Bible Versions Questions and discussion about the Bible version issue.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 05-16-2008, 06:35 PM
Connie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diligent
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie
What I mean is that if a true updated King James had been done that people felt were more accessible, it would be chosen by more churches or at least more individuals.
What makes you think that? Is that your intuition? They are obviously not satisfied with any of the modern versions -- they keep clamoring for a new one every year. What reason do you have for believing a "New New KJV" would be any different?
Who is "they?" Seems to me it's the publishers and sellers who are seducing the flock, and the seminaries are teaching that the modern versions are acceptable and so it goes.

I'm with those advocating a final update by a group of church-appointed Spirit-led born-again scholars. (Final because I am very sure we are in the very last of the last days and there is probably not even time for such a project, but if there is time then it should be done.) Why do I think it would be any different? Because it hasn't yet been done. All that has been done is the false versions.

Yes, I guess it's my "intuition," my Spirit-led intuition. Too bad we all claim this kind of leading and yet disagree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diligent
The fact is, people -- most Christians -- could not be bothered to actually care about the authority of God's word. They don't even trust their chosen, preferred modern versions to guide them in their faith. They heap to themselves evermore teachers and scholars to tell them how to get along with the world, when we are supposed to contend for the truth.
You have a very low view of today's Christians. Not all the church is apostate. There are still true sheep who are being misled by the shepherds, even by wellmeaning shepherds who are also misled. Yeah, sure, I'm trusting in my own judgment about this stuff, but so is everybody. Seems to me that if you dismiss them all as apostates you are in danger of contributing to their confusion and weak faith by your hard attitude toward them -- and I've seen a lot of this hard attitude at this site along with the good teaching I've found very helpful. I know true Christians who are of very weak faith but I know they are nevertheless true Christians, true as they can be with the poor teaching they get. We don't all have the same degree of faith or understanding, and the shepherds have the responsibility for the condition of these weaker Christians -- and you know that is scriptural. The shepherds will be judged very harshly in the end, and some of this KJB-onlyism isn't helping the situation -- yes, again, my (Bible-fed Spirit-led) judgment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diligent
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie
on the KJB-only side that is contributing just as much as itching ears to the current situation -- a fleshly stubbornness, not a Spirit-led discernment.
What makes you qualified to make such a judgment? And no, I'm not talking about your gender. What evidence do you have to support this charge you are making?
All any of us has is our hopefully Bible-fed Spirit led judgment. That's all you have too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diligent
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie
I hate to think of the millions who are being deceived into accepting the corrupt versions. It's not ALL itching ears, there are people who are simply being misled by their leaders -- leaders who usually preach good doctrine, in my opinion though probably not the strictest KJB-onlyers' opinion, and I honestly believe some of this situation is the fault of the latter.
This is a very Chamberlain-esque line of reasoning.
Not an edifying statement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diligent
I've been dealing with KJV detractors for a while now -- this website brings all sorts and some of the email I get is just unfathomable -- and I can tell you without any question that an "update" of the language of the KJV is not an issue. Period. There is a concerted effort to replace the authority of the Bible with the authority of men. That is why the KJV is being rejected. It's not because of a few "eths."
Such charges may be correct, though I can't tell for sure without more information, and if they are correct I'd say you are apparently hearing from the apostates -- though perhaps you are hearing from people who are misled by admired and otherwise worthy shepherds (whom perhaps you don't believe even exist). But I'm talking about the flock at large.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diligent
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie
Bro Tim may be right that it's simply impossible to get a true update in any case, but I find it hard to give up on it.
Why? Do you think God gave you a mission to advocate for a revision of his Bible? This is a serious question -- you are admitting this is your heart here. Is this desire of your heart from God or from your human heart? Do you know what the Bible says about our hearts?
I am admitting no such thing. Finding it hard to give up on it doesn't imply that except to someone who makes words mean such things. I feel strongly about various problems I see in the churches and I write about them all the time, for years now, and I pray for the Lord's leading and that He would keep me from error though I know that of course we are all prone to error. I'm getting a blog started on these things as well. Strong concerns like these may very well indicate a mission from God, at least a spiritual gift in a certain direction. Nothing I said implies I'm trusting my deceitful heart, and why couldn't the same be said back to you? One of the problems that concerns me is in fact people trusting their hearts which are deceitful above all things.

