King James Only

[Ezra]

That's the language Jesus ,Peter & Paul spoke

im not convinced that is exactly how the spole . i use kjv i cut my teeth on it . i use other versions not a big fan of niv . in some places it is more straight forward than k.j .v

 

[Taken]

i have some programs but have no idea how to use them

I am a novice but perhaps there are online tutorials, maybe on YouTube ?

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Helen]

I tried to follow the "why" of this post. Are we discussing a book or an anointed book that will take us to The Word and thereby we will hear him who was The word and the word was God. With that light shining on the page all things are possible.

 

[Helen]

Hey, don't knock those "Thee's" and "Thou's." That's the language Jesus, Peter & Paul spoke...… and if the King James Bible was good enough for them to preach from, it is good enough for me.

Clever one @Willie T

Thanks for the chuckle.

 

[Copperhead]

just out of curiosity have you read the original in which it is written ? i have serious doubts you have you know greek hebrew latin %100? or do you just have a phd pilled high deep degree do you have the original writings? if not speculation is what your using who is these many scholars do they have the original ? a simple yes or no is suffice

Not really a point worth considering. It only leads to obfuscation of the issue. The point has been made that there are many very good translations, but they all have errors in one way or another. There is really no way to convey the entire meaning of a passage from the source language to another language in every instance.

One doesn't need to know the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. There are myriads of online sources, programs, books, resources, etc that go into significant detail of the words of those languages so that, given the accessibly we have today, there is no excuse for anyone to not be able to ascertain the true meaning of any given word and passage. And many of those resources are free to anyone.

One doesn't need to learn the original languages, though that is an admirable goal. But one should compare translations to see where they agree and where they diverge. The includes even how things were translated in different time eras. In questionable areas, dig even deeper than the translations themselves.

The one thing we can be certain is that the major translations all convey the basic core principles of the Chrisian faith. Only the abhorrent translations like the JW Watchtower "New World Translation" and other similar works are not worthy of consideration. And I have problems with such "translations" as the Living Bible style of translations where they can paraphrase to an extreme and it end up being more of an interpretation than a translation. But I would not throw out that style of Bible. I just wouldn't rely on them for serious study and for establishing doctrinal positions.

 

[Helen]

Not really a point worth considering. It only leads to obfuscation of the issue. The point has been made that there are many very good translations, but they all have errors in one way or another. There is really no way to convey the entire meaning of a passage from the source language to another language in every instance.

One doesn't need to know the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. There are myriads of online sources, programs, books, resources, etc that go into significant detail of the words of those languages so that, given the accessibly we have today, there is no excuse for anyone to not be able to ascertain the true meaning of any given word and passage. And many of those resources are free to anyone.

One doesn't need to learn the original languages, though that is an admirable goal. But one should compare translations to see where they agree and where they diverge. The includes even how things were translated in different time eras. In questionable areas, dig even deeper than the translations themselves.

The one thing we can be certain is that the major translations all convey the basic core principles of the Chrisian faith. Only the abhorrent translations like the JW Watchtower "New World Translation" and other similar works are not worthy of consideration. And I have problems with such "translations" as the Living Bible style of translations where they can paraphrase to an extreme and it end up being more of an interpretation than a translation. But I would not throw out that style of Bible. I just wouldn't rely on them for serious study and for establishing doctrinal positions.

Agree!!

Amen, wise and clear post.

It cheered my heart because it seemed there as if this thread had degenerated into the usual continued arguments ...to see who can post last and shout their belief loudest.

Thanks for a wise and good post.

 

[Berserk]

A good rule of thumb in deciding which modern books on Christian spirituality to read is this: generally ignore books whose quotations are all in the KJV. Why? Because it demonstrates that they have not formed their perspectives in dialogue with modern academic book commentaries on the Bible and therefore lack an adequate background in the linguistic and cultural/ historical background of the text, a background essential for a full grasp of biblical teaching.

 

[Ezra]

Not really a point worth considering. It only leads to obfuscation of the issue. The point has been made that there are many very good translations, but they all have errors in one way or another. There is really no way to convey the entire meaning of a passage from the source language to another language in every instance.

One doesn't need to know the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. There are myriads of online sources, programs, books, resources, etc that go into significant detail of the words of those languages so that, given the accessibly we have today, there is no excuse for anyone to not be able to ascertain the true meaning of any given word and passage. And many of those resources are free to anyone.

to be able to say it is not accurate you would have to have the original script . see when it comes to counterfeit money .the secret service studies out the real thing. so they can discover the fake

 

[reformed1689]

Did you know that the oldest manuscripts are the MOST CORRUPT? Therefore a hoax was perpetrated to claim that they are *the best*. So if you want the truth you will need to study the matter in depth, and access the writings of Burgon, Scrivener, Hills, etc. to understand what really happened.

I actually have studied the matter in depth. But if you want to say that a translation that believes there are unicorns is the best, so be it.

 

[Willie T]

I have little concern about any possible mistakes, or what diminutive and obscure terms may or may not have been included, or might have been left out, of a particular version. I just want a true and as honestly accurate a DYNAMIC translation (in understandable modern jargon) as I can locate.

