1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Slandering God

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by stilllearning, Oct 3, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep, at least those "poor pilgrims" had in their posession what led up to the KJB and not what went downhill!:laugh:
     
  2. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now try printing everything you copy and paste into book form and linger around long enough for the letters to start pouring into your mailbox from their lawyers.
     
  3. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Sal,in the effort you're expending in trying to belittle modern versions you misrepresent a lot. If you think they down-play the subjects of sin,hell,judgment you will have to provide evidence.I can't speak for every MV;but let's deal with the NLTse for now. In post #100 of mine I provided eight representative passages regarding God's wrath. In none of them was there any equivocation.It's up to you to prove your negative contentions.
     
  4. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist

    The Pilgrim's rejected the KJV.It was distasteful to them.They preferred what came before the MV (KJV).
     
  5. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,371
    Likes Received:
    2,405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Actually, the KJV was the Establishments version of choice. Dissenters like the Pilgrims and the Puritans (in America) used the Geneva Bible. Which IIRC is based on the TR.
     
  6. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I agree with what you said.But what does "IIRC" mean?
     
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps it might be more accurate to say the Puritans (in America) and Pilgrims initially used the Geneva Bible, for as these Bibles became more or less 'unusable', due to 'wear' and 'age' (Consider that the bindings of books were not as good then, as they are today), and as the Geneva was no longer printed widely with the arrival of the KJV on the scene (nor was the Bishop's), then effectively not printed at all after a few years, the only fairly easily available Bible was the KJV.

    It is also worthy of note that, for the most part, the Puritans still generally considered themselves as the 'true part' of the Church of England, and were more interested in seeing her 'reformed' (and Reformed, as well) than in starting some 'breakaway' group. Hence, the KJV was not particularly to be avoided, in those early days, but was merely basically a "New" version, to them. This seems to be somewhat a different tune, to the one I often hear playing today.

    BTW, I believe IIRC stands for "If I recall correctly", FTR. ;)

    Ed
     
  8. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is nothing more than your own personal preference to suggest that the KJV is the 'pinnacle' of Bibles. Where is any "objective standard" that determines this?

    BTW, are you ever going to answer C4K's question about which is the correct rendering of I Jo. 5:12 - that wording found in the KJV, 1611 or that of Paris, Blaney, et al. found in the editions of a century and a half later, and following??

    If the Geneva Bible and the KJV-1769 agree (and they do here) and the KJV-1611 differs, which reading is the accurate one??

    Ed
     
  9. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is nothing more than your own personal preference to suggest that the KJV is the 'pinnacle' of Bibles. Where is any "objective standard" that determines this?

    BTW, are you ever going to answer C4K's question about which is the correct rendering of I Jo. 5:12 - that wording found in the KJV, 1611 or those 'non-existent updating and 'corrections' of Paris, Blaney, et al. found in the editions of a century and a half later, and following??

    If the Geneva Bible and the KJV-1769 agree (and they do here) and the KJV-1611 differs, which reading is the accurate one??

    Ed
     
  10. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi EdSutton

    I have had a very interesting journey over the last few days, and it has been a blessing.

    Earlier I stated, that the late 1800's were a bad time for the Word of God, and I have discovered that statement, to be more true than I had imagined.

    Satan had so hated the previous 200 years, that he had crackpots, coming out of the woodwork, attacking the Bible in every imaginable way.

    Then BB Warfield took a great stand for the Bible, in declaring it to be “the actual Word of God”, and therefore shutting the mouth’s of those attacking it.

    But then, in 1893, BB Warfield(during his tenure at Princeton), went about to re-interpret the Westminster Confession of faith, in such a way, that he ended up doing greater harm to God’s Word, than all these other men, could have ever done.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Chapter one, of the Westminster Confession.......
    http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/
    .....is about the inspiration of Scripture.

    Other great men, had interpreted it as saying.......
    In other words, the copies, were as inspired as the original.

    Therefore God has perfectly preserved His Word for us.
    --------------------------------------------------
    But when Warfiled gave his survey of the WCF, here is what he said about the copies...
    http://www.apuritanatheart.com/warwest.htm#LinkTarget_18613
    He goes on, for dozens of pages, expounding basically how God’s Word has been lost(because the autographs of Scripture are gone), and somehow, we have to find it.

