Bible Versions Questions and discussion about the Bible version issue.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 11-30-2008, 01:17 AM
stephanos's Avatar
stephanos stephanos is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Wenatchee WA
Posts: 885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianT View Post
Brandplucked, I'm sorry but it still feels like you are evading the heart of my question, and still not being clear. Let me be blunt and direct: Do you, or do you not, believe that there was a single "hold in your hand" complete inerrant perfect Bible in the year 1600 A.D.? Yes or no?
I wish I knew why you making this point will prove anything. Paul said that there would be something perfect to come, and that those things which were done 'in part' would be done away with.

Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. (1 Corinthians 13:8-10 KJV)
(notice how he speaks of prophesy, tongues, and knowledge which are all the early 'partial' forms of God's Word.)

So is it so hard to believe that eventually that which is perfect has truly come? We believe it is the King James Holy Bible. We believe God wants us to know His Word, and that He is not slack in providing it.

Peace and Love,
Stephen
The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software
  #22  
Old 11-30-2008, 01:55 AM
bibleprotector's Avatar
bibleprotector bibleprotector is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 587
Default

Quote:
Do you, or do you not, believe that there was a single "hold in your hand" complete inerrant perfect Bible in the year 1600 A.D.? Yes or no?
That's like saying "Do you believe there was a Christian in 1600 B.C.? Yes or no.
  #23  
Old 11-30-2008, 06:40 AM
Maverick
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephanos View Post
Paul said that there would be something perfect to come, and that
So,clarify something for me.......
Are you suggesting that what Paul penned was not perfect at the time,and that God waited until a bunch of Anglican/Catholic clerics to "get it right"?!
  #24  
Old 11-30-2008, 07:48 AM
Gord's Avatar
Gord Gord is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Burlington, Ontario
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephanos View Post
But when that which is perfect is come, (1 Corinthians 13:8-10 KJV)[/B]

Peace and Love,
Stephen
That quote by Paul is referring to our Lord Jesus Christ only. Not the KJV. Yes God wants us to know His Word, and that He is not slack in providing it. But that is not what Paul is saying and or referring to.
  #25  
Old 11-30-2008, 08:47 AM
Will Kinney's Avatar
Will Kinney Will Kinney is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Colorado, a beautiful state with four distinct seasons; sometimes in the same day!
Posts: 252
Default God's perfect Book - the King James Bible

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianT View Post
Brandplucked, I'm sorry but it still feels like you are evading the heart of my question, and still not being clear. Let me be blunt and direct: Do you, or do you not, believe that there was a single "hold in your hand" complete inerrant perfect Bible in the year 1600 A.D.? Yes or no?

Hi Brian. To the best of my understanding at this time I would have to say there there was not a perfect, ENTIRE Bible as we know it today which contained both the New and Old Testaments. It seems that God preserved His perfect words in the majority of the Hebrew texts for the Old Testament, and the New Testament may well have been found among a majority of the Waldensian believers around the time of the Reformation. Can I prove this to your satisfaction? No, not at all. The Waldensians were true believers whom the Catholic church persecuted for hundreds of years and burned their Bible manuscripts. This is history.

Satan is always trying to discredit "The Bible, the words of God, Scripture" or however you wish to name it. Textual corruptions creep in and God begins a process of purification. This is what I believe He did in the English language until we finally get the finished product in the King James Bible. This is right before the world wide missionary movement began. God is in control of history.

There is absolutely no need nor promise from God that every nation or every individual would have a perfect, inerrant and complete Bible in their language. For centuries there was only one nation that had the ongoing (it was not at all complete) revelation of the true words of God, and even then there were no printing presses and I seriously doubt most individuals even had a copy for themselves, but God says: "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not done so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD." Psalm 147:19-20

It was not until the 16th to 17th century that the church in the main finally settled on the 66 book Canon. It was only after the King James Bible came out and was well established among English speaking people that the church began to make their formal declarations concerning the inerrancy of Scripture. I and many other Christians believe that we do have a single Book that contains all of God's perfect and inerrant words. It is called the King James Bible.

