KJV versus Modern Translations

[CoreIssue]

Would you please explain how can there be a last seven years of anything after the "thief in the night" rapture when Peter says the day that the Lord comes as a thief in the night will end of the world as we know it?

There are two thief in the night happenings in the Bible.

The first is the pre-tribulation rapture.

The second is the rapture just before the destruction of the earth.

Peter is talking about the second.

 

[CoreIssue]

I gave you plenty of proof about the TR. Catholic priest Erasmus was a truth seeker more than a papist devotee - like you - and exposed the errors of the Western Latin MSS by the Byzantian Greek MSS brought West by Christians fleeing Islam in the East.

That is your opinion.

The fact is he never stopped being a Catholic priest.

No I have you offered a scrap of evidence supporting your claims of the superiority of the TR.

 

[Phoneman777]

There are two thief in the night happenings in the Bible.

The first is the pre-tribulation rapture.

The second is the rapture just before the destruction of the earth.

Peter is talking about the second.

CoreIssue, slow down and think about that for a minute. How can there possibly be TWO "thief in the night" events? If Jesus sneaks into town and sneaks out with the Gentiles saints where planes, trains, and automobiles crash everywhere, loved ones vanish, and word spreads across the globe that the Christians were right all along about the "Secret Rapture" and the final "7 Years of Tribulation" - the most Earth shattering, monumental event to ever hit the planet - how can there possibly be a "surprise reprise" of another "thief in the night" event?

• Do you really think nobody will notice this "rapture" has happened?
• Don't you think that exact moment in time will be burned into the minds of everyone on the planet?
• Don't you think those "Left Behind" will start the 7 years "Countdown to the Second Coming"?
• Don't you think there'll be a "Times Square Ball Drop" complete with A-list entertainers on the last night of the "tribulation" when every single person on the planet will be looking skyward?
• Do you really think the end of the 7 years is going to sneak up on anybody "as a thief in the night" when the entire world would be marking off their calendars down to the very hour exactly 7 years after the world got turned upside down in the "rapture"?

Please, tell us how there can possibly be "TWO thief in the night" events in light of the above questions.

 

[CoreIssue]

CoreIssue, slow down and think about that for a minute. How can there possibly be TWO "thief in the night" events? If Jesus sneaks into town and sneaks out with the Gentiles saints where planes, trains, and automobiles crash everywhere, loved ones vanish, and word spreads across the globe that the Christians were right all along about the "Secret Rapture" and the final "7 Years of Tribulation" - the most Earth shattering, monumental event to ever hit the planet - how can there possibly be a "surprise reprise" of another "thief in the night" event?

• Do you really think nobody will notice this "rapture" has happened?
• Don't you think that exact moment in time will be burned into the minds of everyone on the planet?
• Don't you think those "Left Behind" will start the 7 years "Countdown to the Second Coming"?
• Don't you think there'll be a "Times Square Ball Drop" complete with A-list entertainers on the last night of the "tribulation" when every single person on the planet will be looking skyward?
• Do you really think the end of the 7 years is going to sneak up on anybody "as a thief in the night" when the entire world would be marking off their calendars down to the very hour exactly 7 years after the world got turned upside down in the "rapture"?

Please, tell us how there can possibly be "TWO thief in the night" events in light of the above questions.

There are two. 1007 years apart.

 

[Phoneman777]

That is your opinion.

The fact is he never stopped being a Catholic priest.

No I have you offered a scrap of evidence supporting your claims of the superiority of the TR.

Erasmus exposed the error of the Latin: TR = "unless ye repent, ye will all likewise perish" while the Latin says "unless ye do penance, ye will all likewise perish."

BTW, so what if he remained a priest. Did his church approve of his TR is the only question necessary.

 

[Phoneman777]

There are two. 1007 years apart.

I don't care if it's 10,000 years, there won't be anyone asleep on the last night of your "1,007 tribulation/millennium" as they look skyward to see what will happen.

How long ago was the Mayan apocalypse predicted? And yet wasn't everyone across the globe watching to see if the world would end?

How much more will people be looking for the "1,007 year coming" of Jesus after the "rapture" which turned the entire world upside down?

I'm almost embarrassed for you that you would publicly post such a ridiculous idea.

 

[CoreIssue]

Erasmus exposed the error of the Latin: TR = "unless ye repent, ye will all likewise perish" while the Latin says "unless ye do penance, ye will all likewise perish."

BTW, so what if he remained a priest. Did his church approve of his TR is the only question necessary.

I am fully aware what Catholicism believed and the Vulgate said.

But the fact remains he was a Catholic priest and never ceased To Be a Catholic priest.

And he replaced Passover with Easter.