Last edited by Connie; 05-16-2008 at 06:40 PM. Reason: grammar problems
The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software
  #42  
Old 05-16-2008, 08:53 PM
conwaytim conwaytim is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 7
Default

Titus 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

I may at times be mistaken in my "discernment", "understanding" and "wisdom" when it comes to my judgment in these matters - and if I am, God will see to it that I am "chastened"; but I am not going to shrink from my duty to "warn"; "admonish"; and "REPROVE"; and, even when the occasion requires, "REBUKE" a "proud", "vain", and "offensive" person who hurls insults at a Christian without regard for What God's word has to say or even what common courtesy would require.

Bro. George,
As always, one can count on you to respond in a way that many would shrink from, in order to refrain from judging others!
  #43  
Old 05-16-2008, 09:42 PM
bibleprotector's Avatar
bibleprotector bibleprotector is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 587
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie View Post
Yeah, sure, I'm trusting in my own judgment about this stuff, but so is everybody.
Then, how can such a person be claiming to be Spirit-led? The Spirit of God is not subjective, nor is He merely someone's intuition.

It is certainly true that there needs to be a final form of the King James Bible, but it is by receiving from tradition, that is, what has been afforded to us by the providence of God, rather than looking to yet raise up another “standard”.

It is clear that the Spirit of God is not leading toward creating yet another update to the King James Bible. Rather, it is that people must take up what is, and read. They must turn back to the old paths, restore themselves to the present foundation, “All ye inhabitants of the world, and dwellers on the earth, see ye, when he lifteth up an ensign on the mountains; and when he bloweth a trumpet, hear ye.” (Isaiah 18:3).

It is propaganda of the enemy that English words are being lost, or that meanings have altered so much as if the Spirit of God cannot teach people what words ending in “-eth” mean. Such usage should be retained because it is both accurate and God-honoured. No Bible English words or meanings are actually lost anyway.

Now, I am well aware of the idea that some have about how God should do new things, or that people must progress forward, but this never means forsaking the foundation, nor does it mean going into the “spirit” to the abandonment of the Word. Such feeling-oriented “Christianity” is not leading into the truth. The true power of the Spirit is to have the Word and to show forth, by the Church, the things of the Word.
  #44  
Old 05-17-2008, 12:24 AM
Connie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Then, how can such a person be claiming to be Spirit-led? The Spirit of God is not subjective, nor is He merely someone's intuition.
If a person is in the Word and in prayer about such things and seeking to know the will of God, then that person's judgment is going to be led by Him and not be subjective or mere intuition as you think of it. There is always room for error of course, but we are talking about Christians who presumably live by the Word and the Spirit.

Quote:
It is certainly true that there needs to be a final form of the King James Bible, but it is by receiving from tradition, that is, what has been afforded to us by the providence of God, rather than looking to yet raise up another “standard”.
Perhaps you are right. But how has anything ever been done in the history of Christianity except by born-again people feeling a need, subjecting it to the Word and prayer and setting out to execute it in His power? How else would you judge whether something is of the will of God or not? You may be right that God will not bless the efforts of those who desire this sort of updating as I do, but I don't consider my desire itself to be anything other than a desire to further God's glory and strengthen His church. I impute the same motives to you. God will judge us in the end.

Quote:
It is clear that the Spirit of God is not leading toward creating yet another update to the King James Bible.
How do you know? How do you know that it's not simply that the devil has confused the churches to such an extent that we are not reliably following the Spirit of God where He wants us to go? We are in the days where the devil is wearing out the saints right and left and bringing all kinds of confusion among us. SOME of us certainly feel a need for such an update, and how do you know THAT is not of the Holy Spirit?

Quote:
Rather, it is that people must take up what is, and read.
Well, that is what we must do in any case. That doesn't mean we can't think and pray about updating as well.