It seems that your view is that God's true words are STILL scattered "out there somewhere" among the remaining thousands of variant readings in obscure languages that the vast majority of people cannot read, and not one of you can know for sure which ones are right and which are not. You end up being Bible Agnostics, and every individual becomes his own little authority as to what God may or may not have said, and each one differs from everybody else.

Belief in the inerrancy of Scripture is at an all time low and professing Christians read and believe their "bibles" less and less every day.

God Himself said He would send a famine of hearing His words and that there would be a falling away from the faith in the end times. I believe this is happening now. If we see any truth at all and believe His words and His Book, it is all by the grace of God. Not because we are any better, smarter or holier than anyone else.

I sincerely hope that God will give you the faith to believe His Book.

Will Kinney
  #26  
Old 11-30-2008, 08:59 AM
BrianT
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Stephanos,

Quote:
I wish I knew why you making this point will prove anything.
Primarily it simply clarifies a basis for discussion. It is very hard to have a discussion with someone who sometimes argues for one thing, and at other times argues for the opposite. Kinney is arguing that certain scriptures mean the preservation of a "book" is promised, while at other times arguing that no "book" existed until 1611. He is arguing that God's word has always been pure and preserved and did not pass away, while at other times arguing that it wasn't pure and preserved but passed away and had to be purified / resurrected.

Quote:
Paul said that there would be something perfect to come, and that those things which were done 'in part' would be done away with.
So your answer to my question is "no"? That there wasn't a pure, perfect word of God before 1611 A.D.? That the verses KJV-only supporters use to "prove" the necessity of a pure, perfect, preserved word of God were not true until the 1 Cor 3:8-10 was fulfilled in 1611?

Quote:
We believe God wants us to know His Word, and that He is not slack in providing it.
Was God slack in providing it for the first 80% of church history?

Hi Bibleprotector,

Quote:
That's like saying "Do you believe there was a Christian in 1600 B.C.? Yes or no.
No, that's not like that at all. Your question spans the coming of Christ. My question does not span the finalization of scripture. I am not asking if one could be "KJV-only" in 1600 A.D., I am asking if there was a single "hold in your hand" complete inerrant perfect Bible in 1600 A.D.
  #27  
Old 11-30-2008, 06:12 PM
bibleprotector's Avatar
bibleprotector bibleprotector is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 587
Default

Quote:
It seems that your view is that God's true words are STILL scattered "out there somewhere" among the remaining thousands of variant readings in obscure languages that the vast majority of people cannot read, and not one of you can know for sure which ones are right and which are not.
Just as Moses could be "Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt" (Heb. 11:26) when Christ had not yet come. But one day Christ came. Likewise we have now a manifest perfect single Bible version.
  #28  
Old 11-30-2008, 06:58 PM
Vendetta Ride
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianT
Feel free to jump in, Vendetta Ride. I apologize if my posts sound like sniping. I have been trying to get Brandplucked to answer these questions for quite some time now, and that combined with what I felt was an annoying game (abandoning our original discussion, posting his response to me here, and not telling me about it) aggravated me a little and I let it show through in my comments. That's not an excuse, just an explanation. I will endeavor to keep 2 Timothy 2:24-25 and Galatians 5:22-23 in mind in future replies.
I did not intend my remarks to sound like a rebuke to either of you; I was simply taught that it was impolite to inject myself into the squabbles of others!

Quote:
If you want any background info on me or links to my websites, just ask.
Thank you: I will do that, at a later time. I prefer, when encountering someone in a forum for the first time, to regard them as tabula rasa, and let their words speak for themselves. I could not do that with Bro. Kinney (whose name I misspelled in my previous post).

I am still attempting to figure out exactly what your position is. You seem dubious as to the uniquely preserved status of the Authorized Version; I'm trying to understand why. Frankly, the notion that all of the modern versions could be equally reliable, or equally "preserved," does not seem to be the sort of thing that would commend itself to a rational mind.

As for that hoary old chestnut about "where was the Bible before 1611," I'm sure that it will be explained to your satisfaction shortly, by someone who really understands the issues. If not, I'll do it.