 

[Phoneman777]

I am fully aware want Catholicism believed and the Vulgate said.

But the fact remains you was a Catholic priest and never ceased To Be a Catholic priest.

And he replaced Passover with Easter.

SO WHAT? Did the Catholic church accept and sanction the TR or did it ban it? Why did they ban it? Why did the Reformation embrace it? Because it exposed the errors of BOTH the Western Family MSS and that worthless Alexandrian Family MSS of which you are so fond, friend

 

[CoreIssue]

I don't care if it's 10,000 years, there won't be anyone asleep on the last night of your "1,007 tribulation/millennium" as they look skyward to see what will happen.

How long ago was the Mayan apocalypse predicted? And yet wasn't everyone across the globe watching to see if the world would end?

How much more will people be looking for the "1,007 year coming" of Jesus after the "rapture" which turned the entire world upside down?

I'm almost embarrassed for you that you would publicly post such a ridiculous idea.

 

[CoreIssue]

SO WHAT? Did the Catholic church accept and sanction the TR or did it ban it? Why did they ban it? Why did the Reformation embrace it? Because it exposed the errors of BOTH the Western Family MSS and that worthless Alexandrian Family MSS of which you are so fond, friend

The Catholic Church never banned the Erasmus.

 

[Phoneman777]

View attachment 6313

CoreIssue, I'm disappointed that your only response to my point that people will be just as watchful for your "1,007 years post millennium Second Coming" as the world was for the long-ago predicted date of the Mayan Apocalypse...

...was "off topic".

Don't run from the Cognitive Dissonance - man up and answer the question: How can there possibly ever be a Second "thief in the night" rapture event when the first one will be the chronological timestamp from which ANY Second Coming date can be calculated, be it 3 1/2 years later, 7 years later, or in your case, 1,007 years later? Not going to happen, bro.

 

[Phoneman777]

The Catholic Church never banned the Erasmus.

Oh, so now the TR never made it on the list of banned books? Give me a break! I've got 19 pages in my files detailing the banning of Bible versions by the papacy, many of which were translated using the TR.

 

[Phoneman777]

The Catholic Church never banned the Erasmus.

"All of his works were placed on the Index of Prohibited Books by Paul IV, and some of his works continued to be banned or viewed with caution in the later Index of Pius IV. Catholics have claimed that 'Erasmus laid the egg that Luther hatched'”.

 

[CoreIssue]

"All of his works were placed on the Index of Prohibited Books by Paul IV, and some of his works continued to be banned or viewed with caution in the later Index of Pius IV. Catholics have claimed that 'Erasmus laid the egg that Luther hatched'”.

But he still remained a Catholic priest.

He still did things like change Passover to Easter.

You are trying to make him something he was not.

The history of Luther's says differently.

 

[Phoneman777]

The Catholic Church never banned the Erasmus.

Librorum Prohibitorum. Between 1557 and 1559, Pope Paul IV issued the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, the first official listing of books prohibited by the Catholic Church. The list was regularly updated until 1948 and not officially abolished until 1966. Authors whose works, including their Bible translations, were banned on the initial list, of course included Martin Luther, William Tyndale, and John Rogers. Among the many others were:


John Calvin. Calvin was the second most influential religious reformer following Martin Luther and the founder of the Reformed and Presbyterian denominations.


Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer was the Archbishop of Canterbury during the reigns of the English kings Henry VIII and Edward VI. He was imprisoned by Queen Mary I for two years and then burned at the stake.


Desiderius Erasmus. Although Erasmus remained a devoted Catholic for his entire life and even defended some Church doctine against attacks by Martin Luther, he still fell from favor for the satirical and humanist nature of his writing, especially The Praise of Folly, a satirical work that lampooned the then superstitious and corrupt character of the Church.

 

[CoreIssue]

Librorum Prohibitorum. Between 1557 and 1559, Pope Paul IV issued the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, the first official listing of books prohibited by the Catholic Church. The list was regularly updated until 1948 and not officially abolished until 1966. Authors whose works, including their Bible translations, were banned on the initial list, of course included Martin Luther, William Tyndale, and John Rogers. Among the many others were:


John Calvin. Calvin was the second most influential religious reformer following Martin Luther and the founder of the Reformed and Presbyterian denominations.


Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer was the Archbishop of Canterbury during the reigns of the English kings Henry VIII and Edward VI. He was imprisoned by Queen Mary I for two years and then burned at the stake.


Desiderius Erasmus. Although Erasmus remained a devoted Catholic for his entire life and even defended some Church doctine against attacks by Martin Luther, he still fell from favor for the satirical and humanist nature of his writing, especially The Praise of Folly, a satirical work that lampooned the then superstitious and corrupt character of the Church.

