Naw, he isn't that deep.
-
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!
The Key to the KJV-Only Conundrum
- Thread starter John of Japan
- Start date
- Status
There is an organization of men ousted, according to a reliable source, from the DBS called the "King James Bible Research Council." In an article by somebody or other (it's not clear), it says God "gave providential direction and guidance in the preparation, translation, and publishing of the most influential Bible translation in history." But the article also claims inerrancy for the KJV.
(http://www.kjbresearchcouncil.com/Pages/Articles/Preservation.htm)
Once again, they say the preservation of the Bible is providential. They also say in the article that there are no errors in the KJV. You can't say both and be consistent. Perfection in the KJV could have come only through a miracle. Providence does not provide perfection. But as usual, there is no indication of how or where the miracle occurred--meaning there was no miracle, since a miracle must be openly apparent to all.
(http://www.kjbresearchcouncil.com/Pages/Articles/Preservation.htm)
Once again, they say the preservation of the Bible is providential. They also say in the article that there are no errors in the KJV. You can't say both and be consistent. Perfection in the KJV could have come only through a miracle. Providence does not provide perfection. But as usual, there is no indication of how or where the miracle occurred--meaning there was no miracle, since a miracle must be openly apparent to all.
His book seriously needs editing. It's kind of a hodgepodge, but that's often what you get with self-published works, especially in this field.
That's why I call it the "Wrong Answer Book".
Several years ago, I asked him by email if he could provide any SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for KJVO, & he replied, "Psalm 12:6-7", showing his dependence upon Dr. Ben Wilkinson's Our Authorized Bible Vindicated for intel. It's bad when a Christian relies on a 7th day adventist's writings for theological intel!
IMO, one of the best tracts ever published to steer people to Jesus is Jack Chick's This Was Your Life. Since it was published, Mr. Chick has slowly gome RRAAWWPP! in his publications, becoming absorbed with KJVO hooey, and he and Dr. Gipp have collaborated on several projects. They are examples of two good man spoiled by believing a false doctrine of worship. We can only hope & pray they drop the foolishness and return to spreading the Gospel.
Several years ago, I asked him by email if he could provide any SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for KJVO, & he replied, "Psalm 12:6-7", showing his dependence upon Dr. Ben Wilkinson's Our Authorized Bible Vindicated for intel. It's bad when a Christian relies on a 7th day adventist's writings for theological intel!
IMO, one of the best tracts ever published to steer people to Jesus is Jack Chick's This Was Your Life. Since it was published, Mr. Chick has slowly gome RRAAWWPP! in his publications, becoming absorbed with KJVO hooey, and he and Dr. Gipp have collaborated on several projects. They are examples of two good man spoiled by believing a false doctrine of worship. We can only hope & pray they drop the foolishness and return to spreading the Gospel.
Their purpose though was to make a valid and good translation, but one in the traditions of the Anglican church, as there are issues with how they chose to render things, such as in baptism itself...
A Good translation, but not really in the Baptist tradition....
There has never been any inspiration from God given towards any translation of the scriptues though, as that was completed and done by him in the origianl texts, and he did perserve for us to have all of those various varients and texts in order to have us the source means to reconstruct pretty much the Original tects, but the Kjv was not a"perserved version", any more so than any other good and compenant version would be!
I've been informed of a correction. The men of the KJBRC were not "ousted" from the DBS but left voluntarily because of the alleged heavy-handed tactics of Dr. Waite, who has been president of the DBS since 1978. (Get it?)
I was thinking of his An Understandable History of the Bible, but yeah, that one too.
Dr. Gipp is an example of what can happen to one who gets eaten up with a false doctrine. The KJVO myth overshadows all of his work for Jesus, greatly reducing its potential effectiveness.
That's why the KJVO myth is so insidious...when many people start seeing its falsehoods without seeing discussions such as these here, they begin to have doubts about ALL Bible translations, which is exactly what Satan wants. That's one of the reasons why he made the KJVO myth
That's why the KJVO myth is so insidious...when many people start seeing its falsehoods without seeing discussions such as these here, they begin to have doubts about ALL Bible translations, which is exactly what Satan wants. That's one of the reasons why he made the KJVO myth
Can you explain to me to me how believing that no translation is perfect doesn't cause people to doubt the word of God?
