People who have a problem with a translation being infallible, I can agree with them except for one very important thing: The Bible isn't just "some book".

The author of THE BOOK is still alive and well and is quite able to preside over any translation of HIS BOOK. The folks who just take it upon themselves to make a translation of the Bible for whatever reason without the sanctioning of the Holy Ghost are people who's "shoes" I wouldn't want to be in when standing before God.

There are well over 300 English translations and they all say something different. They can't all be God's Word because God isn't the author of confusion nor does He contradict Himself.

Again I ask, if the AV1611 isn't God's infallible Word in English, then which one is? Name ANY English version of the Bible that has been used of God for as long as the KJB? Name any English version of the Bible that is so intimidating to the other English versions as the KJB? If God's Word is going to be the standard by which we are judged, why wouldn't God see to it we had access to it?

Originally Posted by Pastor Mikie

People who have a problem with a translation being infallible, I can agree with them except for one very important thing: The Bible isn't just "some book".

The author of THE BOOK is still alive and well and is quite able to preside over any translation of HIS BOOK. The folks who just take it upon themselves to make a translation of the Bible for whatever reason without the sanctioning of the Holy Ghost are people who's "shoes" I wouldn't want to be in when standing before God.

There are well over 300 English translations and they all say something different. They can't all be God's Word because God isn't the author of confusion nor does He contradict Himself.

Again I ask, if the AV1611 isn't God's infallible Word in English, then which one is? Name ANY English version of the Bible that has been used of God for as long as the KJB? Name any English version of the Bible that is so intimidating to the other English versions as the KJB? If God's Word is going to be the standard by which we are judged, why wouldn't God see to it we had access to it?

Awesome Pastor Mike. This is the central fallacy of the pseudo "science" of textual criticism. And that's why textual criticism is unbelief. They treat the book as though its authors lived hundreds/thousands of years ago.

YES SIR HE IS STILL ALIVE!!! Praise his name! Great reply pastor Mike!

Originally Posted by ok.book.guy

If I can't understand what the Bible says in English, I'm sure not going to understand it in another language.

Direct hit pastor Mike!

Proverbs 29:18 (KJV) Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.

Okay. What is the meaning of "vision" in this passage, and how did you come to that conclusion?

Originally Posted by againstheresies

Proverbs 29:18 (KJV) Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.

Okay. What is the meaning of "vision" in this passage, and how did you come to that conclusion?

I hope you don't mind if I jump in.

Originally Posted by Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary

Pr 29:18
18. no vision--instruction in God's truth, which was by prophets, through visions (1Sam 3:1).
people perish--(Compare Margin), are deprived of moral restraints.
keepeth the law--has, and observes, instruction (Pr 14:11,34).

no vision, or no prophecy. In the N.T. prophecy is by the preaching of God's Word.

Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

w/o the knowledge of the Word of God, the people will perish.

Okay I think I understand now. It is okay to use a commentary written by scholars (who know Greek and Hebrew and who were not KJV only advocates or TR only advocates) to understand the English. But it is not okay to learn Hebrew and Greek and study the text yourself so that you can better evaluate the conclusions of others.

Too bad Jack Hyles did not get the memo before he passed away.

See the exerpt from one of his sermons: What Changes a Church by Jack Hyles

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Books...ch-chap_19.htm

“(2) He loses his vision. Proverbs 29:18 says, Where there is no vision, the people perish. That means when a leader has lost his vision for the members, the members perish. It does not mean that if I have no vision for myself, I will perish, but if I have no vision for my people, they will perish.

I have visions for my church. I have visions for the young people. My heart is broken when the young people do not fulfill the visions I have for them. I have visions for the kind of young ladies that our young men will marry. I have visions for the kind of young men our young ladies will marry. I have visions for Hyles-Anderson College. I have visions for Hammond Baptist Schools. I have visions for the First Baptist Church of Hammond. I have visions for the kind of Christians I want my people to be.”

Too bad he could not have just referred to another English translation like the NKJV and used it like a commentary. It may have been helpful for someone who has no need to study the original languages.

Proverbs 29:18 (NKJV) Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; But happy is he who keeps the law.

But it is not okay to learn Hebrew and Greek and study the text yourself so that you can better evaluate the conclusions of others.

Its okay to learn Greek and Hebrew. My point is: Why? You have God's infallible word in your hands in the Bible. English is my first language. So I will NEVER understand Gk/Heb grammar as well as I will understand English grammar. I read the Bible because it is as trustworthy and authoritative as the TR/Masoretic. The TR cannot trump the Bible. The TR is God's word (NT) in Gk, the Bible is God's word in english.

You are not a greek grammarian (although you may play one in real life). You have no business trying to 2nd guess the Bible. You are not a text critic either. You really have no business trying to pass judgement on the quality of the source documents used in the NA/UBS4 or TR for that matter.

NOTE: I didn't say you haven't had 3 or 4 years of Greek. But that doesn't make you a grammarian else you don't know what a grammarian is.

Who publishes the infallible Word of God today? Oxford or Cambridge?

Which reading is the infallible Word of God — "whom ye" Cambridge KJV or, "whom he" Oxford KJV in Jeremiah 34:16?

Which reading is the infallible Word of God — "sin" Cambridge KJV or "sins" Oxford KJV in 2 Chronicles 33:19?

And how do you know?

[Paladin54]

The infallability of the Bible is not in question with these two persons. If there is a typing error, it can still be the word of God. For example, one of the first re-printings of the KJV had Exodus 20:14 wrong, and said "Thou shalt commit adultery". This was quickly caught and it was corrected. Everybody quicklyu saw this mere printing error. Everybody knew better, and that is why the message was not changed:EVERYBODY knew that the Bible really says" Thou shalt not commit adultery".

HOWEVER, when you change something like Acts 8:9 "bewitxched the people" and make it "astonished the people", you change the meaning of the verse. Here, the meaning, or in some cases with the NKJV Christian doctrine or the Deity of Christ, that corrupts the word, making it no longer the infallable Word of God.

To answer your questions specifically, both word in each example. In Jeremiah 34;16, the context lets you know that the King of Judah, Zedekiah, had made a covenant with the people of Judah. This covenant said that the people would release their man and maidservants, or slaves, contrary to the covenant God had made witht the Israelites in Exodus. Suddenly, the people recalled their bondservants and made them work again.

So, the King told the people to release the bondservants, meaning that he released the bondservants with the authority of his royalty. "whom he released"

The people released the bondservants with the authority as their masters. "whom ye released"

Both parties, King Zedekiah and the Israelites released their bondservants.

"Ye" (the Israelites) and "he" (the King Zedekiah) both released the bondservants.


In 2 Chronicles 33:19, "sin" and "sins" mean the same thing. It doesn't matter which word is there, BOTH CAMBRIDGE AND OXFORD EDITIONS SAY THE SAME THING!

Originally Posted by againstheresies

Who publishes the infallible Word of God today? Oxford or Cambridge?

Which reading is the infallible Word of God — "whom ye" Cambridge KJV or, "whom he" Oxford KJV in Jeremiah 34:16?

Which reading is the infallible Word of God — "sin" Cambridge KJV or "sins" Oxford KJV in 2 Chronicles 33:19?

And how do you know?

"Whom ye" the Cambridge is. The infallible OT in hebrew (masoretic) supports "Whom ye". The original 1611 has "Whom ye". Scrivener gives the pedigree of "whom he" if you're interested.

Now. What's the real reason you ask?