I can fully understand that all of those older parts of the Bible were never dictated by God. They were simply ancient "campfire" stories that had been told and retold hundreds of times by countless generations of long-dead storytellers before anyone ever wrote down the particular version that finally made its way down from their great, great, great grandfathers, to their ears.

To argue over some of the minute details as we do, is utter foolishness.

 

[Ezra]

To argue over some of the minute details as we do, is utter foolishness.

your so right i could care less what version any uses except for the nwt j.w bible and mormons .i use kj i have couple other versions that was give to me. i even have a nkjv... as long as it does not water down the Virgin birth the doctrine of justification the cross the resurrection. i have seen arguments over being Born again . if some one wants to buy me a different version thompson chain .i will take it.but to sit here and read that thus and thus version is corrupt. just to be blunt makes me sick .if that is all adults have to argue over. i have no need

 

[Willie T]

Yes, I don't understand all those arguments. My only objection to the KJV is that it is extremely difficult for the younger generations to understand. Literacy in this country has taken a nose-dive in the last thirty years. (You can see it right here all over this forum) And to expect people who can't even master the modern language they live with every day, to figure out the contorted jargon used in the KJV is kind of cruel.... IMHO.

 

[Copperhead]

Did you know that the oldest manuscripts are the MOST CORRUPT?

Hmmm. The oldest manuscript of the Book of Isaiah is from the Dead Sea Scroll collection and it seems pretty incorrupt to those who have looked at it. You can see it in its entirety on display in Jerusalem.

 

[Copperhead]

I can fully understand that all of those older parts of the Bible were never dictated by God. They were simply ancient "campfire" stories that had been told and retold hundreds of times by countless generations of long-dead storytellers before anyone ever wrote down the particular version that finally made its way down from their great, great, great grandfathers, to their ears.

So then, by your implication the oldest books of the Bible are not reliable? Just trying to see where you are going with that comment.

Yeshua (Jesus) seemed to hold those older books as being trustworthy and reliable. And attributed their authorship to the what has been traditionally assumed. Especially so Moshe, Daniel, and Isaiah. Modern textual criticism has its place, but the one thing many of those who rely on it fail to see is that the one who gave the scripture takes the position that what we have is accurate. And Yeshua along with the Apostles seemed to refer to the Septuagint version which was done prior to Yeshua's first coming, so they felt that the Septuagint was a very reliable translation.

 

[Taken]

Yes, I don't understand all those arguments. My only objection to the KJV is that it is extremely difficult for the younger generations to understand.

Agree, younger generations have more difficulty with historical generations Jargon.

Literacy in this country has taken a nose-dive in the last thirty years. (You can see it right here all over this forum) And to expect people who can't even master the modern language they live with every day, to figure out the contorted jargon used in the KJV is kind of cruel.... IMHO.

I do not particularly find it cruel to explain historical jargon to younger generations...such as what an Ice box is and why it was called that....or a Dialing of a phone and why it was called that.
Gods Word does not change, regardless of how we express His Word...unless we use words, that expand His meaning, and thus, do not express His Word

For Example.
Scripture simply called Jesus a man in the Likeness as a Human man.
Men call Jesus a Human, which is expressly a terrestrial man out of the Earth, which expands the Scriptural Truth of Gods Word.

Another funny "modern intent of man"...
Daylight "savings" time. AS IF, men could "save" Light. When in fact it is the Light that "saves" men.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Willie T]

So then, by your implication the oldest books of the Bible are not reliable? Just trying to see where you are going with that comment.

Yeshua (Jesus) seemed to hold those older books as being trustworthy and reliable. And attributed their authorship to the what has been traditionally assumed. Especially so Moshe, Daniel, and Isaiah. Modern textual criticism has its place, but the one thing many of those who rely on it fail to see is that the one who gave the scripture takes the position that what we have is accurate. And Yeshua along with the Apostles seemed to refer to the Septuagint version which was done prior to Yeshua's first coming, so they felt that the Septuagint was a very reliable translation.

Do you honestly believe not one single word of all those hundreds and hundreds (more like, thousands) of tellings and retellings, and repeating, and retelling, etc. in the multiple centuries before any written languages existed at all, changed a bit? Really? We even see differences in the relating of the same incidents in just the Gospels.

Certainly, God made sure the message he intended to convey got written down. But our senseless arguing over tiny details that vary from passage to passage is plain vanity of wanting to claim WE have the true story.

 

[Willie T]

Agree, younger generations have more difficulty with historical generations Jargon.



I do not particularly find it cruel to explain historical jargon to younger generations...such as what an Ice box is and why it was called that....or a Dialing of a phone and why it was called that.
Gods Word does not change, regardless of how we express His Word...unless we use words, that expand His meaning, and thus, do not express His Word

For Example.
Scripture simply called Jesus a man in the Likeness as a Human man.
Men call Jesus a Human, which is expressly a terrestrial man out of the Earth, which expands the Scriptural Truth of Gods Word.

Another funny "modern intent of man"...
Daylight "savings" time. AS IF, men could "save" Light. When in fact it is the Light that "saves" men.

