View Single Post
  #20  
Old 02-09-2008, 07:54 AM
Pink Frog
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

[QUOTE=againstheresies;315]In all five of your examples you mentioned there are no variant readings. There is no difference in the Greek Text for the NT and no difference in the reading of the Hebrew text. For example, in the case of Job 17:1 the Hebrew word “ruwach” can mean “breath” or “spirit.” Usage determines meaning. The context is Job praying for relief. His spirit is broken. There is no textual variant here. “My spirit broken” clearly better conveys the meaning of “ruwach chabal” better than “My breath is corrupt.” The other examples you cited are the same. There is no textual variant or alternate reading in these verses.

First of all, I'm a simple person and I talk in simple terms. Quite frankly, I think we can get too choked down on "textual this and that" worrying about what the context of the original word was. My belief in the superiority of the KJV does not come from textual analysis (as interesting as it is), but from experience. We can't truly explain the depth of salvation to someone who has never experienced it. They are going to have to experience it for themselves. God's word is the same way, we can't just read the Bible, we must experience it. I choose to stay with the KJV because God has fittly framed it together, each specific word in it's place for a reason. Unless you have truly experienced this for yourself, this answer will seem less than satisfactory. Please read my posting on Hebrews 10:25 in the Bible Studies forum which basically points out God's hand in using specific words.

Am I saying that God cannot reveal spiritual things to you through scripture in modern versions? No. . . Can you eat a bologna sandwich? Of course. . . but why would you want to when there's steak on the table?

Last edited by Pink Frog; 02-09-2008 at 07:56 AM. Reason: omittion of word