1. 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!

Why does the KJV have [questionable] material in it?

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Daniel David, Oct 11, 2002.

Top Posters
Page 1 of 2
  1. Daniel David

    Daniel David New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the KJV is God's preserved word, then God's preserved word didn't exist until 1611. The KJV does not use one Greek and Hebrew manuscript alone. It incorporates words and phrases from manuscripts that are not found in the Textus Receptus, which is the main text that they used.

    Here's my favorite example:

    Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also]. 1 John 2:23 KJV

    In the KJV, the translators let the reader know when certain words are not actually in the Greek or Hebrew by placing them in italics. In 1 John 2:23, the entire second clause is in italics! "...but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also." Since this clause was not in the supposedly "preserved" Textus Receptus, why did the "inspired" KJV translators include it?

    The answer will surely infuriate the KJV-only crowd. Check out your New American Standard Version. It has the same words as the KJV, only the second clause is not italicized! That clause IS found in the Alexandrian manuscripts, but not the Textus Receptus! Would you believe it...the King James translators relied on a reading from the Alexandrian manuscript for their translation!

    [snip]

    KJVO have been duped and under deception and it is clouding truth and stunting growth.

    [ October 13, 2002, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Bob 63 ]
     
    #1 Daniel David, Oct 11, 2002
  2. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    PTW, Worse yet, that reading might have come from the RCC Bible, the Vulgate. You know Bishop Andrewes was kind of in favor of reunion with Rome any way... maybe this was a subtle attempt... to close the gap.

    Seriously though, do the 'Noles have a shot against the 'Canes?
     
    #2 Scott J, Oct 11, 2002
  3. Daniel David

    Daniel David New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is the problem with KJVO. The want certainty above what the Bible says. Inerrancy is a doctrine taken from Scripture. KJVO is a doctrine made up by misguided people used to deceived more misguided people. The KJV translators didn't believe what KJVO teaches.

    Probably not. I think we are going to get stomped. I can count on one hand the number of times I thought the Noles could not win a game. I have been a fan since '91.

    Like all good arguments for KJVO, I am out.
     
    #3 Daniel David, Oct 11, 2002
  4. Scott J

    Scott J Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Amen to the first part... and this coming from someone who likes and uses the KJV.

    I hope you're wrong about the second part. I detest both the Gators and Miami. I would love to see FSU as the Florida champs. In reality though we will probably both have a disappointing weekend. Georgia will probably beat UT as bad as Miami beats FSU. The only ray of sunshine is that either Texas or OU will have a loss on Saturday.

    Out like the number of Vol players with season ending injuries... then again in like the number of those guys that are going to be awesome next year.
     
    #4 Scott J, Oct 11, 2002
  5. Japheth

    Japheth Guest

    It means the KJV translators were HONEST egnough to put italics in the verses;a lot is changed when you go from Greek/Hebrew to English. What makes a good sentense in Greek/Hebrew don't mean it will make plain sense in English.
     
    #5 Japheth, Oct 11, 2002
  6. Daniel David

    Daniel David New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, Japheth, you are clearly ignoring the point. The point is that the KJV is not solely based on the TR. If someone wants to still use that line, what do you do with what I previously said?

    The KJV translators took from the corrupt, [snip] text of Westcott and Hort.

    I can almost hear that old, worn-out line as to why the NKJV should be rejected.

    Apparently, the didn't buy into the same logic put forth by KJVO.

    [ October 13, 2002, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Bob 63 ]
     
    #6 Daniel David, Oct 11, 2002
  7. Anti-Alexandrian

    Anti-Alexandrian Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    0
    #7 Anti-Alexandrian, Oct 11, 2002
  8. Japheth

    Japheth Guest

    Again,you are wrong;W&H was not even ALIVE in1611 :rolleyes: It sates CLEARLY in the KJV dedicatory that they did IN FACT have access to other text;but did not use them.
     
    #8 Japheth, Oct 11, 2002
  9. Daniel David

    Daniel David New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow, a false creed invented by KJVO to purposely misrepresent the Critical Text position! I am shocked that they would stoop so low! :eek: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :eek:

    KJVONLY, that contributed nothing to the discussion. With all due respect, please hijack a different thread. Thank you.
     
