Bible Versions Questions and discussion about the Bible version issue.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 02-27-2008, 11:01 AM
jerry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Isaiah 28 was directly referring to their captivities - which would make those languages Assyrian and Babylonian. Then Paul makes an application in the NT to the gift of tongues.
The King James Bible Page SwordSearcher Bible Software
  #12  
Old 02-27-2008, 03:25 PM
fundy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My Cambridge Bible is without the question mark, an old Collins KJV that I have has the question mark. None of the examples shown below have the question mark.

I dont see Gods pure word being altered by the use or not of the question mark. The word "wherefore" still indicates a question and the sense of the passage is not altered either way, in my opinion.

This is not at all like the issue of the placement of the comma in Luk 23:43.

I wouldnt know Hebrew from Zwahili, so can anyone tell me how the passage was structured in that language? Was there a form of punctuation or was the question made obvious in another way?

(Bishops) And Zedekias shalbe caryed vnto Babylon, and there shall he be vntyll the tyme that I visite hym saith the Lorde: but if thou takest in hande to fight against the Chaldees, thou shalt not prosper.

(Geneva) And he shal lead Zedekiah to Babel, & there shall he be, vntil I visit him, saith ye Lord: though ye fight with the Caldeans, ye shall not prosper.


(KJV-1611) And he shall lead Zedekiah to Babylon, and there shall he be vntill I visit him, saith the Lord: though ye fight with the Caldeans, yee shall not prosper.

(KJVR) And he shall lead Zedekiah to Babylon, and there shall he be until I visit him, saith the LORD: though ye fight with the Chaldeans, ye shall not prosper.

fundy
  #13  
Old 02-27-2008, 04:52 PM
lei-kjvonly
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I agree with you fundy that in this passage does it really matter about the question mark. I don't think it's going to make much of a difference either way. I understand the principle of changing punctuation should not be made a habit but what is the big deal in this case? I believe God had a hand in the insertions of punctuation but I don't believe He inspired it. Because again punctuation will change as you make one translation into a different language such as translating the English into French or into Spanish and I think God was aware of that. I believe God only inspired the writing of the originals. I believe that the KJV is perfect because a preservation of a perfect book is perfect.
  #14  
Old 02-27-2008, 08:44 PM
bibleprotector's Avatar
bibleprotector bibleprotector is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 587
Default

Present Cambridge printings of the KJB are without the question mark, but the older ones have it.

While the punctuation issue at one place seems like a small issue, it is much larger, because there are multiple differences of words between KJB editions as well.

Surely there should be one right way of punctuating the KJB, just as there would be one right edition. If not, then there is no standard by which we may resist all the new changes that the KJB printers are silently and not so silently introducing.
  #15  
Old 02-28-2008, 10:54 AM
lei-kjvonly
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I personally have not studied out the differences between the Cambridge and the Oxford, but if they are just spelling changes then I would not say that someone who does not have a Cambridge has a impure or corrupt text. Yes punctuation is important, but I'm just not 100% sure that God inspired it.

I look at inspiration as this - A man can sit at a table with a blank sheet of paper and a pen and God literally works through that man to write what He wants. I know that the word inspiration means "God breathed."

All I'm saying is I believe God had a hand in the translation of the King James Bible, but I do not believe He worked through the men as He did in the originals. Could He? Yes He could if He wanted too. But I think if the KJV was INSPIRED by God (according to my defintion of inspiration) then the translators would not have needed to have the other translations there in the room with them, because God would have given it to them anyway.


Whether God INSPIRED it or not, we both have the same outcome - The KJV is perfect.
  #16  
Old 02-28-2008, 11:47 AM
jerry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Look at the cover page of your KJV - it says "translated out of the original tongues with previous translations diligently compared and revised." The KJV is inspired by God because it is Scripture - though it was not reinspired. God inspired the words, not the writers or the translators.
  #17  
Old 02-28-2008, 01:01 PM
Pastor Mikie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.


Amen Jerry. I never noticed that before. The words are inspired and the people who wrote them down were moved by the Holy Ghost. So, the said could be said about translations. That is why I contend there are translations being made "by the will of man" and that is why they are in error.
  #18  
Old 02-28-2008, 01:21 PM
Jot&Tittle
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hey Jerry,

I must disagree. Sometimes when you say things out loud it just doesn't make sense.

"The KJV is inspired by God because it is Scripture - though it was not reinspired. God inspired the words, not the writers or the translators."

I'll attempt to get out of the way and let God speak.

Jeremiah 36:4 Then Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah: and Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the LORD, which he had spoken unto him, upon a roll of a book.
Jeremiah 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.
Jeremiah 36:27-29 Then the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying, 28 Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned. 29 And thou shalt say to Jehoiakim king of Judah, Thus saith the LORD; Thou hast burned this roll, saying, Why hast thou written therein, saying, The king of Babylon shall certainly come and destroy this land, and shall cause to cease from thence man and beast?

That is reinspiration! Webster's 1828 (Reinspire, v.t. [re and inspire.] To inspire anew.)

Was your Bible written by "the will of man" or by "holy men of God"?

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

I don't mean to come off too strong. I believe God is in the whole process of preserving his words, if he is not...well, that doesn't leave us in a very good position!

In Christ,

Jot&Tittle
  #19  
Old 02-28-2008, 01:47 PM
Pastor Mikie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Just to clear up any misunderstandings (noting that I could have not been clear in my communications), I wish to state that the Words of the Bible are inspired by God and the writers (whether originally or a translation) were moved by the Holy Ghost to write them down. Since 2 Timothy 3:16 says “all scripture IS…”, that is present tense. So, the Scriptures are always inspired, but not everyone who writes them down (as in translating) is inspired to do so unless moved by the Holy Ghost. I don’t see any proof that new-version translators were moved by the Holy Ghost.

By that reckoning, there are translations of the Scriptures that were done by “the will of man” and are therefore full of errors. God doesn’t contradict Himself.

I’ve been questioned many times as to why I believe the KJB is God’s inspired Word. Simple. Faith, longevity and fruit. Name another English Bible that comes close to the KJB in longevity and fruit. And to reiterate, they can’t all be correct. And, God isn’t dead, broke or out of Gas. He’s able to preserve them, since He gave them in the first place.

Job 32:8 But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness…

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

This is how I understood Jerry's statement.
  #20  
Old 02-28-2008, 01:53 PM
jerry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jot&Tittle View Post
That is reinspiration! Webster's 1828 (Reinspire, v.t. [re and inspire.] To inspire anew.)
Re-inspiration is inspiring something again. Those manuscripts were destroyed, not un-inspired. God did not RE-inspire the words, He gave them again. If the manuscripts were not destroyed, the words on them would be just as inspired as they were originally.
 

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 05:57 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