To me the whole flood gate of bible translations that exist in English today definitely leads to confusion and doubt.
This is a trenchant observation. I would further say it hinders soul-winning and revival. Gipp is so concerned about protecting a weapon (the Bible is a sword), he's forgetting to swing it at Satan and steal souls from old Scratch.
The same is true about Peter Ruckman, Gipp's mentor. It may be that no one in the 20th century distracted people more from God's Great Commission than Ruckman. He had such potential, and could have done a great work, but instead only pastored a small church all his life.
He started a mission board, but only ever had a couple of missionaries that I know of, one in Africa and one in Japan. The one in Japan (not a bad guy) called me once to ascertain the exact nature of our new Japanese translation, to criticize rather than rejoicing that such a translation was being done.
Not to keep robycop from answering, but Brother Jordan, if my original Hebrew OT and Greek NT are inerrant then why do we need a translation to be inerrant also?
Jordon, I mean absolutely the best for you, but you really need to think this through more. Let me ask, at what point did the KJB become inerrant? If it is inerrant, do you agree that had to happen by a miracle? If not be a miracle, how did it happen? If by a miracle, when was it?
The miracles of the Bible are all very plain and clear to all, and thus people glorified God. Over and over, when people saw miracles of Jesus, they "glorified God" (Matt. 9:8, 15:21, Mark 2:12, Luke 5:26 and many more). So for us to glorify God because of a perfect translation, we must know when and how it happened. If we don't know that it cannot glorify God.
Every Bible translation in whatever language is the product of God's perfect word being handled by imperfect men. `The translators of every valid version did the best they could with what abilities and materials God gave them. And the AV men admitted that even the "meanest" (poorest) of such translations was still the word of God.
And at times, goofs & booboos are in the mind of the beholder. remember the differences between Isaiah 42:7 and 61:1-3 in the Book of Isaiah and the copy from which Jesus read aloud in Luke 4:17-21. Now, who can say either rendition is incorrect, espacially as Jesus called what He read aloud "this Scripure"?
Many, many Greek, hebrew, and Aramaic words/phrases have many different English translations. Various translators use what each believes is the best rendering of such words and phrases; thus we have "re'em" rendered as everything from a unicorn to a wild ox in various translations..
Based upon the above facts, I believe a variety of translations gives us a better overview of Scripture than merely confining ourselves to just one translation. Now, if we were highly-proficient on the languages of the Scriptural mss, knowing all their subtleties & nuances, we would need only one compilation of all the known mss. but GOD has chosen for us to have different languages, with only certain people gifted as translators. Thus, translations are His chosen method of presenting His word to the great majority of us, and we are blessed to have many good translations in English. So, let us pick up ALL the "swords" God has prepared for us & use each one for its intended situation. And remember, the KJVO myth is not a "sword" of God's but a rubber knife of Satan's.
Robycop's post reminded me of something I've been thinking about lately. I just finished an academic paper on Bible translation, and as I did it I put a theological name to something I've been thinking about in connection with translation: the linguistic theory of universal grammar. This is the theory that the ability to learn a language is in the DNA of every child born.
To give a theological name for this concept, it comes under the doctrine of natural (or general) revelation. This is the teaching that all of creation shows forth God (Ps. 19:1-6, Rom. 1:19-20, etc.). So, God created the different languages at the Tower of Babel, with their different verb systems, syntax, semantics, etc.
If God created all of the languages, then all of the languages can have the Word of God translated into them. God will guide the missionary translator as to how to best do this.
It follows then that since God created all of the languages, none of them is more special than any other. English is just another language, created in God's providence, so why would God choose the English language as the one to have a perfect Bible? Why not the logical German or the beautiful French or the exotic Chinese or the ubiquitous Spanish?
If the answer is that it is spoken by the most people, that is wrong. Chinese is spoken by 1.2 billion, though English is spoken by around 940 million. Spanish is spoken by half a billion.
