Now, can you admit the fact that most manuscripts do not have this verse? That the NASB places it in brackets and footnotes it to be honest about the passage being missing?
There is no "conspiracy" here.
King James Version Only...?
- Thread starter LC627
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
There is no "conspiracy" here.
YeshuaFan1
Active Member
101G
Well-Known Member
First thanks for the reply, but consider this. if men would leave out their two cent worth, the understanding of the scriptures are revealed clearly. the word of God is never going to change, but men who rewrite scriptures do, be it with pen and paper or electronically.
example, in Genesis 3:20 "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living." here this verse clearly tells us that Adam and Eve had children before the Fall, and before they was expelled out of the Garden.
now the NIV, "Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living".
STOP right here for a second. that verse in the NIV just lied, by changing the word "WAS" to "WOULD" BE, making Adam and Eve having Children after the Fall and after the expelling from the Garden. this kind of deception puts one on the couese of destruction. because now someone reading this have the mindset that they only had children after the fall which is a LIE. for Genesis 3:16 clearly states that they had Children in the Garden before the Fall, listen, "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."
here SORROW is Labor Pains, it's the Hebrew word,
H6093 עִצָּבוֹן `itstsabown (its-tsaw-ɓone') n-m.
worrisomeness, i.e. labor or pain.
[from H6087]
KJV: sorrow, toil.
Root(s): H6087
and CONCEPTION is pregnancy, it's the Hebrew word,
H2032 הֵרוֹן herown (hay-rone') n-m.
הֵרָיוֹן herayown (hay-raw-yone')
pregnancy.
[from H2029]
KJV: conception.
Root(s): H2029
God said that he was going to, "multiply" here Labor pain in pregnancy. well one cannot multiply, or INCREASE something unless it has already happen. that's a scientific fact. for example, if I was sitting in a car, no movement, I cannot INCREASE, or MULTIPLY my speed untill I'm in Motion first. so Eve was already experiencing Labor pains, in her pregnancy, but not greatly.
see by knowing this, one can understand where Cain got his wife from, and one knowing that Adam and Eve had children before sinning, can now know and understand who the sons of God are in Genesis chapter 6. and also one can know now who was the other people who was there with Cain and Able. scripture, Genesis 4:14 "Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me." Hold it, who is these "EVERYONE" else who might find him to slay Cain? see, by knowing that Adam & Eve had Children before the Fall one can KNOW the TRUTH.
by the change of ONE word in the scripture in Genesis 3:20 "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living."
TO, "Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living". that one word change started a whole bunch of false doctrine that angels are the sons of God. or the sons of God was from seth. see what a new translation would do? by changing one word here pop up false doctrine after another.
and it's NOT JUST the niv, listen to the Berean Study Bible, "And Adam named his wife Eve, because she would be the mother of all the living".
or the Contemporary English Version, or the International Standard Version, or the GOD'S WORD Translation just to name a few.
this kind of translation is what I'm talking about, they just ignored what was said in verse 16 before.
if people would Just read with the Holy Spirit, then they would know that there was two lines of descendants from Adam. children that was in the Garden born before Adam and Eve sinned, and those who was Born outside the Garden in sin.
this is just one example, but there are many more.
PICJAG.
YeshuaFan1
Active Member
They should be based off Hebrew and Greek texts!
I would bet that you do not read the 1611 King James, but the 1769 Cambridge edition, or 1769 Oxford edition of the King James. There are at least 10 different versions of the King James, and they are all different.1611, 1612, 1613,1616,1629,1638, and two different ones in 1769. Which one is the right one?
Personally I want my translation to show me as closely as possible the words used in the manuscript. I think that if we start trying to "clean up" the text to fit our ideas propriety that we can miss nuances and connects the text is making.
"Holy Spirit" is a neuter noun the way it's written in the Greek.
Much love!
YeshuaFan1
Active Member
Why is that though, as a translation into different language then English will not read same as the Kjv!
Ok...but there's a problem with translating tenses from Hebrew or Greek into English...
They don't fit whatsoever.
Past and present but not future doesn't have a tense in English...past, present and future also doesn't have a tense...
Present and future doesn't have a tense either....
And in order for a sentence to show plural tenses at a time they have to really reconstruct what was said.
And I firmly believe that we shouldn't add to or take away from God's Word either...
What the translators are trying to do is stay true to a tradition set by Wycliffe with the past tense... maybe it was Erasmus who gave him the idea and by the time the later translations were done it had become a thing....
Look at John 1:12. Again all past tense and glaringly obviously wrong....but it's in the nominative, perfect, aortist tense meaning past, present, and future tense at the same time.
How would you like to try to rephrase that so that everyone reading it could understand that?
You can't...
No proper English translation will.
101G
Well-Known Member
first thanks for the reply, what I stated was in the Hebrew. and second, the tense do not supersede actual scripture, if a tense change the value of the scripture before or after said scripture then the change is not of God.
my position is this, if something change the intent of the understanding of the scriptures then it's not acceptable nor profitable.
and as for John 1:12 "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:"
the verse is very understandable. "But as many as received him", (past tense), "to them gave he power to become the sons of God", (present tense), "even to them that believe on his name:", (future tense).
