The ONE QUESTION KJVOs can't correctly answer...

[TCassidy]

Saved-By-Grace claims to be a better Greek scholar than all the translators who translated the KJV: From either
γεγεννηκα or its cognate μονογενης:

Joh_1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Joh_1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh_3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh_3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Act_13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
1Co_4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
Phm_1:10 I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds:
Heb_1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Heb_5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
Heb_11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
1Pe_1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
1Jn_4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
1Jn_5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
1Jn_5:18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
Rev_1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Saved-By-Grace claims to be a better Greek scholar than all the translators who translated the ASV: From either
γεγεννηκα or its cognate μονογενης:

Luk_1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee: wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten shall be called the Son of God.
Joh_1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.
Joh_1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh_3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh_3:18 He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Act_13:33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
Phm_1:10 I beseech thee for my child, whom I have begotten in my bonds, Onesimus,
Heb_1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee? and again, I will be to him a Father, And he shall be to me a Son?
Heb_5:5 So Christ also glorified not himself to be made a high priest, but he that spake unto him, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee:
Heb_11:17 By faith Abraham, being tried, offered up Isaac: yea, he that had gladly received the promises was offering up his only begotten son;
1Pe_1:23 having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, which liveth and abideth.
1Jn_2:29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him.
1Jn_3:9 Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin, because his seed abideth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is begotten of God.
1Jn_4:7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is begotten of God, and knoweth God.
1Jn_4:9 Herein was the love of God manifested in us, that God hath sent his only begotten Son into the world that we might live through him.
1Jn_5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God: and whosoever loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
1Jn_5:4 For whatsoever is begotten of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that hath overcome the world, even our faith.
1Jn_5:18 We know that whosoever is begotten of God sinneth not; but he that was begotten of God keepeth himself, and the evil one toucheth him not.

Saved-By-Grace claims to be a better Greek scholar than all the translators who translated the RV: From either
γεγεννηκα or its cognate μονογενης:
Joh_1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.
Joh_1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh_3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh_3:18 He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Act_13:33 how that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
Phm_1:10 I beseech thee for my child, whom I have begotten in my bonds, Onesimus,
Heb_1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee? and again, I will be to him a Father, And he shall be to me a Son?
Heb_5:5 So Christ also glorified not himself to be made a high priest, but he that spake unto him, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee:
Heb_11:17 By faith Abraham, being tried, offered up Isaac: yea, he that had gladly received the promises was offering up his only begotten son;
1Pe_1:23 having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, which liveth and abideth.
1Jn_2:29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him.
1Jn_3:9 Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin, because his seed abideth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is begotten of God.
1Jn_4:7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is begotten of God, and knoweth God.
1Jn_4:9 Herein was the love of God manifested in us, that God hath sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
1Jn_5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God: and whosoever loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
1Jn_5:4 For whatsoever is begotten of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that hath overcome the world, even our faith.
1Jn_5:18 We know that whosoever is begotten of God sinneth not; but he that was begotten of God keepeth him, and the evil one toucheth him not.

Oh, yes. Even the Revised Standard Version, the bible Evangelicals love to hate disagrees with his claim to being more knowledgable than all the translators of the RSV:

Act 13:33
this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, 'Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.'

Heb 1:5
For to what angel did God ever say, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee"? Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"?

Heb 5:5
So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee";

That is an amazing claim. Too bad he can't back it up.

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

TCassidy:

Interesting how you only include the older versions that are spin-offs from the KJV! How about the ESV, HSCB, 1984 NIV, etc? I have not checked these as yet, but doubt if they use "begotten/beget".

Versions are one thing, you have still failed to show from the LXX where "μονογενης" is used in the sense of "begetting". Nor the weighty Greek lexicons of L&S, A&G, and M&M, who have examples from the Bible's use, as well as non-biblical texts. Theologically, it has been used for this purpose, but, as I have said more than once, the Old Latin used "unicus", which is our English "unique".