Quote:
They must turn back to the old paths, restore themselves to the present foundation, “All ye inhabitants of the world, and dwellers on the earth, see ye, when he lifteth up an ensign on the mountains; and when he bloweth a trumpet, hear ye.” (Isaiah 18:3).
I just can't see how this applies to what is merely human language.

Quote:
It is propaganda of the enemy that English words are being lost
Who has said that English words are being lost? I haven't said that.

Quote:
or that meanings have altered so much as if the Spirit of God cannot teach people what words ending in “-eth” mean.
I have also not said that people can't be taught the meaning of the -eth endings.

Quote:
Such usage should be retained because it is both accurate and God-honoured.
So would -s and -es endings if applied properly be both accurate and God-honored.

Quote:
No Bible English words or meanings are actually lost anyway.
I have no idea what you mean by "lost." I haven't said any words or meanings are lost. The reason for updating is simply to have the Bible in the language of the people, which has been the aim of all the translators since the Bible was wrested from the Roman Church.

Quote:
Now, I am well aware of the idea that some have about how God should do new things, or that people must progress forward,
That has nothing to do with anything I've been saying. I don't think updating a translation has anything to do with new things or progress. I don't regard it even as a change at all if it is done correctly. It is simply putting God's word into the language of the people. If I say "flower" and the Frenchman says "fleur" and the Hispanic says "flora" and the German says "blume," or the 17th Century Englishman says "prevent" where today we say "precede" there is no change involved, no new thing, no progress because all the terms are equivalent. Translation is the art of discovering the most exact equivalent. The Holy Spirit oversees such work if done in the right spirit for the right reasons by the right people under the right authority.

Quote:
but this never means forsaking the foundation, nor does it mean going into the “spirit” to the abandonment of the Word. Such feeling-oriented “Christianity” is not leading into the truth. The true power of the Spirit is to have the Word and to show forth, by the Church, the things of the Word.
There is nothing "feeling-oriented" about anything I've said. The Word is the work of the Spirit, there is no contradiction. The Spirit directed the writing of the Word in the first place, the selection of the Word by the church down the centuries, the translation of the Word into all the different languages, and also whatever necessary updating has been done and should be done.

Last edited by Connie; 05-17-2008 at 12:30 AM.
  #45  
Old 05-17-2008, 12:45 AM
Truth4Today
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Arrow A Man With One Watch Knows What Time It Is; A Man With Two Is Never Quite Sure

Quote:
Originally Posted by bibleprotector View Post
I certainly agree the only valid use for the Greek is as a secondary and confirming witness to the English. However, it is an important issue as to the exact sense, that is, the full scope of God's message being present in English. By this I mean that by translation etc., we now (since 1611) have the full, exact and express message of God in English, which is fully and utterly in English. And reading the King James Bible now is as if God spoke English throughout the inspiration of the Scripture, for the manifest infallibility of it in English.

Burgon said concerning the translators, "When we find them turning ‘goodly apparel,’ (in S. James ii. 2,) into ‘gay clothing,’ (in ver. 3,) — we can but conjecture that they conceived themselves at liberty to act exactly as S. James himself would (possibly) have acted had he been writing English."

The argument is not whether or not the Scripture in English is sufficient for salvation, because very born again believer really will have to admit that. The issue is that God's full and utter truth, exact in words, full in sense, leaving nothing to be desired, having nothing added, is fully present in the King James Bible only".

After that is settled, one more thing needs to be addressed, namely, has God supplied a pure form of the King James Bible, free from printing errors and with standard spellings? I think that He has. While God has blessed various editions of the King James Bible, He has blessed one particular line, and brought it into a kind of acknowledgment that makes it the chosen form.
I respect your position and convictions, yet I have to disagree with you. I do not think that the Greek or for that matter the Hebrew are secondary to the English. I have stated what I believe and what I wrote was clear enough. First and foremost is determining the exact parameters for who is King James Only. I don’t want to sound redundant, but this is the more important thing. This is vastly more important than my own personal stand within those parameters. Secondly, my own personal view has been posted as well. Now, I am aware that I did not use the very same words as you. Pure semantics if you as me. However, let me at least explain where I am coming from.

