1. 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!

Featured KJV versus Modern Translations

Discussion in 'Bible Study Forum' started by CoreIssue, Mar 15, 2019.

  1. CoreIssue

    CoreIssue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,224
    Likes Received:
    1,111
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    A different look at Bible version disagreements.

    John Ankerberg Show (KJV vs New Translations) - YouTube

    Very interesting is the KJVO do not argue anything but they have faith in the KJV.

    Start at the beginning of these videos, most are Good to listen closely. Discussions are broken up into multiple videos videos.

    What argument I find obscene is that there was no Bible before 1611. But they also admit 1611 is not the KJV of today. The 1769 is, which got rid of the books of the apocrypha.

    Moving beyond that it deals with the broader questions concerning the Bible, all versions.

    Also notable is the claim that the KJV's is word for word, which is bogus. You cannot translate from one language to another word for word. It is impossible.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2019
  2. Enoch111

    Enoch111 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,091
    Likes Received:
    2,652
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    No one in their right mind spouts such nonsense. Just A STRAW MAN ARGUMENT.
    Go to OFFICIAL KING JAMES BIBLE ONLINE: AUTHORIZED KING JAMES VERSION (KJV) and compare the original KJV (1611) with the standard KJV of today. They are identical, other than spellings, punctuation, orthography etc. Another BOGUS ARGUMENT.
    The date is incorrect. It should be 1885. And the Apocrypha was not recongized as Scripture by the translators. Another INCONSEQUENTIAL ARGUMENT.

    Your irrational hatred for the KJV is plain to see. What that will do is send you into false doctrines.
     
    Reggie Belafonte and Phoneman777 like this.
  3. ScottA

    ScottA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,687
    Likes Received:
    1,819
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    It doesn't matter.

    Although many may like to think so, man is not in charge of what word goes out to the world, God is. Only God has providence over His word down through all generations. It shall not return void.

    It is not man's interpretation or translation that matters, it is God's revelation that matters.
     
    amadeus and Acolyte like this.
  4. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    When will you stop characterizing the debate as "KJV VS. All Others" when it is actually the Textus Receptus VS. the Critical Text, the Byzantian VS. the Western/Alexandrian?

    As you've been shown, the Critical Text is based on an extreme minority of all ancient MSS and has been proven to be steeped in questionable circumstances -
    • totally reckless compilation and deviation from strict methods and best practices of genuine ancient scribes
    • dated to be around the time of Constantine's commission to Eusebius (who was a disciple of that deceived occultist Origen) for the compilation of an "ecumenical Bible" intended to unite pagans with the church by, through removal of key texts which point to the exclusivity of Him as Savior and God, a Total Onslaught on the sole divinity of Christ
    • the widely known then but almost entirely unknown today fact that those false Bibles were rejected and discarded by the early church (only to be "discovered" as the oldest MSS which many like you have erroneously concluded that "oldest" means "what God originally intended)
    • suspicion as to the genuineness of the Protestantism of Westcott, Hort, Tichendorf, and their band of "Merry Mary Men" and papal intrigue surrounding their events of the 19th century
    • coupled with the fact that older letters from ECFs contain that which is present in the Byzantian MSS (from which the Textus Receptus is compiled) but which is absent in the MSS that you defend so fiercely
    • the fact that the Alexandrian MSS, upon which the Critical Text is based, is called "Alexandrian" for a good reason: most of it was found in Alexandria - THE CAPITAL OF OCCULTISM - where God picked the mightiest Pharaoh to ever live to demonstrate His omnipotent power at the time of the Exodus - the same world renown, mighty Pharaoh of Pharaohs who was called "the Napoleon of Egypt" - the same Pharaoh who was directly responsible for the compilation of the Book of the Dead, the "bible" of the occult world - the same Pharaoh who got his butt handed to him by my Lord in the spring of 1450 B.C. - and you along with Westcott and company expect such ancient MSS to be "what God originally intended" while dismissing the Byzantian MSS from Palestine - WHERE CHRISTIANITY WAS BORN - as full of errors?
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  5. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Please take the time to consider both sides of the issue: you have demonstrated yourself as being a "hack": a person interested only in advancing and idea or agenda without any regard whatsoever to the evidence against them.

     
  6. CoreIssue

    CoreIssue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,224
    Likes Received:
    1,111
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    You are making indoctrinated claims. You did not listen to a single video.