Add to this the Hebrew "יָחִיד", which the LXX renders by the Greek "μονογενης". "יָחִיד", according to the Hebrew Lexicons, denotes:

"adjective and substantive only, only one, solitary (Late Hebrew id.; Aramaic יְחִידַי יָחִיד,, , , id.; Arabic solitary) —
1 only one, especially of an only son, Gen_22:2, Gen_22:12, Gen_22:16 יְחִידְךָ את בנך את thy son, thine only one, יָחִיד אֵבֶל Amo_8:10; Jer_6:26 mourning for an only son, היחיד על כמספד Zec_12:10; Pro_4:3 אמי לפני וְיָחִיד רַךְ; so feminine יְחִידָה Jdg_11:34.
2 feminine יְחִידָה as substantive Psa_22:21; Psa_35:17 יְחִידָתִי my only one, poetic for my life, as the one unique and priceless possession which can never be replaced (in each || נַפְשִׁי).
3 solitary, Psa_25:16 אני ועני יחיד כי; Psa_68:7 בַּיְתָה יְחִידִים מוֺשִׁיב causing solitary, isolated ones (i.e. friendless wanderers or exiles; || אֲסִירִים) to dwell at home (Lag Ch and others מֵשִׁיב bringing back home)." (Brown/Driver/Briggs)

"(1) adj. thin, lean (used of cows), Gen_41:19, 20 Gen_41:20, 27 Gen_41:27.
(2) it becomes an adv. of limitation, restriction, only, alone. Job_1:15, רַק אֲנִי לְבַדִּי “only I alone.” Gen_47:22, “only the land of the priests he bought not.” 1Sa_1:13 Jud. 14:16 Amo_3:2 2Ch_28:10 33:17 , and frequently. Also, of exception, only, except, provided, Isa_4:1, “we will eat our own bread, … only let us bear thy name.” Specially-(a) when a negation precedes, it is, only, besides, save that, except. 2Ch_5:10, “there was nothing in the ark רַק שְׁנֵי הַלֻּחוֹת except the two tables.” 2Ki_17:18. Jos_11:22, “there were not left of the nation of the Anakim רַק בְּעַזָּה except in Gaza.” 1Ki_15:5.-(b) it is prefixed to adjectives (equally with אַךְ No. 2, a-c), as רַק רַע nothing except evil, nur böfe, eitel böfe. 1Ki_14:8, רַק הַיָּשָׁר “only what is right,” weiter nichts als was recht ift. Deu_4:6. Hence-(c) it has a kind of confirming sense. Gen_20:11, רַק אֵין יִרְאַת אֱלֹהִים בַּמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה “surely the fear of God is not in this place,” prop. it cannot be otherwise than-i.e. no doubt, surely.
Note. Sometimes this particle, when placed at the beginning of a sentence, must be referred not to the next but to some more remote word. Isa_28:19, רַק זְוָעָה הָבִין שְׁמוּעָה “to have heard only the rumour causes terror.” Psa_32:6, רַק לְשֶׁטֶף מַיִם רַבִּים אֵלָיו לֹא יַגִּיעוּ “(as to) the flood of great waters, to him only (the righteous) they shall not approach.” The same is the case with the particles גַּם Gen_16:13, אַךְ Isa_34:14." (Gesenius)

Where do you see the Hebrew "יָחִיד", translated by, or having the meaning of "begetting"? The LXX also does not know of this meaning for "μονογενης".

You are going around in circles and accomplishing nothing, because your arguments are moot. You quote from older versions, because they agree with what you believe to be right. The language used as I have shown time and again, does not agree with your understanding. Like your misplaced manuscript "evidence" for John 1:18, you are clutching at straws with your futile reasoning of "μονογενης", which seems all to clear to me, that you really don't know what you are talking about here! Simply admit that you got this wrong, and move on.

 

[HankD]

Simply admit that you got this wrong, and move on.

