View Single Post
  #54  
Old 10-14-2008, 10:48 PM
stephanos's Avatar
stephanos stephanos is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Wenatchee WA
Posts: 885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tlewis3348 View Post
First of all, I would like to say that I only use that KJV and refuse to use any of these other translations. That said I do not believe that the King James Version was inspired. If it were inspired then all other translations that have been used by the many faithful men before the KJV was finished as well as those that cannot understand English must have been inspired as well. Are we prepared to say this? How do we decide what has been inspired and what has not? If the KJV is the only thing that we have today that has been inspired then what are the Spanish and German and all the other languages supposed to do? Was God's inspired Word not in existence before 1611?

I believe that a much more logical thing to say is that God's Word has been preserved in the existing manuscripts of the Majority Text. I also believe that as a result of the extreme carefulness and great knowledge of the KJV translators that we can say that the KJV is as close as we can get to God's inspired Word in the English language. Therefore, I believe that it can be helpful at times to go back to the Greek or Hebrew to discover different shades of meaning to the words used (many times the English does not have an exact word or phrase to fully describe the Greek or Hebrew word). This can be done by simply looking up the word in a Strong's Concordance. This will give you the Greek or Hebrew word, its meaning and how it has been translated in different parts of the Bible. This makes it possible for anyone to be a Greek or Hebrew 'scholar' without actually knowing those languages.

I do not want anyone to misunderstand me. I do not believe that any of the modern translations are good and I do believe that they all contain drastic contradictions as a result of being translated from the Critical Text. And while I do believe that it is theoretically possible to have a new translation based on the Majority text that would be better for us today as a result of being in our modern language, I believe that such a translation would not be as accurate because it would not use the various more precise forms of different pronouns and words that do not exist today. If anything were to be changed about the KJV today, I believe it should only be the punctuation and some spelling and capitalization (which should be done very carefully so as to be sure that the original meaning was not changed) because much of this has changed today and making those changes would make many passages more clear (the punctuation of a sentence can greatly affect its clarity and capitalizing pronouns and words referring to the deity could help clarify many passages that would otherwise take some study to understand). This very thing was done to the KJV that we have today. I understand that the people who did the NKJV tried to do this; however, I do not believe that they were as careful when they did what they did. Therefore, I am sticking to the KJV.
There are many that would agree with what you've just said. I however am not one of them. I believe God promised to preserve His Word, and He has done just that. He's preserved a perfect Bible in the King James Bible of 1611. This Bible is a faithful and error free preservation of the Greek Hebrew and Aramaic that God, by the hands of men, penned a very long time ago. This Bible is as inspired as those ancient texts.

I should mention that your idea of a Majority Text is flawed. There is no such thing as a Majority Text.

From http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/kinn...hell-game.html:
There really is no such thing as the majority text since what passes for this today is based on Von Soden's work of PARTIALLY comparing only about 400 of the 5000 Greek manuscripts that presently exist.

Even the TR isn't faithful to the reading of the KJB in every instance. So you have to ask yourself an important question; did God when He said that He isn't the author of confusion preserve His Words scattered across thousands of texts that only so called expert textual criticism scholars can track down (when they all don't even agree) or did He preserve an error free Holy Bible that can be completely trusted and read and cherished by all peoples from all backgrounds, and all educational levels?

When I answered that question, I found that I had enough for me to believe. Though there is more for those willing to dig deeper into the subject.

Much Love in Christ Jesus,
Stephen