[JMWHALEN]

Originally Posted by tlewis3348

First, I would like to thank those of you who have pointed out my error in logic of saying that the KJV is "as close as we can get to the originals." Please let me clarify myself.

Stick with me on this.

If we take Shakespeare's Hamlet and translate it into Spanish, is this not still Shakespeare's work? I would submit to you that it is if and only if the translator did not add any of his own opinions to it. We had to do something like this in high school English. We were to take a quote from a famous work and paraphrase it without adding any of own ideas. I found this to be surprisingly difficult. Is it possible? Yes, of course. It especially is when one is very good at understanding language. Now when someone is translating a work of literature the idea is to translate it word for word and then rearrange those words into a reasonable thought (since the grammar of different languages call for different sentence structure). I believe that the KJV translators accomplished this when they translated the Bible. Now as we continue with this train of thought, we consider what happens when a translator comes to a word in the original that simply does not exist into which he is translating. What does he do in this situation? He chooses the word in the translation that most closely represents the original word. These are simple facts that must happen when something is being translated. I believe that the KJV translators did a superb job at this. Now some say that these men were unknowingly divinely empowered to choose exactly the right word in the English language. Since we know that there are some words in the original languages for which there exists no English word to fully describe, we must conclude that either one or the other is a fuller description of what was meant. Therefore, if the English is the fuller description then that must mean that the originals were not as good of a description. Now God did inspire the original writers of the Bible (I think we can all agree on at least that); therefore, what they wrote is exactly the inspired word of God. Now as scribes copied the Bible there were differences that appeared (there are differences in the Greek manuscripts that exist, though very few). Does this mean that God has not preserved His Word? NO! Historians say that we still have Homer when we only have a few copies of his work. We have several thousand copies of the scripture, as well as billions of Bibles in circulation. Yes God most definitely does preserve His Word. So although the Greek and Hebrew manuscript do contain differences they are very small and very few and we therefore conclude that they differ very little from the original manuscripts written by the original authors that were most definitely inspired by God. As we have already said, when translating a language there are some words in the original that have no exact translation in the new language. So therefore we see that there is a logical succession here. First there were the original autographs, then scribes copied those autographs, then translators translated from those copies into what we have today. We have many of those copies and we know that they differ slightly from each other and therefore they must differ slightly from the originals. We also know that any time something is translated into a different language there is a slight loss of meaning. Therefore, is it not logical to say that the closer we can get in that succession to the original autographs the more accurate representation we will have of what the originals said? I believe that this is a logical statement. I also believe that this does not remove any of the foundations of my Christian faith. Let me restate something here. I do believe that the KJV is God's inspired Word (just like a Spanish translation of Hamlet is still Shakespeare); however, I believe that the study of a compilation of the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts can give a fuller understanding of what is being said in a certain passage. So while it is not necessary to have knowledge of what the Greek or Hebrew says it certainly is helpful. This knowledge can be had by anyone through the use of a Strong's Concordance.

__________

(bold is my emphasis)

"the translator... the KJV translators ...accomplished this ….when a translator comes to a word in the original ….What does he do in this situation? He chooses ..I believe that the KJV translators did a superb job at this...."

My comment: Wrong premise("supporting walls") -wrong conclusion. Your premise is that man is responsible for the preservation of the inspired word of God, i.e., secular humanism/moderism. Why is it(rhetorical question) that Christians can believethat LORD God created the universe, saved sinners, raised the dead....................but "just couldn't get this preservation thing down right."



"Does this mean that God has not preserved His Word? NO! Historians say that we still have Homer when we only have a few copies of his work. We have several thousand copies of the scripture, as well as billions of Bibles in circulation. Yes God most definitely does preserve His Word. So although the Greek and Hebrew manuscript do contain differences they are very small and very few and we therefore conclude that they differ very little from the original manuscripts written by the original authors that were most definitely inspired by God….We have many of those copies and we know that they differ slightly from each other and therefore they must differ slightly from the originals.

__________________________________________________ ________________________________
"they differ very little….differ slightly from each other"

My comment. This is incorrect. The 5000+ ms. differ in hundreds of places.