Aint gonna happen

Two Lutherans - maybe.
Two Baptists- Never!

 

[TCassidy]

Interesting how you only include the older versions

Yes. The 1952 RSV is an "older" version translated by men much less intelligent than you claim to be as you accuse all of them of not knowing enough Greek to correctly translate Greek into English.

Let me see. Who to believe? 100+ of the best Greek scholars in the world?

Or you?

Let me think about it. That's enough! You lose!

 

[Logos1560]

Saved-By-Grace claims to be a better Greek scholar than all the translators who translated the KJV: From either
γεγεννηκα or its cognate μονογενης:

Joh_1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Joh_1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh_3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Perhaps this poster did not really claim that he himself was a better Greek scholar than the KJV translators. Perhaps he may think some other men may have been better Greek scholars than them.

Did you skip over or omit how the KJV translators translated the Greek word monogenes in the gospel of Luke?

In Luke 7:12, the KJV translators translated it "only" ["the only son of his mother"]
In Luke 8:42, the KJV translators translated it "one only" ["one only daughter"]
In Luke 9:38, the KJV translators translated it as "only child" ["mine only child"].

 

[Rippon]

in God's providence, he provided the majority text, while leaving the others obscured.

I agree completely with Boyce's understanding of God's Providence which you provided in post #5.

Nevertheless, you have yet to answer my question that I originally posed.

 

[Rippon]

His Greek text agreed with the vast majority of all Greek manuscripts of the New Testament including those which predate Aleph and B.

"Including those which predate Aleph and B"? Well that claim of yours is indeed false.

 

[HankD]

"Including those which predate Aleph and B"? Well that claim of yours is indeed false.

Rip - He may be referring to the papyri.

I know Wikipedia is not ultra reliable but they have lists of the papyri - interesting.

List of New Testament papyri - Wikipedia

e.g
Papyrus 46 - dates around AD 180 - 220.
Papyrus 66 - circa 200 - almost the complete Gospel of John.

 

[1689Dave]

I agree completely with Boyce's understanding of God's Providence which you provided in post #5.

Nevertheless, you have yet to answer my question that I originally posed.

I wasn't defending the KJV only position, but saying God for some reason provided it as a mainstay and not the others until recently. This is based on scripture similar to “In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:” (Ephesians 1:11) (KJV 1900)

 

[TCassidy]

"Including those which predate Aleph and B"? Well that claim of yours is indeed false.

Try doing some study instead of just making things up as you go along. See: Harry A. Sturz, The Byzantine Text-Type and New Testament Textual Criticism (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1984).

Also see:
New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority by Maurice A. Robinson.

http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v06/Robinson2001.html

 

[TCassidy]

Did you skip over or omit how the KJV translators translated the Greek word monogenes in the gospel of Luke?

In Luke 7:12, the KJV translators translated it "only" ["the only son of his mother"]
In Luke 8:42, the KJV translators translated it "one only" ["one only daughter"]
In Luke 9:38, the KJV translators translated it as "only child" ["mine only child"].

You seem to have missed the point. I clearly stated the term was in common usage in the sense of "only child."

His contention is that those 100+ Greek scholars were not as knowledgeable as he thinks he is because he flat out says "only begotten" is a mistake in every version containing that translation and those mistakes made by those 100+ Greek scholars because they are less qualified then he is.

If he wants to recant his absolute charge and simply say "only begotten" is archaic English for most early 21st century readers, fine, but to make a blanket statement that it is simply wrong is not based on any study of Greek but on his own ignorant arrogance and pride.

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Rip - He may be referring to the papyri.

I know Wikipedia is not ultra reliable but they have lists of the papyri - interesting.

List of New Testament papyri - Wikipedia

e.g
Papyrus 46 - dates around AD 180 - 220.
Papyrus 66 - circa 200 - almost the complete Gospel of John.

