Translator Question

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
Every so called bible outside the KING JAMES IS A LIE STRAIGHT FROM SATAN HIMSELF.

That is borderline blasphemy, in my opinion. I pray you carefully consider your words.

In fact the NIV leaves out the name of Jesus over 30 times int the New Test.

Obviously, you are simply repeating hearsay instead of actually examining things for yourself. If you were honest with your position, you would have researched this lie before repeating it, and you would have discovered that the NIV's NT has the name of Jesus 297 times *more* than the KJV does.

They are from the pit of hell and I for one will be glad when God throws them there.

I wonder what you will feel when he doesn't.

I hope God will take every bible rejector and make them where a KING JAMES sign around their neck all through the millenium.

Now this conversation is getting strange.

Rest of inflammatory nonsense ignored.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
Larry I have to wonder if you really are a pastor...

Steve K,

God did not call us to change the mind of everyone who does not hold to our opinions on the KJV. He calls us to reach out to this lost and dying world with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, it is okay to disagree with others without getting personal. I feel that your personal remarks toward Pastor Larry were uncalled for. How can you judge a man that you have never met?

Pastor Larry and I disagree more often than not but, to my knowledge, we have never had unkind words with each other.

I am as strong a KJV supporter as you're likely to find but I try never to resort to un-Christlike methods to make my point.

I am not the spokesperson for the KJVO crowd on the BB, but I am going to have to state emphatically that I disagree with your chosen approach to the issue.

State the facts; state your beliefs, let the KJV speak for itself. It has been doing a great job for nearly 400 years now. The issue will not be put to rest tonight or any time in the near future.

Pastor Larry, please accept my apology for the nature of the posts in question.

Pastor Bob

 

[Author]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
... A LIE STRAIGHT FROM SATAN HIMSELF. Don't say they don't leave the blood out they do. In fact the NIV leaves out the name of Jesus over 30 times int the New Test. They are from the pit of hell and I for one will be glad when God throws them there...

er... Steve... Let's not get carried away here, my brother... NIV mentions the name of Jesus over 300 times MORE than KJV. Here's a chart I did some time back:

Number of times 'Jesus' is mentioned by name
============================================
American Standard Version 883
Amplified Bible 1,116
Contemporary English Version 1,823
Darby Translation 904
English Standard Version 1,055
King James Version 942
New American Standard Bible 946
New International Version 1,281
New King James Version 1,063
New Living Translation 1,396
World English Bible 1,571
Young’s Literal Translation 932

I would be remiss in my personal ministry if, at this point, I did not answer the only question that really matters: Which of these Bibles (and many other editions not listed in many languages) gives us the true message of Salvation?

Here’s the Good News, all of them do! If you say to me the concept of Salvation put forth in the Bible is inerrant, I will agree with you, although I prefer the word infallible instead. If you tell me the Bible is literal, I refer you to the above and again, ask “which one?” Translations vary. The wonderful thing is, none of the differences matter! We cannot prove or disprove the inerrancy of the Bible in the way that term has come to denote (especially in recent SBC politics). However, the Bible (ANY edition) is a record of the Word of God. As Baptists, any time we do not understand something, we can go directly to God in prayer and ask the Holy Spirit to enlighten us. As the Bible tells us, Jesus Christ, not the Bible itself, is our final authority on faith and practice.

John 14:6 — “…I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh to the Father, but by me.”

Believe the above, for it is the truth, and you will not get upset if someone reads a different version of the Bible than you do. Read that which you understand best.

in Christ,

--Ralph

[ December 22, 2002, 11:16 PM: Message edited by: Author ]

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by JYD:
Sure they are;just pick up any NASV,ASV,NIV,ect...& there it is..

That is not the WH text, which you should know. That is a NA27 text was the most recent used for those translations.

Neither can you prove they are not corrupt because the originals are gone.

Exactly my point. That is why the multitude of manuscripts must be considered rather than omitting a few (as the Majority text does) or the vast majority (as the TR does). You simply cannot leave out part of the evidence.

[/qb]So using corrupted versions from corrupted text is right?? my my...

[/qb]Did I miss the place you gave the proof of corruption??? Of course I didn't becuase you haven't given any yet. Your assertion of corruption has not been proven. You have listened to someone else tell you that and have bought it without studying for yourself.

Yep, most folks dislike being wrong

This is unfortunately all too typical a response from you. I wish you would begin to deal with the actual substance of the discussion rather than the foam and froth that is worked up by hyperactive imaginations not grounded in fact.