Glory to God,
Taken

But, why should a person of any age or level of competency in their language not be able to read a book and know what it says without having to trust in another man's opinion to tell them what they just read? And for that to happen, requires that translations evolve as the languages they are read in also evolve.

 

[Ezra]

My only objection to the KJV is that it is extremely difficult for the younger

ot can be if they want it to be hard.. i was like 32 or 33 when i got saved and started reading. but yes i do use other translations .i like the christian standard Bible . the english translation is good.. i use dictionaries and commentaries .sometimes i just do a google search .example i might use the phrase a living sacrifice . it helps m get a better understanding. the church we attend is about a 50/50 mix some use NIV other k.j . the association that i was ordained in use k j v only .
what gets me in all the arguments men like tyndale was burnt at the stake for printing the bible . in america the Christian Church has forgot its roots . we are becoming a religious organization full of pomp and circumstances. all this arguing of the correct version gets old.. if we lived in china we wouldn't have this.... .this is going the 3rd week around 1 a.m our son had come in i got up .he said his buddies sent him a text structure fire at the church we attend .
we arrive to find flames coming out of the roof a total burn out.. that weekend i was asked to come to ARK. preach pilgrims rest had no services that sunday. the next sunday we shared a building with a missionary bapt church. were non denom. that was one of the better services we have had in years .people was happy to be there we had church. it reminds me of every branch that does not bear fruit is taken off. we lost our building but this could be the spark that ignites revival . we miss the point arguing over the correct Bible. when its GOD word that cuts /the two wedged sword .. pardon my writing skills.. but if SOME WILL READ THIS they may get the point

 

[Ezra]

Agree, younger generations have more difficulty with historical generations Jargon.



I do not particularly find it cruel to explain historical jargon to younger generations...such as what an Ice box is and why it was called that....or a Dialing of a phone and why it was called that.
Gods Word does not change, regardless of how we express His Word...unless we use words, that expand His meaning, and thus, do not express His Word

For Example.
Scripture simply called Jesus a man in the Likeness as a Human man.
Men call Jesus a Human, which is expressly a terrestrial man out of the Earth, which expands the Scriptural Truth of Gods Word.

Another funny "modern intent of man"...
Daylight "savings" time. AS IF, men could "save" Light. When in fact it is the Light that "saves" men.

Glory to God,
Taken

amen qnat straining

 

[Taken]

But, why should a person of any age or level of competency in their language not be able to read a book and know what it says without having to trust in another man's opinion to tell them what they just read? And for that to happen, requires that translations evolve as the languages they are read in also evolve.

When a child Learns, "they" begin learning by what the "SEE" and "HEAR". The fact is a child will "Learn" by what words they Hear. Call a skin jelly a skin lubricant and and apply it to their skin, they will learn what it is called and what it is for. As they mature you can futher expand their knowledge, that the skin jelly comes from a petroleum, and teach what that means.

And the fact is; Children "should" be learning from they who can be "trusted" to teach them the Truth.

How does a child "decide" whom to "trust"?
It "used" to be the Parent, that was instinctively trusted...Trusted the mommy and daddy, would feed them, cuddle them if they were scared, sooth them if they were hurt, teach them of things that would hurt them, teach them how to play games, sing songs, encourage them, praise them, punish them, Never Abandon them and Never Lie to them.

I would guess, the majority of children believe, skin lubricant IS "A" Vaseline.
It isn't. Vaseline is a NAME BRAND.
The same for a tissue designed to wipe a runny nose and then discard. It replaced what was called a "handkerchief or hankie". That had to be washed and then reused.
KLEENEX is a NAME BRAND.

And I would presume, MANY children DO NOT Trust their parents, Because, they have Lied to them, appointed and allow others to feed them, clothe them, care for them, and Because so many parents Have Abandoned their children.

If THAT ^ is ALL they know...THEN at what point do they FIND the ANSWER, There "used to be Another Way" and that "other Way" is still possible for their own children and themselves "as" a potiental husband and father" ?

LOOK at the majority of the modern youth...
They are "conditioned" to receive everything they "want", merely because "they Want" it.

And conditioned, to complain and Say they are "depressed", because they May not get what "they" want.

And conditioned, to take "a pill", because it will "fix" their "supposed Depression".

It's CRAZY!
And while my example may be trivial...it leads to the Bigger Picture, and We are witnesses to the Bigger Picture of a nation of youths who are defiant, do not trust their parents, their teachers, their elders, or Know the power of Trust in the Lord.

Half of Americans ARE addicted to drugs.
Half of the Prison prisoners ARE drug addicts.
Half of the Jail prisoners ARE drug addicts.
Schools, work places, have the same percentages.

And a great number of the "drug" descriptions are "mind altering" drugs.

I read where the Jews, LOST their way, and began following Gentile ways.

I think a bulk of Americans have LOST their minds to think rationally, and have been conditioned to think they are deserving based on their flippant wants.

In either case, it is the Truth, that sets a person on a course of what is Acceptable to God.

I am not knocking modern inventions...myself quite pleased, from leaves, corn cobs, catalogue pages, to therapeutic papers, to toilet paper....has been made easily available in my generation! Lol

Glory to God,
Taken