And Please define "slightly." Again, "slightly" wrong? "Almost the word of God"?



So, how do you explain the following(among hundreds of examples), i.e., if all the different the translators were all looking at "the" Greek, how can any reasonbally(Is. 5:20) prudent person ccome to this "differ slightly" conclusion?:

Ephesians 3:6

"That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:" King James Bible


"This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus." NIV

In the NIV, the phrase that "the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel", the words "with Israel" are not found in any of the 5000+ manuscripts-nada. Someone else on this board can either verify this, or correct me. If this is so: One of the very "lynch pins"of a dispensational approach to understanding the Holy Bible, is the premise that there is a clear separation between Israel and the body of Christ=things that differ-scriptures which apply to Israel cannot be applied to the body of Christ in this mystery dispensation. Gentiles are not heirs "together with Israel." The King James Bible and the NIV cannot both be the word of God, if the logic of the law of non-contradiction as a tool, is a presumption in our/any discussion(The KJB and the NIV contradict each other in hundreds of places. I only focus on a dispensational aspect here).

And how do you explain, if these differences are just "slight", the following:

Galatians 2:7

"But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;" King James Bible


"On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as Peter had been to the Jews." NIV

"But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised ." NASB


Our faith("in") vs. the Lord Jesus Christ's faith("of")

Galatians 2:16
"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." King James Bible

" knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified." New King James Version

"know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified." NIV
_____________________________
Galatians 2:20
"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." King James Bible

"I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me." New King James Version

"I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me." NIV
_____________________________
Galatians 3:22
"But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." King James Bible

"But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe." New King James Version

"But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe." NIV
______________________________
Ephesians 3:12
"In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him." King James Bible

" in whom we have boldness and access with confidence through faith in Him." New King James Version

"In him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence." NIV
________________________________
Philippians 3:9

"And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:" King James Bible

"and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;" New King James Version

"and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith." NIV
___________________________________
Colossians 3:12
"Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." King James Bible

"buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead." New King James Version

"having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead." NIV
__________________________________________________ ____________________________________________




"the Greek... manuscript "

My comment: Are you sure you are not just restating what you read on other websites, i.e., have you done the research? There is no such thing as "the Greek manuscript." Please identify this "the" Greek manuscript.




"...differ very little from the original manuscripts written by the original authors that were most definitely inspired by God…. ... "

My comment: You continue to argue this point, but, as I asked you twice previously, how are you able to make this assessment/judgment, i.e., " differ very little from", without having "the original manuscripts written by the original authors."


Do you mean "the originals", or the 5000+ manuscripts? "Fess up"-have you seen/reviewed/studied either "the original manuscripts written by the original authors", or the 5000+ manuscripts? If no, how can you make this statement?. I believe you are confused on the terms "originals"/"original manuscripts"-there is only one "original"(of anything); there are 5000+ ms.

I assume you mean the 5000+ manuscripts, given your "We have many of those copies and we know that they differ slightly from each other and therefore they must differ slightly from the originals" statement. . If so, my question remains: how are you able to make this assessment/judgment, i.e., that "those copies" "differ slightly" from "the originals?

(I suggest you "tighten up" your teminilogy, i.e., be more precise.)


__________________________________________________ _______________________________
".... We have several thousand copies of the scripture, as well as billions of Bibles in circulation....

Vs.

"I do believe that the KJV is God's inspired Word "



My comment: You seem to distinguish/differentiate between "the scripture" and "billions of Bibles", i.e., your "as well as" phrase, and you seem to distinguish between "the scripture" and "the KJV." Are 'billions of Bibles" "the scripture"? I thought that "the" in "the Bible" is singular, as in "the book", "the volume of the book?"
___________

"I do believe that the KJV is God's inspired Word. "

My comment: Thank you!!!! Despite the preceding comments, I am happy to see your conviction, your "spine/backbone", in stating, on record, that you believe "that the KJV is God's inspired Word."




In Christ,

John M. Whalen