• I do not believe all Bibles are equal
• Therefore, some Bibles are better than others
• The King James Authorized Bible is at LEAST the Best English Version of the Word of God
• The King James Authorized Bible was NOT given by inspiration but was given by divine providence
• The English of our King James Authorized Bible cannot correct the Greek or Hebrew for it comes from Greek and Hebrew
• Therefore, English is not superior to Greek, Hebrew, and/or any other language in EVERY way
• It is not the Greek or Hebrew words or Mss. that contain them that are the problem, but rather man’s understanding of those Greek and Hebrew words
• Presenting the King James Only position MUST be done in love, with meekness and grace
• Every person must come to this conclusion for themselves and have the right to disagree

What ever the case, are the parameters that I originally posted correct or not and why (by your standards)?

In this debate (i.e. the Bible Version Debate), we should be fighting side-by-side for the use of and belief in the King James Authorized Bible as the Standard as far as English speaking peoples go.

You and I both agree that having a standard is Biblically conducive. Please correct me if I am wrong. And for those of you who disagree, I will post my argument now.

A Firm Foundation—Certainty, Authority, and Standard: The Biblical Argument For Having A Standard Bible!

Quote:
“Throughout the history of Bible translation, whether Greek, Latin, or Reformational, there has been a tendency for one translation to emerge as the standard. This was not a result of debate; it simply happened.” (Vanbruggen, Jakob The Future Of The Bible 1978, p.54)
Quote:
“It is argued that unless we embrace the KJV as our ‘final authority,’ we have no final authority at all, and hence all is subjectivity and uncertain. People do not want subjectivity, but desire certainty and clarity, and so we must hold to the ‘traditional’ text. This argument is extremely powerful and should not be underestimated.” (White, James R. The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1995 pp.93-94)
The Need For Authority


The need for an authoritative standard appears to be a need recognized by all. For example, the court system has a “Supreme Court”, machine shops have a standard by which to calibrate their tools each year, Occults have their ritual documents upon which to exactly conduct their insidious incantations and sinister summoning, etc.. But, what about the Christian? Where is the Christian‘s authority? In the Bible of course! However, of which Version? There are several you know? Modern scholarship would have us to believe that after God had inspired a text(s) that it somehow fell away and that for some 1500 years the Church (God‘s people) used corrupt manuscripts, and thus, we are in the process of finding those original words. Hence, by Modern scholarship we Christians have no authority in the Bible but in what some scholar thinks the best reading is. Yet, this is contrary to Scriptural testimony (Is. 40:8; 1Peter 1:24-25; Matt. 5:18; Luke 16:17; 21:33).

The disquieting fact that so painfully lies heavy on the back of our time, is that the Church has lucratively and effectively given an answer and contended all the major doctrines in the Bible, and yet, the Bible seems to be just an idea or mirage that looks good from a distance but is disappearing when searched for. Having, distinctively detailed what a Christian is to believe, the question is, “What was used to define it?” You bellow a verbally articulated pronounced statement of reply, “THE BIBLE!” I ask, “But, which one?”

Their Can Be Only One


It has been claimed that, to make one particular Version the standard, is somehow “pinning God down.” Those who believe this think that it is wrong and usually tout, “show me one verse that says to use that one version.” I respond, show me a verse (just one) that prohibits me from “pinning” God down to just one version! I will let you in on a secret; the Bible does not give any of these prohibiting verses. In reality, this kind of argumentation is null and void, because it is not properly addressing what the Bible addresses. Of course the Bible doesn’t name any one Version as the final rule; it doesn’t name any Version at all. What the Bible does do is, lend to the belief in ONE Version. Take as a case in point, note that the true prophets of God spake with one mouth (1Kings 22:13; Luke 1:70; Acts 3:18; Rev. 11:3, 5). Notice, the prophets are plural but speak with ONE mouth (singular). In contrast to this, the wicked, the unruly, the vain talkers, the deceivers, even the idols made by their hands, speak with mouths (plural) (Ps. 22:13; 78:30; Jer. 44:25; Lam. 3:46; Titus 1:10-11). Does, this not indicate that singularity is to be preferred over the many? Those who cry about “pinning God down” to one Version, are simply spewing forth that which is not Biblically existent, rather it is spawned from a couple of fundamental questions. “Why be limited to any one Bible exclusively?” or “Why believe in any onlyism?” The facts are just as fundamental. Does not the Bible teach and do we not believe:

• In ONLY one true God (2Sam. 7:22; 1Chron. 17:20; Malichi 2:10; Mark 12:32).
• In ONLY one way to the Father (John 14:6).
• In ONLY one Master (Matt. 6:24; 23:8,10).
• In ONLY one door to be saved (John 10:9).
• In ONLY one name that Salvation is in (Acts 4:12).
• In ONLY one prefect sacrifice for sin (Heb. 9:11-14).
• In ONLY one beginning (as of time) (Gen. 1:1; John 1:1).
• In ONLY one Body of Christ (i.e. the Church) (Rom. 12:5; Coloss. 1:18, 24; 1Cor. 12:27-28).
• In ONLY one marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev. 9:7-9).
• In ONLY one manner of law (Ex. 12:49; Lev. 7:7; 24:22; Num. 15:16, 29).
• In ONLY one tabernacle (Ex. 26:6).

Then, why not in ONLY one Bible? Did not God originally author ONLY one Bible? God did not author two versions of Genesis or two renderings of the letter to the Romans! Why would He do it now? The Bible goes on to testify that we are to speak the same thing that we be not divided (1Cor. 1:10) and that we walk by the same rule and mind the same thing (Phil. 3:16). How can we do this when we have conflicting authorities? In like manner we must not forget the Biblical conflict between the one true God and the many false gods. The one true God does not contradict nor is He the author of confusion, but the many gods are.

I want to clarify if I could as to what I really mean. When I talk about pinning God down or limiting Him to only one Bible what do I really mean? Do I mean to convey that the King James Bible should use as the standard of authority for all people every where (weather English speaking or not)? By no means at all! When I speak of God’s word being found in one standard, what I mean is that the King James Authorized Bible is the only real standard for the English speaking peoples. That God’s providentially preserved word; that has been faithfully handed down from the first through the ages, has been providently kept intact in the Biblical English of the King James Bible.

The Conflict

To give you the idea here, take a look at each of these verse comparisons in both the KJV and the NIV. In (Psa. 10:4-5) is the wicked’s ways always grievous or prosperous? In (Prov. 25:23) does the north wind drive away the rain or bring it? In (Prov. 26:22) are the words of a talebearer wounds or choice morsels? In (Is. 9:3) did God increase the joy or not? In (Jer. 51:3) is the archer to bend his bow or not? In (Jer. 27:1) was it the reign of Jehoiakim or Zedekiah? In (Hos. 11:12) does Judah yet rule with God or is Judah unruly against God? In (Matt.18:22) do we forgive our brother 70 X 7 or 77 times? In (Matt. 27:34) was Jesus given vinegar or wine? In (John 9:4) how must do the work, “I” (Jesus) or “we” (Jesus & His disciples)? In (Acts 6:8) was Stephen full of faith or grace? In (Eph. 5:9) is it fruit of the Spirit or light? In (Col. 2:18) is it things which he hath not seen or about what he has seen? In (Rev. 19:17) is it a Great God or a great supper? Which is right? Both cannot be! Which shall you chooses?

The examples above are just a representative portion for there are hundreds even thousands more which could have been cited. Now, let me take this a step further. Examine these 16 verses in the NIV: (Matt. 17:21), (Matt. 18:11), (Matt. 23:14), (Mark 7:16), (Mark 9:44), (Mark 9:46), (Mark 11:26), (Mark 15:28), (Luke 17:36), (Luke 23:17), (John 5:4), (Acts 8:37), (Acts 8:37), (Acts 24:7), (Acts 28:29), (Rom. 1624). Are you having trouble yet? If you are, the reason is, that these verses are not present in the text of the NIV. They may be in a foot note but not in the text itself. The question here is this, do these verses belong in the Bible or not?