Fact: There are over 5000 manuscripts containing portions of Scripture.
Fact: No two of those manuscripts are identical.
Fact: Not one of those manuscripts is without error in copying.

The word of God did not wait until 1611 to be available. You earlier said that the Geneva Bible was God's word in 1605. Yet it is different from the KJV. Your own words prove my point that something other than the KJV is the word of God. You are simply inconsistent.

I would encourage you to study this issue from the point of biblical theology and historical reality.

 

[Steve K.]

My response that seems hagsh to a few is in response to his calling KJ people deceived or willfull liars. My stand is unchanged.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
Larry I have to wonder if you really are a pastor why you have so much time to spend questioning.

I don't spend any time questioning. I am not sure what you are talking about. You are right that I have not seen the originals. Niether have you so you cannot say with absolute assurance that your KJV is identical to them. That is the fallacy of your argument that you are too willing to overlook.

For you to call faithful translations of the word of God a lie from Satan himself is a gross perversion of the truth. Even the KJV translators you so highly revere for their work disagreed vehemently with you and answered the position you hold in their preface. The preface to the KJV1611 soundly answers the KJOnly movement. It should be read.

You talk of stuff they leave out but you haven't offered any proof of it. These differences you talk about are differences in texts. No two texts are identical; they all differ. Translations therefore will depend on which text you choose to follow. The KJV is based on less than a dozen of 5000 manuscripts. The TR of Erasmus went through five revisions (less than your "perfect" KJV). It shows that the nature of biblical transmission is, in reality, far different than you have been taught.

Nobody will be using the KJV in the millennium and no one will be wearing signs about it. God saved a college freshman out of the "pit of hell" just last week at my church. He saved her mother out of the same "pit of hell" about 2 months ago. They are growing like weeds from the "pit of hell." So for me, I will continue to use the "pit of hell" since God is blessing it. I have people in my church who tell me that they have learned from from the "pit of hell" in four years of my pastorate than they did in the previously 45 years. I have been in a KJOnly church. I was there for over three years and saw God save less than five people in that time. By your standards, I should be blaming that on the version. I don't because I know the truth. Any faithful translation of God's word produces fruit. I would be very careful to knock the word of God, even if it is a translation you don't like.

Normally I would be non confrontational but I am sick to death of people bad mouthing my bible and then when they are called on it saying "be nice" "don't be mean" Well don't mess with my bible!!!

No one here is bad mouthing or messing with your Bible, Steve. It seems that you have been backed in a corner with no truthful evidence to refute the claims that have been made. Your only recourse is personal attacks and diatribes. It is insufficient to deal with the evidence. I encourage you again to study this issue to obtain the truth about it.

The KJV gave the people the Bible in their own language. We should have the same today.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
My response that seems hagsh to a few is in response to his calling KJ people deceived or willfull liars. My stand is unchanged.

But my statement was made on evidential grounds, not on emotional ones. I truly believe most are deceived. I have heard it preached so many times and pinpointed inaccuracy after inaccuracy in their preaching. I have read the books from a wide range of authors. I know what they say. For instance, when someone says that the NIV took the blood of Christ out, they are simply not telling the truth. The blood of Christ is all over the NIV. Eph 1:7 clearly says that we have forgiveness through his blood. Col 1:20 tells us that Christ made peace through the blood of his cross. When someone says that the NIV took the blood out, they are deceiving others. When someone says that they took the deity of Christ out, they are deceiving others. Consider John 1:18 where the Word in flesh is called God. Consider Titus 2:13 where he is called God. Consider Romans 9:5 which is the most explicit translation on the deity of Christ. When someone says that the NIV took the deity of Christ out, they are not telling the truth.

Steve, these are facts that can be seen by looking at any NIV or NASB. It is not a matter of dispute or debate. It is a matter that you can verify for yourself by picking an NIV and doing a search on the word blood or Christ or whatever you want. You will find every doctrine is there, more clearly than in the KJV for the sake of hte modern reader who speaks contemporary English.

Your ire is wrongly directed. Direct your emotions towards the study of these issues to clarify them in your own mind. I say what I always say, I really don't care what version you use so long as you love it, study it, and live by it. But don't call other faithful translations perversions, lies, etc.

 

[Steve K.]