You mean. like in #30, when TCassidy gives FALSE evidence of the Willoughby manuscript - 250AD, in his attempt to show that the earliest reading for John 1:18, is "υἱὸς", instead of "θεὸς"? This manuscript ONLY has six lines which is John chapter 1, verses 50-51. If we are dealing with John 1:18, how then can this manuscript be said to support any reading? I have asked more than once for TCassidy to explain this, and he has failed to do so, simply saying that I have missed the point? What point is that, he has never told me! He accuses me of being proud and arrogant, and I am ashamedly guilty of this and much more in my life, but, at least I do NOT present FALSE evidence to support something that I like to be there!

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

You seem to have missed the point. I clearly stated the term was in common usage in the sense of "only child."

His contention is that those 100+ Greek scholars were not as knowledgeable as he thinks he is because he flat out says "only begotten" is a mistake in every version containing that translation and those mistakes made by those 100+ Greek scholars because they are less qualified then he is.

If he wants to recant his absolute charge and simply say "only begotten" is archaic English for most early 21st century readers, fine, but to make a blanket statement that it is simply wrong is not based on any study of Greek but on his own ignorant arrogance and pride.

Tom, I suggest that you take some time to do some detailed research for yourself, before you post any more, either false (like the Willoughby manuscript in #30) evidence, or that which clearly you lack knowledge of. I suggest that you look at early Church History, especially at the time of the Arian controversy, when the Church was battling the onslaught of this arch heretic and enemy of The Faith. You will see the language used by the Church fathers, in their responses, where μονογενης, is used by many with the sense of "begetting", to counter the teaching of the Arian camp, that Jesus was "created". Hence we have the phrase in the early creeds, "begotten not created". It is noteworthy, that the oldest "Creed" in the Church, is the Old Roman Creed, which J N D Kelly says is from the second century. It is preserved in a Latin form, and has "unicus" (unique/only), and not the later word, "unigenitus" (only-begotten).

There is a big difference of a "theological" meaning to a word, and a "lexical/usage" one, which you should know about?

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Try doing some study instead of just making things up as you go along. See: Harry A. Sturz, The Byzantine Text-Type and New Testament Textual Criticism (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1984).

Also see:
New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority by Maurice A. Robinson.

http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v06/Robinson2001.html

"instead of just making things up as you go along", you mean like you did in #30, when you added FALSE evidence of the Willoughby manuscript - 250AD, to support your contention, that "υἱὸς" is older than "θεὸς", in John 1:18? I notice that you have told me that I have missed the point, when I asked why this manuscript was listed by you, but you have failed to tell me how I missed anything? I know that you are one of the oldest members on the Board, and respected by some for your knowledge, etc, however, I don't understand how you can post as you wish, even when it is NOT TRUE, and no apology, or anything is done? If this were me, no doubt you would again ban me, as you have done in the past, just to shut me up, especially when you are shown to be WRONG! I expect you will again ban me for speaking the truth here.

 

[robycop3]

So, as scholarship cannot point to a bible passage that proves the historic transmission of the text of holy writ, scholarship has no authority to opine that the bible has survived the two millennia from the 1st century until now?

It is insufficient, according to you, for me to state, "I know that God has preserved His word because I have a copy of it right here in my hand?"

I can say that if I'm holding a copy of the NKJV, NASV, KJV, ESV, Geneva, Bishop's, HCSV, Luther's, Chinese Union, or any one of a wagon load of Bible translations regardless of that translation's language-not to mention the ancient Scriptural mss. if I could hold them.

But the KJVO myth was simply invented outta thin air by MEN.You know its man-made origin same as I do. If KJVO were GOD'S will, He would've said so.

You've often spoken out against the KJVO myth for the same basic reason I have - YOU KNOW IT'S FALSE. And there's simply nothing whatsoever from GOD supporting it.