Additionally, lets examine one last group of verse comparisons. Please view these 11 verses: (Matt. 13:51), (Mark 9:24), (Luke 7:31), (Luke 9:57), (Luke 22:31), (Luke 23:42), (1Cor. 15:47), (2Cor. 4:10), (Gal. 6:17), (2Tim. 4:1), (Titus 1:4). Is Jesus Lord in these verses or not? Do you not see why we need a standard? A great book illustrating these and more is “Evaluating Versions of the New Testament ” by Everett W. Fowler. Thought, he only focuses on the N.T. he does an awesome job at explaining the why in a simple manner.

This does not mean that other Versions cannot be referred to, howbeit, only in a secondary sense. Nor does it mean that others cannot use a Bible other than the KJAB, for that is a persons personal preference. Although, there are certain questions that we must deal with: “Which Bible should be used as the standard?”, “Which Bible should we use for preaching, teaching, and all areas of controversy?”, “What problems exist if a standard is not kept?”, “Why do you used the Bible you use?”, “What are the reasons and are they reasonable?”. Most importantly we must ask, “Is it Biblically conducive?” Having only one standard indubitably is!

The Implications


The issues faced here are imperative as well as controversial. It is imperative, because of the implication of its most basic Idea, “Does God‘s authoritative Word exist to day?” Think of the implications! What if it doesn‘t? The very book that influenced not only nations but the English language as we know it; and that has touch and change countless lives. Not to mention the blood of enumerable believers who gave their lives to the propagation of it! Yes, the book that is the very breath and Spirit of God! If it be not in existence today, then the Bible is nothing more than a vain Script that means nothing and the faith of those proceeding us was futile. Probably the most devastating problem of it all, is that our faith in the Holy Writ would be bootless, our salvation nonexistent, and we would be hopelessly lost in trespasses and sin.

It is controversial, in that, it involves the very foundation of what we as Christians stand on. The Authoritative Word of God! And that’s just it, for the Christian the Bible is authoritative. It is the finale authority for faith, life and practice. However, the question emerges which demands and almost pesters a clear answer: “Which Bible do you mean?” A little over a century ago this would have been no problem, for the answer was evident: “The standard is the Authorized Version!”; one empire of all controversy to stand as the supreme standard for the faith. Of which it did, by the providence of God, for some 300 years; although, today numerous new Bibles are challenging this standard and persisting for a place of recognition and prominence as valid and more accurate specimens. So, which Version should be the standard? Would God allow one type of Version to reign as the Standard English Bible only to change it latter? That is what we must answer.

Maximum Certainty


The whole issue comes down to having maximum certainty as opposed to maximum uncertainty. If God’s word was not preserved in its entirety, then what certainty can we have of it? How do we know which reading is the acceptable one and which is the unacceptable one? God wants us to have as much certainty as possible as to what He has spoken. For example, again, Jesus told us that man cannot live by bread only, but by every word of God. How pray-tell can mankind in general, in all ages, be responsible for living by EVERY word if it be not preserved? If man has no certainty as to what God’s word specifically says, he cannot .

In fact both the Old & New Testaments express the desire that we are to have a knowledge of certainty concerning His word. We are to know, that is to say, have a knowledge (Prov. 1:23; Hosea 6:3). How can we know anything if we have no certainty as to what God’s word says? Jesus was emphatic, that if we continue in His word we shall KNOW the truth (John 8:31-32). How could Jesus be so certain, unless His word was just as certain? Furthermore, the words of Christ are so important that we will be judged by them if we do not heed them (John 12:47-48; Duet. 18:18-19). So, we must be very certain as to what those words say. The apostle Paul tells us that we are to rightly divide the word of truth (2Tim. 2:15). Again, how can we rightly divide that which is uncertain? Accordingly we read, “For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.” (Ps. 119:89). If it is settled in heaven, ought it to be settled in earth also? Do we not pray that the will in heaven be done on earth (Matt. 6:10; Luke 11:2)? Not that earth is heaven, but that heaven leaves or better yet leads the example as to how earth ought to have been and yet be.