PICJAG.
Now where Ye Olde Englishe has more of the structural parts of speech that the original language does...
It's not the kind of study that your average person is capable of or is interested in doing.
Look at the sheer volume of various denominations and various theologies we have currently...
All of these came from someone reading scriptures inaccurately and developing theologies... mostly from the Geneva Bible...
And they gained followers because people didn't read the scriptures with proper hermeneutics.
My point being that most people creating theologies shouldn't be handling scriptures to begin with. And asking for people to twice translate scriptures...not a good idea.
The study of scripture takes a lot of time and drive to do it properly. History, anthropology, topography, geology, and the other sciences as well as all of the arts...all this is needed to do a good job of deciphering what was said and why it was said in the manner it was said in.
You obviously have done a lot of this and are to be commended for this. And I'll agree that in some aspects of the KJV is great...but so is the RSV which came out immediately after the KJV by the same guys (Cambridge) with better manuscripts.
101G
Well-Known Member
I agree, they need the Holy Spirit, for no doctrine should contridict scripture, it should come from scripture.
yes I agree, but the Holy Ghost make short work of that by revealing all those thing for you.
I can only say this in response to you. in the Name of the Lord Jesus, thanks. for he is the only one who get's the accolades. for without him, I am Nothing. yes study, yes, research, but do it all in the guidance of the Lord. and thaks for the education on tenses, which is very good and a need to know. for as education if one have the chance to go to school to learn please do so, just don't put one's education before or ahead of God's wisdom. there is nothing more formidable, beside God, that a christian with an edication with God in the lead.
my motto is, "ye have not because ye ask not", oh so true.
Thanks for a civil conversation, it was very refreshing, may God bless you.
PICJAG.
See,
I enjoy having reasonable conversation with people about the scriptures and having good fellowship in doing so.
Because TOGETHER we are more than the sum of our parts...
Together we can know and do more.
ONE Lord, ONE Faith, ONE Baptism...
The "Baptism" here is referencing the root of the word which is all about dying cloth...no two batches of dye are the same...but we have been forever changed by the same batch of dye...that which was made by Christ's blood.
Every believer has a personal relationship with God...no two are the same as we all are individuals...God relates to us all just a bit differently...but when getting together God himself joins us...and that's how we become more than the sum of our parts.
Well, every error that we all commit arouses pleasure in satan. But, I agree with you that it's hard to deny that the radical irrationality, bias and cultish behaviour of these kjvo adherents, appears to have an extremely nefarious intent behind it. That, undeniably and invariably, such a conviction can only do more damage than good. There's an evil here that is not as necessarily present, as in other controversies. I find the proponents of this tenet extremely bizarre and peculiar, to a rather unnerving degree.
YeshuaFan1
Active Member
Indeed, but translators are helpful, are they not, to people who read only their own native language? It of course would better if the translator were also anointed by God in the translation from the original written language to the language of the reader. A translator anointed by God in his work might be like a prophet speaking God's Word to us. Or he might be as the Interpreter in the church so not everyone has to remain silent.
"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God." I Cor 14:28
But then we have this, which should work with almost any Bible version, or not?
"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." John 14:26
That's one way of looking at things...
But aren't we the adopted child?
The ingrafted branches lucky to be a part of the grand plan?
Isn't it incumbent upon us to do all that we can to be more like the family we were adopted into instead of the family adopting us adapt to us?
Just thinking out loud here...
Have you ever heard a Catholic here or anywhere tell of how the Catholic Church brought together for men the Bible? They would say they compiled it and preserved it. If they did, did not God have a part in that? The individual prophets, teachers, apostles, writers or whatever they might be named wrote the individual books, letters as inspired by God to do so... but considering that Moses the apparent writer of the first five books died close to 3500 years ago, how much credit should we give to him or to Joshua or David or Ezekiel or Matthew or Paul or John for what they wrote? How much credit should we give to any translators of their original writings to the many versions in English and in every human language in which it is written today?
What God did in seeing to it that all of the books and letters were written as He wanted them written and translated and compiled into single volume is what some might call a miracle... or was it all simply in accord with His whole plan? During much of the time from Moses until now, a great many of God's followers had no written book available to them or if there was one, most them probably couldn't read it any way. Again, a miracle, or simply God's plan?
Now those with the ability and knowledge to do so not only compare what is available today but also argue why this one is better than that one, and so on... Considering what God has done with regard to the Book during those 3500 years, who would limit His ability to get His message out to anyone who is hungry and thirsty?
"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled" Matt 5:6
"So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it" Isaiah 55:11
Nancy
Well-Known Member
Amen
When an unbeliever say's to me "there are books missing in the bible ya know" I just say 'Well, I guess God did not want them in there'
We have His true and Living Word. Nobody can ever destroy it, it's the number one seller every year...yes, God's Word does and will continue to accomplish His will and will always attain His purposes.
He is Good...
Similar threads