That does not prove your claims about the TR and KJV.

 

[SkyWriting]

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.

I like the different versions because they shed light on the translation process.

New International Version
So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

New Living Translation
“Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets. The Narrow Gate

English Standard Version
“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Berean Study Bible
In everything, then, do to others as you would have them do to you. For this is the essence of the Law and the Prophets.

Berean Literal Bible
All things therefore, as many as you might desire that men should do to you, so also you do to them, for this is the law and the prophets.

New American Standard Bible
"In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

King James Bible
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Christian Standard Bible
Therefore, whatever you want others to do for you, do also the same for them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Contemporary English Version
Treat others as you want them to treat you. This is what the Law and the Prophets are all about.

 

[SkyWriting]

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.

Do you have any evidence for your accumulated errors theory?
Becasue the dead sea scrolls are the oldest found and no one claims they are the most accurate.
The reason the numbers do count is that the "Copy centers" of old were trained professionals who did "Background checks" before they spent 4 months to copy one book of scripture. Not the same as the teens at your local copy center, they were not inclined to copy fiction disguised as history.

 

[Enoch111]

But he still remained a Catholic priest.

Erasmus remained a NOMINAL Catholic, and a nominal Catholic priest for a short time. In fact he mercilessly excoriated and mocked the Catholic priesthood in The Praise of Folly.

Regardless of your biased nonsense the historical facts are as follows:

1. Erasmus was one of the leading scholars of the Reformation.

2. He undertook the task of preparing the first printed Greek New Testament directly from Greek manuscripts, but he was trying to ensure that his was the first printed Greek text instead of the Complutensian Polyglot.

3. As a result his first edition was prepared hastily and did have several printers errors. While he used a handful of manuscripts, they were sufficient, and adequately represented the Majority or Byzantine Text.

4. He made several revisions to his Greek text over a considerable period. Martin Luther used his 1519 edition for his German Bible.

5. His text was further improved by several other scholars who succeeded him such over a period of over 100 years.

6. It was the 3rd edition (1550) of Robertus Stephanus (Robert Estienne) which became the actual Received Text or Textus Receptus. After Stephanus the Elzevier brothers continue to made editions of the Textus Receptus and this term is found in one of their editions.

7. Erasmus associated primarily with the Protestant Reformers and his convictions were those of a Protestant. But he did not accept the Calvinistic ideas about free will, and wanted to reform the Catholic church from within.

8. Modern unbelieving scholars have made Erasmus a scapegoat, but the fact is that he was one of the greatest scholars of the Renaissance. And the actual Greek Text of the King James Bible does not go back to Erasmus but to Stephanus. Even there the translators had an opportunity to examine all the printed Greek texts including the Complutensian Polyglot. So it is a blend on many Greek texts and Scrivener prepared the actual Greek of the KJV (1894) which -- for all practical purposes -- is that of Stephanus.

 

[CoreIssue]

Erasmus remained a NOMINAL Catholic, and a nominal Catholic priest for a short time. In fact he mercilessly excoriated and mocked the Catholic priesthood in The Praise of Folly.

Regardless of your biased nonsense the historical facts are as follows:

1. Erasmus was one of the leading scholars of the Reformation.

2. He undertook the task of preparing the first printed Greek New Testament directly from Greek manuscripts, but he was trying to ensure that his was the first printed Greek text instead of the Complutensian Polyglot.

3. As a result his first edition was prepared hastily and did have several printers errors. While he used a handful of manuscripts, they were sufficient, and adequately represented the Majority or Byzantine Text.

4. He made several revisions to his Greek text over a considerable period. Martin Luther used his 1519 edition for his German Bible.

5. His text was further improved by several other scholars who succeeded him such over a period of over 100 years.

6. It was the 3rd edition (1550) of Robertus Stephanus (Robert Estienne) which became the actual Received Text or Textus Receptus. After Stephanus the Elzevier brothers continue to made editions of the Textus Receptus and this term is found in one of their editions.

7. Erasmus associated primarily with the Protestant Reformers and his convictions were those of a Protestant. But he did not accept the Calvinistic ideas about free will, and wanted to reform the Catholic church from within.

8. Modern unbelieving scholars have made Erasmus a scapegoat, but the fact is that he was one of the greatest scholars of the Renaissance. And the actual Greek Text of the King James Bible does not go back to Erasmus but to Stephanus. Even there the translators had an opportunity to examine all the printed Greek texts including the Complutensian Polyglot. So it is a blend on many Greek texts and Scrivener prepared the actual Greek of the KJV (1894) which -- for all practical purposes -- is that of Stephanus.

Unproven claims.