Exactly, I saw it.
To change the important doctrine affects my belief. I do not approve that. To change it affects anyone's belief and helps them defending their modern versions.
-
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!
Who did the king see?
- Thread starter stilllearning
- Start date
- Status
To change the important doctrine affects my belief. I do not approve that. To change it affects anyone's belief and helps them defending their modern versions.
stilllearning
Active Member
Hi annsni
You asked........
That is no issue for me, because “they both are the Word of God”.
The Lord will bless your faith in studying and “fully believing” the ESV, just as the Lord will bless me, for “fully believing” the KJB.
But if either of us, start using and studying both, than that is where the problems starts.
--------------------------------------------------
Some can’t understand this, but God blessing our “faith” more than anything else.
And comparing two English versions, can’t help but place doubt in our minds about God’s ability to perfectly preserve His Word!
You asked........
That is no issue for me, because “they both are the Word of God”.
The Lord will bless your faith in studying and “fully believing” the ESV, just as the Lord will bless me, for “fully believing” the KJB.
But if either of us, start using and studying both, than that is where the problems starts.
--------------------------------------------------
Some can’t understand this, but God blessing our “faith” more than anything else.
And comparing two English versions, can’t help but place doubt in our minds about God’s ability to perfectly preserve His Word!
I see 2 sides: which is to believe it or doubt it?
I stand with you. I second.
Sorry, but this is simply untrue. I use both the ESV and the KJV and have NEVER doubted God's ability to perfectly preserve His word. This is totally uncalled for by you. You have been asked by the mods and now me to stop this type of postings. you just had a thread closed where you were doing this very thing. Having 2 or more translations of the Bible is great!
stilllearning
Active Member
Hello Rippon
You have said serval times.......
They are just men.
--------------------------------------------------
Next you said.........
I was totally unaware that anybody else was saying this(honestly).
This is one of the points that I have made in this very thread:
None of us, should allow what ANY HUMAN BEING has said, to effect our Doctrine.
Jesus said.......
Mark 7:7
“Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.”
--------------------------------------------------
Next you asked........
It’s not wrong to compare mayonnaise or truck tires, because each of us have our preferences;
But we are talking about THE WORD OF GOD!
Our preferences should have absolutely no bearing on this!
--------------------------------------------------
You also said........
This has already been discussed in this thread;
I am a big fan of finding the nuances of God’s Word; But I want the Holy Spirit to bring them out to me, not some editor of another Bible version!
This comparison leads to a “false deeper understanding”, that is not really deeper at all;
But more shallow.
Because it’s getting us away from verbal inspiration!
--------------------------------------------------
Lastly you suggest........
What may “feel” like an enhancement(to my flesh), might be something I don’t really need.
You have said serval times.......
I have not responded to this statement, because they are nobody to me.
They are just men.
--------------------------------------------------
Next you said.........
I was totally unaware that anybody else was saying this(honestly).
This is one of the points that I have made in this very thread:
None of us, should allow what ANY HUMAN BEING has said, to effect our Doctrine.
Jesus said.......
Mark 7:7
“Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.”
--------------------------------------------------
Next you asked........
It’s not wrong to compare mayonnaise or truck tires, because each of us have our preferences;
But we are talking about THE WORD OF GOD!
Our preferences should have absolutely no bearing on this!
--------------------------------------------------
You also said........
This has already been discussed in this thread;
I am a big fan of finding the nuances of God’s Word; But I want the Holy Spirit to bring them out to me, not some editor of another Bible version!
This comparison leads to a “false deeper understanding”, that is not really deeper at all;
But more shallow.
Because it’s getting us away from verbal inspiration!
--------------------------------------------------
Lastly you suggest........
No thinks;
What may “feel” like an enhancement(to my flesh), might be something I don’t really need.
I'm still waiting for your other 798 examples. You were incorrect on the first 2 so you still have yet to show me an example.
Last edited by a moderator:
Just to give the answer, the literal translation is "like a son of the gods." Remember, this is a pagan king saying this. He has NEVER seen Jesus, so how would he know what Jesus looked like to be able to make a statement that it looked like Jesus? So even if it was actually Jesus in there(the KJV even says "like" and not that it was actually Jesus) the pagan king would have not known that it looked like Jesus whom he has never seen.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Here is the verse in question in the 1587 Geneva Bible - ' Then Azarias stoode vp, & praied on this maner, and opening his mouth in ye mids of the fire, saide, '
Is that close the KJV of Daniel 3v25?
Last edited by a moderator:
stilllearning
Active Member
Hello again C4K
You asked.......
It is not that much of a fallacy.
The KJB & the Geneva Bible, are basically the same in that the Geneva Bible does not remove the verses and passages that the MV’s do.
I have a copy of the 1611 KJB, and I would say that comparing the Geneva Bible and the KJB, is like comparing the 1611 edition and the 1769 edition.