    Ed, here is the main link.........
    http://www.apuritanatheart.com/warwest.htm

    You should click on the “First article”, and will find the quotes you asked me for.
    --------------------------------------------------
    I couldn’t help but wonder, how a man like BB Warfield, could have made such a mistake at this.
    (It is because of this mistake, that people today, can carelessly state that the Bible has mistakes, and think that they are right.)

    But I believe I have the answer:
    In my studies of BB Warfield, I have discovered that even when he was being praised, it was said of him, that “he was not a Churchman”.
    -It is common knowledge, that he NEVER, regularly attended any Church.-
    And if you think about it, you will realize that he thought himself “so wise”, that there was no way, that he could sit under the authority of a mere pastor.

    Therefore his problem was “a lack of faith”. Like in Mark 9:24.

    This lack of faith, is also seen in his acceptance of Darwinism.
    --------------------------------------------------

    All in all, this has been a wonderful study.
     
  11. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'll stick to preaching and teaching God's Word in the various translations and let you try that because you so like to prove your point.

    It's still just a cop-out and a farce for KJVO's to whine about copyrights when KJV's outsell all but the NIV, NLT, and NKJV (based upon unit sales) in the USA. When all the different KJV publishers start giving them away for free then you might have a point about the MV's being 'profit driven'.
     
  12. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    First, the WCF never states that the copies are as inspired as the original. The WCF statement seems to indicate the originals are inspired --
    VIII. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; ...​
    But in the face of the hard evidence of the copies (where no manuscript is without variants) how should we apply "kept pure"? But even if the WCF did declare the copies inspired then...

    Second, there are at least two BIG steps to take between the copies and a translation for us. The first step is to compile, or collate, all the manuscript evidence available. This practice is called Textual Criticism --
    You do not identify these "other great men", but I agree with the quote. According to this quote "text-critcial studies" are a necessity. The text-critical process then follows the discovery of the manuscripts (copies). But the WCF says nothing about the inspiration or perfection of textual criticism. The second BIG step is Translation, and according to the WCF 1.8 it also seems necessary --
    ... therefore they are to be translated in to the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all... ​
    There's nothing in the WCF that speaks of the inspiration of translations, or an inspired translation process. I did not find the word 'perfect' in the WCF; but it does say that God's words dwell "plentifully in all" translations. Does "plentifully" sound like "perfectly "to you?
     
    #132 franklinmonroe, Oct 9, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 9, 2008
  13. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    No thanks, I do anything the Lord insists upon to AVOID His wrath, you go right ahead.
     
  14. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Anabaptists hold to the KJB, while the pilgrims did view this as politics.
     
  15. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    I worry about people who hear music only in their heads!:laugh:
     
  16. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ask anyone to quote Scripture, their objective primarilly is to quote the KJB. Besides, I'll stick with the Lord on this one.

    Somehow I missed this, where is it?

    How do they differ?
     
  17. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,470
    Likes Received:
    1,228
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I've heard it said many different ways but who can disagree with Sal?

    "If the King James Version was good enough for our Lord Jesus, it's good for me too!" :laugh:

    Rob
     
  18. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, it has been pretty good enough to get the distinction of being paramount to the point it remains the most used and familiar Bible today.

    Seems that would merit the dubious honour you've awarded it!:godisgood:

    Why is it we stay with the KJB, and are quite happy with it, and all MV proponents have to keep searching through the "version of the week" to see what might be right or wrong with it?:D :p :eek:
     
  19. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Or we could just accept that the KJB is all we need and stop searching to see what we should already have learned!:wavey:

    We already know what the word of God says, why keep seeking it out as if we might be wrong?:laugh:

    Something tells me too many have become suspect of the word of God or is it they're still looking for "loop-holes"?
     
  20. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Did you mean "held to the KJB"?I doubt that the majority of present day Anabaptists (which are not Baptists BTW) use the KJV primarily.

    The Pilgrims did not value the Geneva Bible over that of the KJV because of "politics".The Pilgrims were Calvinists.They appreciated the notes of 300,000 words and the translation itself.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...