In the meantime, I'll just sit over here in the corner and observe.

Last edited by Vendetta Ride; 11-30-2008 at 07:13 PM.
  #29  
Old 11-30-2008, 07:28 PM
Will Kinney's Avatar
Will Kinney Will Kinney is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Colorado, a beautiful state with four distinct seasons; sometimes in the same day!
Posts: 252
Default before 1611?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride View Post
As for that hoary old chestnut about "where was the Bible before 1611," I'm sure that it will be explained to your satisfaction shortly, by someone who really understands the issues. If not, I'll do it.

In the meantime, I'll just sit over here in the corner and observe.
Hi VR, I am quite sure that many others here as well as myself would love to hear what thoughts you have on the issue of Where was the Bible before 1611?

Like I said, I think I have a pretty good general idea but would appreciate more insight into this area. The issue doesn't trouble me much since I do not understand all the ways of God nor do I expect to grasp a whole lot more until I get to glory. God has shown me enough truth about the King James Bible that I know if it is not the pure words of God in book form, then no such thing exists. And since I do believe what God says about Himself and His words, then I am quite content to rest in His promises as found in the greatest Book ever printed - the King James Bible.

Please share your thoughts on this issue. Perhaps you can make us aware of some things we have not yet considered.

Thanks,

Will K
  #30  
Old 11-30-2008, 08:41 PM
Vendetta Ride
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Will Kinney View Post
Hi VR, I am quite sure that many others here as well as myself would love to hear what thoughts you have on the issue of Where was the Bible before 1611? .... Please share your thoughts on this issue. Perhaps you can make us aware of some things we have not yet considered.
You are very gracious, but I have no great contributions to make. However, God has been very generous in giving me teachers and mentors who understood such things.

It is a sheer canard to imply that there was no written word of God prior to 1611 - - - in fact, it's worse than a canard; it's an insult to the memory of some of God's most faithful saints. William Tyndale was not burned at the stake in 1536 for the sake of an "inadequate translation;" his version, at that point in time, was the word of God, just as the AV is in our own time. And there were others: because, as has been mentioned once or twice in this thread, God's word was purified over a period of time.

We talk about Ps. 12:6, 7, and we speculate as to the nature of the seven purifications; but we don't always realize that, apart from the Old Latin and the Koine Greek and all that stuff, there have also been seven purifications in English - - - and only seven. The AV was the last.

The first step was the Gothic Bible, which we associate with Ulfilas (310-383). The Goths may have received the New Testament first-hand: many of them served in the Roman army in Thessalonica and Cappadocia. Ulfilas' Gothic Bible, according to liberal and conservative scholars alike, contained no contamination (or influence, if you prefer) from Jerome's wretched Vulgate. The Cambridge History of the Bible says that Ulfilas' Byzantine text "differs very little from the fully developed Textus Receptus of the later period." So, the Goths had a Bible, long before 1611.

Next came the Anglo-Saxon Bible(s), which started cropping up around 450 AD. The "father of English history," the Venerable Bede, bears witness to these vernacular Bibles, which were of the Byzantine text type. There was not a single edition of the Bible in these days before the printing press, but the Anglo-Saxon Bibles were faithful to the Receptus and to one another. So the ancient Britons had God's word, too.

Then, like dawn breaking after a stormy night, came John Wycliffe's Bible in 1389.

Then Tyndale's printed edition.

Then the Geneva Bible in 1560.

Then the Bishops' Bible, in 1568 (although the Geneva was still in use until around 1599).

And, of course, the seventh and final purification came in 1611, although subsequent editions (not revisions) made orthographical changes, in keeping with typesetting practices.

As the English language itself developed from its Gothic roots, the Bible developed, under God's guidance, right along with it. And now we have the King James Bible: which, contrary to popular misconception, is written in Modern English, not Old English or Middle English.

Please understand: I'm not limiting Ps. 12:6, 7 to the development of the English language! I think the verses go much deeper than that, and refer to much more. But isn't it interesting that the development of the English Bible came in seven stages?

Which is nothing that hasn't already been said in another thread, but you asked! You rascal!

 

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 03:18 AM.

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