They are basically the same Bible!
So you asked, is this always enough?
Well I prefer to use the 1769 edition rather than the 1611;
But if all I had was a 1611, I would love it just as much!
--------------------------------------------------
You also suggested.......
But we should consider what is best for us!
Sure the KJB is very close to the NKJV: But why use them both?
If your wanting to study God’s Word, and are listening for the Holy Spirit to reveal to you what the Bible actually says, why gum it up at all with “your choices of additional versions”??
--------------------------------------------------
Finally you said........
If they were only going to give me a CT translation(and that is all that I had), than I would love it.
But if they gave me a choice of one CT translation or two TR translations, I would take the two:
But I would only use one of them!
You asked.......
It is not that much of a fallacy.
The KJB & the Geneva Bible, are basically the same in that the Geneva Bible does not remove the verses and passages that the MV’s do.
I have a copy of the 1611 KJB, and I would say that comparing the Geneva Bible and the KJB, is like comparing the 1611 edition and the 1769 edition.
They are basically the same Bible!
So you asked, is this always enough?
Well I prefer to use the 1769 edition rather than the 1611;
But if all I had was a 1611, I would love it just as much!
--------------------------------------------------
You also suggested.......
Each of us can do what we want.
But we should consider what is best for us!
Sure the KJB is very close to the NKJV: But why use them both?
If your wanting to study God’s Word, and are listening for the Holy Spirit to reveal to you what the Bible actually says, why gum it up at all with “your choices of additional versions”??
--------------------------------------------------
Finally you said........
You remember the example I gave about being in prison.
If they were only going to give me a CT translation(and that is all that I had), than I would love it.
But if they gave me a choice of one CT translation or two TR translations, I would take the two:
But I would only use one of them!
stilllearning
Active Member
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Different editions - some of the editions of the Geneva Bible, like 1587, included the Apocrypha in the body of the text. So which Geneva was close enough to the KJV to count as the same Bible?
Well, I see what the issue is here. It is that by reading to different versions, you begin to lose faith in God. So for you, I can see why you need to only have one version. However, I do not at all have that issue. I can read multiple versions and never once doubt that God had preserved His Word and that I can fully stand on what I am reading. So may God bless you in your single version and may God bless me in multiple versions.
stilllearning
Active Member
I figured that the explanation would be “different editions”, but why look for trouble that has already been dealt with.
The 1611 KJB also had the Apocrypha, but the following editions removed it.
--------------------------------------------------
This is a significant point in this discussion.
“Why was the Apocrypha removed from the later editions of these Bibles?!?”
Because God’s Spirit filled people WOULD NOT ACCEPT the Apocrypha!
--------------------------------------------------
So instead of going back and forth about, “just how close a Bible should be to the KJB”, why not just exclusively use the KJB, that for hundreds of years, was “PURIFIED” by God Himself, through the Spirit filled Church that read it?
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
So we go full circuit - it must be the KJT or it is not enough.
And on topic - the king saw what he perceived as a representation of divinity, be it an angel or Christ incarnate.
Last edited by a moderator:
stilllearning
Active Member
======================================
You said......
You know as well as I do, that I have repeatedly said in this very thread, that even the NIV would be “enough” for me, if that is all that I had.
--------------------------------------------------
You also said.......
If that is “enough” for you, that’s fine.
But don’t you think it is important, in rightly dividing the Word of truth, that we never leave any questions about Christ open like this.....
Who was it that died on the cross? It could have been an angel or Christ Himself?
(I know this is blatant, but I am making a point.)
If it’s not important to correctly identify Christ in Daniel 3:25, than where in the Bible is it important?
It wasn't removed from most KJV editions until the mid 19th century. So from 1611 until 1850 or so were the people of God not filled with the Spirit of God? Were the KJV revisers not filled with the Spirit of God when they included it and cross-referenced it to the rest of the canon?
Would you say that the real essence of the KJV --the stripped-down model,with the Apocrypha deleted has only been around for 161 years?
Why was it removed? Things that are different are not the same. The KJV of today is very different from the KJV's from 1611-1850 or so.
Time to make new charts to demonstrate how many verses have been removed from the modern (since 1850)KJV's.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Where does the Aramaic refer to Christ in Daniel 3v25? It is indeed enough that a pagan king was impacted enough to refer divinity. How does the concept that the individual in the fire might be an angel affect the doctrine of Christ?
that's not the Geneva. They didn't spell words like that. What you just quoted was the current KJV reading, not the Geneva.
Yes, that's the apocrypha portion. the Geneva has this...
Geneva: "And he answered, and said, Loe, I see foure men loose, walking in the middes of the fire, and they haue no hurt, and the forme of the fourth is like the sonne of God."
KJV 1611: He answered and said, Loe, I see foure men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they haue no hurt, and the forme of the fourth is like the sonne of God.
Still think some are missing the point
- Status