The Bible says, “Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge, That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?” (Proverbs 22:20-21). See also (Luke 1:4). We are to have confidence, assurance, and maximum certainty that God‘s authoritative Word does exist today so we can love it and have great peace (Ps. 119:165). Seeing as God has taken care of His Word, how much more does He take care of us (1Peter 1:5; 4:19).



__________________________________

- “One accurate measurement is worth more than a thousand expert opinions”

- “...this is the Word of God; come, search, ye critics, and find a flaw; examine it, from its Genesis to its Revelation, and find an error... This is the book untainted by any error; but is pure, unalloyed, perfect truth. Why? Because God wrote it. Ah! charge God with error if you please; tell him that his book is not what it ought to be. I have heard men, with prudish and mock-modesty, who would like to alter the Bible; and (I almost blush to say it) I have heard ministers alter God's Bible, because they were afraid of it... Pity they were not born when God lived far—far back that they might have taught God how to write.” Charles Haddon Spurgeon (Spurgeon's Sermons Volume 1: Sermon II p. 31)

- “If, therefore, any do complain that I have sometimes hit my opponents rather hard, I take leave to point out that 'to everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the sun' : 'a time to embrace, and a time to be far from embracing' : a time for speaking smoothly, and a time for speaking sharply. And that when the words of Inspiration are seriously imperilled, as now they are, it is scarcely possible for one who is determined effectually to preserve the Deposit in its integrity, to hit either too straight or too hard.” Dean John William Burgon (The Revision Revised. pp. vii-viii)
  #46  
Old 05-17-2008, 08:03 AM
bibleprotector's Avatar
bibleprotector bibleprotector is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 587
Default

PART ONE

What are the pure words of God in Hebrew and Greek? Where is the extant copy or volume of the book which today may be considered “equal” to the King James Bible?

The truth is that there is no sure and certain Hebrew or Greek manuscript or edition today, and that none, as good as they are, may be considered to be perfect in regards to the finality and exactness of their text, or their completeness, as being totally free from any tiny mistake or variation.

This also can be argued in regards to any Bible Version.

What is needful is to have one final Version for the world.

“For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.” (Isaiah 28:11). This means that the truth would not come to the Jews in Hebrew. Nor is it merely meaning the NT Greek, because the prophecy has not yet been fulfilled “And so all Israel shall be saved” (Romans 11:26a). Therefore, it must be yet at hand.

Furthermore, we see that God promised, “ For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.” (Zephaniah 3:9). That pure language must be Bible English, as English is being installed as the world language, and it is a language which many Jews know already.

Since we have the best Bible in the world, and since English is everywhere, God by His providence is indicating that English preaching of the King James Bible is the way to go. In fact, it is what was promised that should be.

“All ye inhabitants of the world, and dwellers on the earth, see ye, when he lifteth up an ensign on the mountains; and when he bloweth a trumpet, hear ye.” (Isaiah 18:3). This is not merely meaning St George’s Cross or something, but that there should be one standard Word, by which the Gospel is preached to the world.

There is ONE Bible for the Church, the Jews and to the world.

PART TWO

If there is one standard Bible, the King James Bible, which form or presentation of it should be considered, accepted and made standard? After all, any may differ in the jots and tittles one from another, so by what measure is one called “unacceptable” and another “correct”? In short, what is the actual edition of the King James Bible that is being conformed to, or the useful rule and measure? Or can any edition be equally, or as equally providentially supplied as another, so that one has “he” and one has “she”, and there is no certainty whether both are correct, or which is correct.

“Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.” (Isaiah 34:16). No word concerning the promise should fail in the book. Every word should be correct in its place. And just as God gathers the birds because he promised to do so, He has also gathered the words, to every one her correct jots and tittles, as answering to the Heavenly Volume.