If the answer is that English is easily learned, are you kidding me? It's a very difficult language to learn. I always get a laugh when someone says people should learn English to read the KJV. As one who has taught English to Japanese people, I have to say that is an absolutely ridiculous notion.
Jordan, you've been to Africa now. Does God love Americans more than Africans? Is English somehow a better language than African languages? Why would God choose English to have a perfect Bible instead of an African language?
To give a theological name for this concept, it comes under the doctrine of natural (or general) revelation. This is the teaching that all of creation shows forth God (Ps. 19:1-6, Rom. 1:19-20, etc.). So, God created the different languages at the Tower of Babel, with their different verb systems, syntax, semantics, etc.
If God created all of the languages, then all of the languages can have the Word of God translated into them. God will guide the missionary translator as to how to best do this.
It follows then that since God created all of the languages, none of them is more special than any other. English is just another language, created in God's providence, so why would God choose the English language as the one to have a perfect Bible? Why not the logical German or the beautiful French or the exotic Chinese or the ubiquitous Spanish?
If the answer is that it is spoken by the most people, that is wrong. Chinese is spoken by 1.2 billion, though English is spoken by around 940 million. Spanish is spoken by half a billion.
If the answer is that English is easily learned, are you kidding me? It's a very difficult language to learn. I always get a laugh when someone says people should learn English to read the KJV. As one who has taught English to Japanese people, I have to say that is an absolutely ridiculous notion.
Jordan, you've been to Africa now. Does God love Americans more than Africans? Is English somehow a better language than African languages? Why would God choose English to have a perfect Bible instead of an African language?
Jordan, the answer to your question lies in the meaning of "perfect."
The word "perfect" means, "complete, nothing lacking which is necessary to the whole."
The bible is "perfect" in that it is "complete, nothing lacking which is necessary to the whole."
And every legitimate translation can be said to be "complete, nothing lacking which is necessary to the whole."
What are you confused about and Who are you doubting?
Let me show you what the bible says about knowing which translation is real "scripture."
2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
So, God's word, the bible, says that any bible that is complete enough to make you understand the gospel and be saved is "scripture."
And that the true man of God will, through reading that bible, be made "perfect" - not sinless perfection, but be complete, spiritually mature, nothing lacking in his spiritual life, completely equipped for all good works.
So Jordan, let me ask you a very serious question. Is Paul a liar? Is the Holy Spirit, Who inspired the words quoted above, a liar? If so, you call God a liar. If not then every bible translation able to make thee wise unto salvation is scripture, the word of God in English.
Are some bible translations better than others? Yes, I think so. Some use better underlying Hebrew and Greek textforms. Some use better translation techniques. But all are "perfect" in the sense of being "complete, nothing lacking necessary to the whole" and thus "able to make thee wise unto salvation."
I am an old King James guy. I preach from my KJV. But my daily reading/study is in the New King James. It is based on the same texts and was translated using the same techniques.
But I was saved reading the Revised Standard Version (the bible Evangelicals and Fundamentalists loved to hate).
I have won people to Christ using the American Standard Version.
I have won people to Christ using the New American Standard Version.
I have won people to Christ using the English Revised Version.
I even won a Jehovah's Witness to Christ using his own bible, the New World Translation! (I used his own bible to prove the Deity of Christ.)
How can we recognize the perfect, complete, translation of the word of God in English (or any other language)? Can a person be saved using it? If so then it is God's word.
Thank you Lord for providing your wisdom through inspired human instruments and also for those down though the ages who have been used to preserve it, especially in our native tongue of English in both old and modern translations (plural).
I have forgotten the origin of the following :
Original manuscripts - The word of God by Inspiration.
Copied manuscripts - The word of God by Preservation.
Translated manuscripts - The word of God by Derivation.
HankD
I have forgotten the origin of the following :
Original manuscripts - The word of God by Inspiration.
Copied manuscripts - The word of God by Preservation.
Translated manuscripts - The word of God by Derivation.
HankD
That would be me.
- Status