    You denied any one said there was no Bible before 1611 based on your indoctrination.

    And here is the proof. Go to minute 4.

    I do not hate the KJV. But I love the Bible have no tolerance for false claims such as the KJVO hold.

    Watch the videos and learn something. There are KJVO on the panel. Watch how their arguments fall apart.

     
  7. CoreIssue

    CoreIssue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,224
    Likes Received:
    1,111
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    You didn't watch the videos either. There are KJVO in every video.
     
  8. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I'll bet a bazillion dollars those videos you post are hit jobs that do nothing to acquaint the viewer with an accurate representation of the facts or history.

    As I stated earlier, only someone with ROMAN CATHOLIC SYMPATHIES could ever be pleased with the notion that God kept from His people what the Holy Spirit originally inspired only to hand it over to the Roman Catholic church 15 centuries later in the form of the Latin Vulgate - WHICH THE CRITICAL TEXT MSS AND ALL THE NEW VERSIONS AGREE WITH STUPENDOUSLY.
     
  9. CoreIssue

    CoreIssue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,224
    Likes Received:
    1,111
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Watch them and learn. Listen to what the KJVO argue. Don't assume. Don't argue from ignorance.

    By the way, the Vulgate was fourth century.
     
  10. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Correction, not the Latin Vulgate, but the Vatican MSS is what was discovered in the 15 century. Of course the Vulgate was around - it is from which Wycliffe translated his Bible in the 12th.
     
  11. CoreIssue

    CoreIssue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,224
    Likes Received:
    1,111
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Not discovered in the 15th century. Written in the 15th century.
     
  12. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Sorry, Codex Vaticanus was "discovered" in the Vatican library in the 15th century. Its views are no different than that of the Arian church father Origen and its dated to be at the time which coincides with the writings of 4th century Eusebius, who is widely known as responsible for the 50 or so copies of Constantine's corrupt Ecumenical Bible which slashed text after text which proved the divinity of Jesus - just like the Alexandrian Codex Sinaticus. Both of these MSS are believed to have been authored by Eusebius since they are so closely related.

    Why do you insist on defending MSS that attacks repeatedly the divinity of Jesus? One can only assume you're either a Jesuit or a completely uninformed hack for apostate Protestantism.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  13. CoreIssue

    CoreIssue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,224
    Likes Received:
    1,111
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I'm talking about the Vulgate that was And is the official Bible of the Catholic Church.
     
  14. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Westcott and Hort's Critical Text relied mainly on Codex Sinaticus and Codex Vaticanus, but mostly on the former instead of the latter so as these two "Protestants" would not appear as they were: false Protestants who sympathized with Rome.
     
  15. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    What about it?
     
  16. CoreIssue

    CoreIssue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,224
    Likes Received:
    1,111
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    It in some other Bibles predate the KJV.

    The KJV used today is 1758, not 1611. They are not identical.
     
  17. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Are we to believe that the handful of MSS represented by the Alexandrian and the Western (Roman Catholic) are somehow more reliable than the thousands of MSS found in the Traditional (Byzantian/Majority) MSS?
    Screenshot (2).png
     
  18. CoreIssue

    CoreIssue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,224
    Likes Received:
    1,111
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I don't see the newer versions of the KJV or variants on your chart.

    You do not use the 1611.
     
  19. Deborah_

    Deborah_ Active Member

    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    210
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Numbers are irrelevant. Think about it... if we were ever to find the original of one of Paul's letters, that single document would be more reliable than millions of copies! And the later the copy, the more likely it is to contain accumulated errors. Older copies are fewer in number (simply because they are older), but they carry more weight because they are likely to be more accurate.
     
  20. Phoneman777

    Phoneman777 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,410
    Likes Received:
    769
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    The claim by the pro-Critical Text panel participant that "the closest two Traditional Text MSS contains 6-10 variations per chapter" is a broad statement. What kind of "variations"? Do they significantly change the meaning of the passage? Should we not expect slight variations from a family of MSS that is representative of a huge body of work?

    The question you refuse to answer is this:

    Why is it that handwritten letters between church fathers that are older than the oldest discovered Bible MSS contain references to verses which appear in the so called "corrupt" Traditional Text, but are absent from the "so called "reliable" Alexandrian Text?
     
Loading...