    #9 Daniel David, Oct 11, 2002
  10. Daniel David

    Daniel David New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Japheth, the text itself might not have been discovered until recently. However, it would have been translated into other languages and such. We can look back and see where they got it (indirectly). They did not exclusively use the TR.
     
    #10 Daniel David, Oct 11, 2002
  11. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can you cite this portion of hte 1611 dedicatory for us please?
     
    #11 Pastor Larry, Oct 11, 2002
  12. gratefulcao

    gratefulcao New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2002
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh! PLEASE! :(
    PREACH THE WORD , leave those KJVO extremists alone!
    Sorry to say, but it is SILLY!
    Let's talk about something make sense, would you?
    Umm, even talking about major league playoff makes much more sense!
     
    #12 gratefulcao, Oct 11, 2002
  13. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    That clause IS found in the Alexandrian manuscripts.

    Might I ask, how do you know? [​IMG]
     
    #13 RaptureReady, Oct 11, 2002
  14. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    #14 Forever settled in heaven, Oct 11, 2002
  15. MissAbbyIFBaptist

    MissAbbyIFBaptist <img src=/3374.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 3, 2002
    Messages:
    2,567
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm KJBO, and I believe the reason there are italicised words is because whne translating any language you have to at times add basic words for it to be readable. Such as in Spanish. HTe phrase: Quatos anos teines?; of "How old are you?" when translated directly from Spanish means something to the effect of "Years how many have you?"
    Every language has variations, and that is the reason why there are some italicised words.
    If you don't believe that the KJB is God's word, then how can I help you? Do you see what I mean?
    God said that His word was settled in Heaven forever. No matter what anyone says, you cannot change that.
    Why are people always looking for a fault in the Bible?
    If I asked you to show me a copy of God's word, you'd show me hundreds of versions. If I asked you to show me God's preserved word, you'd tell me i didn't exist.
    And if it dosn't exist, then how do we know we can trust what we already have in the Bible.
    If we can't trust the Bible, then how can we know we are saved?
    Why must people constanly doubt? God said it, that settles it.
    You can trust God's word {and knowing my personality, you know what "version" I speak of} for everything. It's true, and without error! Why would God give us something that had error in it? He wants us to know the truth. "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set ye free..."
    I'm thankful that I'm so simple minded that I can just take God at His word, and leave it at that.
    ~Abby [​IMG]
     
    #15 MissAbbyIFBaptist, Oct 11, 2002
  16. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen, saved by grace 1999 [​IMG]
     
    #16 RaptureReady, Oct 11, 2002
  17. Joe Turner

    Joe Turner New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let me just add for the record that, while I certainly can't speak for all KJVO's, the majority of us DO NOT get infuriated over silly attempts to attack the word of God. I personally got a good chuckle out of Preach the Word's post. He seemed a wee bit agitated for some reason. [​IMG]
     
    #17 Joe Turner, Oct 11, 2002
  18. ChristianCynic

    ChristianCynic <img src=/cc2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2001
    Messages:
    927
    Likes Received:
    0
    That proves the KJV is not the Word of God, or else the Greek and Hebrew texts-- whichever particular ones tickle your funnybone-- are not the Word of God. Do you believe in a God whose words do not make sense from one language to another?
     
    #18 ChristianCynic, Oct 11, 2002
  19. ChristianCynic

    ChristianCynic <img src=/cc2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2001
    Messages:
    927
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very nice acknowledgment that the KJV adds to to Word of God.
     
    #19 ChristianCynic, Oct 11, 2002
  20. Anti-Alexandrian

    Anti-Alexandrian Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you mean to tell me that Koine Greek will read and speak word for word like English?? I doubt that;it is unfortunate that you doubt that God could preserve his word for us. But,that is your opinion; which, much like your posts, are worthless.

    [ October 11, 2002, 09:16 PM: Message edited by: KJVONLY ]
     
    #20 Anti-Alexandrian, Oct 11, 2002
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 2
Loading...