I've studied them too and they are not the same. Every time someone gives you or any bible corrector evidence you say it is not true.As I said in the beginning it is a heart issue.Don't throw your garbage that anyone who disagrees with you is uninformed.I have studied the issues and the new versions and they are not the same. For instance my KING JAMES BIBLE says that Jesus Christ is the morning star some new versions say Satan is. That is an issue that cannot be reconciled. My KING JAMES BIBLE says David killed Goliath some new versions NIV included say that that his brother did.You cannot reconcile that. It is the confusion of new versions that causes division. When my pastor preaches he makes it plain it will be from the KING JAMES BIBLE and so we read the same words. The confusion comes when different versions say different things. All of the differences in text and manuscript is presented day in and day out but bible rejectors and correctors will say"that is not true" Also th NIV changes every so often so that you cannot pin them down because their editions don't match. Stop asking for documented evidence that you will not believe if you get it.Where does the scripture say that there is a state called Michigan? If you want to use another version go ahead but leave people alone that trust to the KING JAMES BIBLE.

 

[Steve K.]

I have a quote for you from DR. Frank Logsdon.
A amn who interviewed and sat with the translators of the NASV.
"I must under God renounce every attachment to the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION.I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord...We laid the groundwork;I wrote the format;I helped interview some of the translators;I sat with the translator;I wrote the preface...I'm in trouble;I can't refute these arguments;it's wrong,terribly wrong;it's frighteningly wrong;and what am I going to do about it.
When questions began to reach me at first I was quite offended..I used to laugh with others..However in attempting to answer,I began to sense that something was not right about the NASV. I can no longer ignorethese criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them...The deletions are absolutely frightening...there are so many...Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?
Upon investigation,I wrote my very dear friend,MR> Lockman,explainingthat I was forced to renounce all attachment to th NASV. The productis grievous to my heartand helps to complicate matters in these already troublous times...I don't want anything to do with it.
The finest leaders that we have today..haven't gone into it{the new version's use of a corrupted Greek text},just as I hadn't gone into it...that's how easily one can be decieved... I'm going to talk to him{Dr. George Sweeting,president of Moody Bible Institute}about these things.
You can say the Authorized Version {KJV}is abslutely correct.How correct?!100% correct!..I believe the Spirit of God led the translators of the Authorized Version. If you must stand against everyone else,stand..
Dr. Frank Logsdon

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
For instance my KING JAMES BIBLE says that Jesus Christ is the morning star some new versions say Satan is. That is an issue that cannot be reconciled.

Of course it can. If you would do a little research, you would see how. "Lucifer" is the Latin and Old English term for Venus, the morning star. The Hebrew "Helel" is the name of the Babylonian god that the Babylonians believed was Venus, the morning star. The KJV translators' marginal note says "Or daystarre". Strong's concordance says the meaning of "helel" is "morning star". The marginal note in the Geneva Bible is lengthy and discusses why "lucifer" is a reference to Venus, the morning star.

The KJV says Jesus is a lion, and also says Satan is a lion. Why are you able to reconcile that so easily, but not this?

My KING JAMES BIBLE says David killed Goliath some new versions NIV included say that that his brother did.You cannot reconcile that.

Notice the phrase "the brother of" in the KJV is in italics? That is because *it was added* to the text. There are *no* Hebrew manuscripts that have "the brother of". If leaving "the brother of" out is wrong, there was never any perfect word of God until 1611 when the KJV translators corrected it. Instead, maybe, just maybe, there is an explanation that you haven't personally thought of.

The confusion comes when different versions say different things.

What an excellent opportunity to dig into God's word and study why there is a difference! You'd be amazed at how much you will learn about scripture through taking advantage of such an opportunity.

All of the differences in text and manuscript is presented day in and day out but bible rejectors and correctors will say "that is not true"

When it is not true, it is not true. I notice that you have not responded to any such responses, because you see that when someone has replied to you "that is not true", they have been correct.

Also the NIV changes every so often so that you cannot pin them down because their editions don't match.

There have been two editions of the NIV. There have been 5 substantial editions and over a dozen minor editons of the KJV.

If you want to use another version go ahead but leave people alone that trust to the KING JAMES BIBLE.

We're not forcing you to use another version. We're trying to get you to stop spreading falsehoods about them.

I have a quote for you from DR. Frank Logsdon.

Should we start quoting the KJV translators for you? Would it make a difference?

[ December 23, 2002, 12:47 PM: Message edited by: BrianT ]

 

[Steve K.]

Heart issue"Ye hath God said"

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
Heart issue"Ye hath God said"

Come on, Steve. Don't brush off all our points with that. Try to actually dialog with us. Do we say that the KJV translators already had a final authority in 1605, but wanted to make their own version because of "Yea, hath God said"? No, of course not.