 

[robycop3]

I have only one response when roby goes off on his KJVO rants and accuses them of not having Scripture to backup their belief. Just ask him about Cain's wife. Absolutely zero Scripture for the crazy things he believes about God creating a separate race of people apart from Adam and Eve. Isn't that called "hypocrisy"? I wrote him off as "credible" on any topic several years ago.

You may check his weird belief in this thread:

cain's wife...

Not to leave the subject of this thread too long, but YOU seem to believe God changes, that He approved incest at one time and all at once prohibited it. I believe we've all seen the bad results of incest and "inbreeding". God caused those results to come about for a reason.

Now, let's see YOU provide some authority for YOU to believe the man-made KJVO myth. Maybe the parents of cain's wife will provide it for you.

 

[robycop3]

Gentlemen, GENTLEMEN....Order in the court!

Seems the dialogue has gotten off the subject of this thread, the lack of authority for believing the KJVO myth. So far, we haven't seen any credible KJVO excuse for sticking to this man-made false doctrine, and I doubt if we will.

I suggest those who wish to debate over the meaning of monogenes, etc. start a new thread about it.

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Gentlemen, GENTLEMEN....Order in the court!

Seems the dialogue has gotten off the subject of this thread, the lack of authority for believing the KJVO myth. So far, we haven't seen any credible KJVO excuse for sticking to this man-made false doctrine, and I doubt if we will.

I suggest those who wish to debate over the meaning of monogenes, etc. start a new thread about it.

apologies, guilty as charged!

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

There are three Scriptures that I want to mention here, that show the King James Version got them very wrong. Further Bible evidence against the KJVO fallacy.

1. Isaiah 48:16

"Come ye near unto me, hear ye this ; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning ; from the time that it was, there am I : and now the Lord God, and His Spirit, hath sent Me."

Rightly corrected to read:

"Draw near to me, hear this: from the beginning I have not spoken in secret, from the time it came to be I have been there. And now the Lord GOD has sent me, and his Spirit." (ESV and others)

Very important passage from Isaiah on the Holy Trinity, where the Speaker here is no doubt the Lord Jesus Christ, Who speaks as YHWH. He says that another Person Who is also YHWH, is Sending Him and the Holy Spirit, which is fulfilled in the Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, in the New Testament.

2. Titus 2:13

"looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"

As it reads, it can be argued rightly, that this verse speaks of Two Persons, The Father Who is "the Great God", and "our Savior Jesus Christ"

Rightly corrected to read:

"waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ" (ESV and others)

Jesus Christ IS "Our Great God and Saviour". No mistake about that!

3. 2 Peter 1:1

"Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"

Like the verse in Titus, this reading can be used to show that "God" and "our Saviour Jesus Christ", are Two Persons.

Rightly corrected to read:

"Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ" (ESV and others)

Jesus Christ IS "our God and Saviour". No mistake about that!

 

[TCassidy]

I can say that if I'm holding a copy of the NKJV, NASV, KJV, ESV, Geneva, Bishop's, HCSV, Luther's, Chinese Union, or any one of a wagon load of Bible translations regardless of that translation's language-not to mention the ancient Scriptural mss. if I could hold them.

Nope. The bible never mentions the NKJV, NASV, KJV, ESV, Geneva, Bishop's, HCSV, Luther's, Chinese Union, or any other translation therefore you have no scriptural authority to say that. (Your assertion, not mine.)

You've often spoken out against the KJVO myth for the same basic reason I have - YOU KNOW IT'S FALSE. And there's simply nothing whatsoever from GOD supporting it.

But you can't have it both ways. If there is no scriptural support for KJVO there is an equal lack of scriptural support for your position.

I believe we've all seen the bad results of incest and "inbreeding". God caused those results to come about for a reason.

Yes. To come about. Over time as the human genome deteriorated it became necessary to place limits on procreation.

Now, let's see YOU provide some authority for YOU to believe the man-made KJVO myth. Maybe the parents of cain's wife will provide it for you.

Cain's wife's parents were Adam and Eve. You have no scriptural authority to say otherwise.