Thus, there must be an exact presentation of the King James Bible on Earth, just as God does not have different “equally valid” editions of the Volume in Heaven. Granted that while God might have one master copy in the Heavenly Tabernacle, there should be an answerable perfect similitude in the spiritual tabernacle, by which I mean the Church (at least with a reserved remnant of it today), by which I mean one edition held as common and standard for its purity and exactness.
  #47  
Old 05-17-2008, 09:07 AM
Diligent's Avatar
Diligent Diligent is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oklahoma, USA.
Posts: 641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie View Post
I have no idea what you mean by "lost." I haven't said any words or meanings are lost. The reason for updating is simply to have the Bible in the language of the people, which has been the aim of all the translators since the Bible was wrested from the Roman Church.
The KJV already is "the language of the people." Unless you mean conversational language -- that it is not, and never was. Even when it was first translated, the KJV retained "archaisms" because it is Biblical English, not conversational English.

Quote:
There is nothing "feeling-oriented" about anything I've said.
I haven't seen you provide a single shred of Biblical support for what you are driving for. Until you do, it is indeed "feeling" oriented.
  #48  
Old 05-17-2008, 01:44 PM
Connie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I haven't seen the Bible used to support the views of my opponents, Diligent, or at least not used relevantly -- much scripture is quoted here that doesn't really support the point but simply expresses the poster's opinion. A poster calls another poster a fool and quotes a long list of scripture that describes fools as if that proves his point, though all it is really is a misuse of scripture to call the poster names. Bibleprotector quoted Isaiah 18:13 in support of his view of the finalized KJB, but you have to already share his understanding of that scripture to accept that it supports his point, and to accept that really stretches its meaning it seems to me.

Where in scripture are the problems of translation addressed? Shall I produce all the scriptures that describe born-again Christians as the priesthood of believers, as able to judge all things through the Holy Spirit, and so on?

Last edited by Connie; 05-17-2008 at 01:52 PM.
  #49  
Old 05-17-2008, 01:56 PM
Connie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
The KJV already is "the language of the people." Unless you mean conversational language -- that it is not, and never was. Even when it was first translated, the KJV retained "archaisms" because it is Biblical English, not conversational English.
Please give Biblical support for this idea that is so common here. The New Testament was written in "koine" Greek, or vulgar Greek, the Greek of the people and not of the scholars and philosophers. There is no such thing as Biblical English or at least there is no Biblical support for such an idea, although I would grant that such an idea is defensible as guided by the Holy Spirit. I am not advocating getting rid of all the archaisms because I think they contribute to the meaning and the spiritual impact of the KJB. But there is no BIBLICAL support for your point of view on this, or mine.

Christians have the Holy Spirit, and that is how we are to judge things that do not have direct Biblical support and THAT in itself is a Biblical position and it's the one I have been taking in my posts above.

Last edited by Connie; 05-17-2008 at 02:04 PM.
  #50  
Old 05-17-2008, 02:06 PM
freesundayschoollessons
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
The KJV already is "the language of the people." Unless you mean conversational language -- that it is not, and never was. Even when it was first translated, the KJV retained "archaisms" because it is Biblical English, not conversational English.
Biblical English? It is Shakesperean English with a few biblical terms.
Koine Greek was the common, spoken language of NT times.
Shakesperean English was spoken, conversational English.
The use of colloquialisms throughout demonstrate the conversational nature of the English
All throughout history, the Bible has been and was always intended to be translated in the common language of the people. Neh 8.9
Even the KJV translators clearly noted that they attempted to use "marketplace" language, the same as found in NT times.

"Therefore the word of God, being set forth in Greek, becometh hereby like a candle set upon a candlestick, which giveth light to all that are in the house; or like a proclamation sounded forth in the market-place, which most men presently take knowledge of; and therefore that language was fittest to contain the Scriptures,"
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®, Copyright vBulletin Solutions Inc.

Website © AV1611.Com.
Posts represent only the opinions of users of this forum and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the webmaster.

Software for Believing Bible Study

 
Contact Us AV1611.Com