If you cannot be honest enough with yourself to recognize and deal with the truth in our responses, why are you even participating here? As a Christian, I would hope you would be willing to look at things like the "Goliath" issue, and say "yes, you're right that 'the brother of' was added by the KJV translators, thus I need to reevaluate my understanding" rather than just hiss at us.

 

[Author]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
... my KING JAMES BIBLE says that Jesus Christ is the morning star some new versions say Satan is. ...

Steve, WHICH Bible says Satan is the Morning Star? (although I do note with interest the post above and will research it). But, in the nine Bibles I have online and searchable (looking at Revelation 22:16) every one quote Jesus as referring to himself as the Morning Star:

The Revelation to Saint John 22:16

American Standard Version, 1901:
I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright, the morning star.

Bible in Basic English:
I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give witness to you of these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright and morning star.

Darby's Translation (1890):
*I* Jesus have sent mine angel to testify these things to you in the assemblies. *I* am the root and offspring of David, the bright [and] morning star.

Douay-Rheims:
I Jesus have sent my angel, to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the root and stock of David, the bright and morning star.

King James Version:
I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Webster's Translation, 1833:
I Jesus have sent my angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning-star.

John Wycliffe's Old English Translation of 1380:
I Jhesus sente myn aungel, to witnesse to you these thingis in chirchis. Y am the roote and kyn of Dauid, and the schynynge morewe sterre.

World English Bible:
", Jesus, have sent my angel to testify these things to you for the assemblies. I am the root and the offspring of David; the Bright and Morning Star. "

Young's Literal Translation, 1898:
I, Jesus did send my messenger to testify to you these things concerning the assemblies; I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright and morning star!

[ December 23, 2002, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: Author ]

 

[Steve K.]

Author you have the right reference to Jesus but check out Is.14:12-15. Not all editions will call Lucifer Morning Star but I have an NIV that does.

 

[Steve K.]

Brian thank God the KING JAMES translators were honest enough to use italics and explain why. Many of the new versios have the words in regular print that are in italics in the KING JAMES. Here are a few more examples of differences in some editions.
Acts 4:24 omitted
Matt.8:29 omit Jesus
1JN.5:7 omitted
JN. 9:35KJ Son of GOD MV Son of Man
Acts 14:15 KJ GOD Mv a God
Josh.22:22 KJ THE LORD GOD MV The Mighty One
Romans 11:6 omitted in MV
Mark 9:42 KJ believe in me MV who believes
Romans 1:16 KJ the gospel of Christ MV the gospel

 

[Pastor Larry]

Morning Star in Isa 14 no more equates Christ with Satan than Ezekiel being called the son of Man equates him with Christ. You must study the context. You cannot just pull out two words and assume they are referring to the same person. They clearly are not. Even a cursory reading of the passage would show that to be true.

Your other "differences" are things that are present in some texts and omitted in some. Each case must be looked at to see why it is there and whether it should be. You still haven't shown one doctrine that's been omitted. You have only shown a few places where the manuscripts differ across the board.

 

[Steve K.]

Studied long and hard and you cannot explain it away by talking about manuscripts we don't have.Omitting the name of God one time is more than sufficient for me. I don't need any more proof.

 

[H.R.B.]

Hey Brian T,
Could you please give me the verses about Satan being
the lion and Jesus being the Lion so I could see what you mean.
Thanks,
Heidi

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
Brian thank God the KING JAMES translators were honest enough to use italics and explain why.

Are you honest enough to admit that the Hebrew manuscripts that don't have this admitted addition ("the brother of") by the KJV translators are also the word of God?

Are you honest enough to recognize that even the KJV translators knew that "Lucifer" was a reference to the daystar (Venus)?

Are you honest enough to admit you were simply wrong about saying the NIV had the name of Jesus less than the KJV does?

Are you honest enough to concede that the word of God existed in 1605 in a form that was *different* than the KJV?

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by Steve K.:
Omitting the name of God one time is more than sufficient for me. I don't need any more proof.

Really? Somehow I doubt you'll be true to your word:

Philippians 1:14 (NIV) Because of my chains, most of the brothers in the Lord have been encouraged to speak the word of God more courageously and fearlessly.

Philippians 1:14 (KJV) And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.

or:

Psalm 145:13 (NIV) Your kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and your dominion endures through all generations. The LORD is faithful to all his promises and loving toward all he has made.

Psalm 145:13 (KJV) Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion endureth throughout all generations.

or:

Jude 1:25 (NIV) to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

Jude 1:25 (KJV) To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

or:

Acts 4:25 (NIV) You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David: " 'Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?

Acts 4:25 (KJV) Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?