the highway" on the issue. Why cannot we allow each other liberty on this issue? Nobody is going to take away your AV so use it. No one is going to take away your MV so use them.
This must be the only army in history that take as many shots purposefully at each other as we do at the enemy.
I am strong proponent of the AV, it is almost all that I use. I think it is the best translation in English, but not every single Christian must agree with me.
This must be the only army in history that take as many shots purposefully at each other as we do at the enemy.
I am strong proponent of the AV, it is almost all that I use. I think it is the best translation in English, but not every single Christian must agree with me.