BaptistBoard.com  
     

Increase font size: 0, 10, 25, 50%
Register FAQ Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Left Container Right Container
 
Go Back   BaptistBoard.com > Baptist DEBATE Forums (Baptist Only) > Bible Versions/Translations

Bible Versions/Translations Comparing & Contrasting Bible Versions & Translations

Fewer Ads for Registered Users - Register Now!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-01-2008, 04:53 PM
Salamander's Avatar
Salamander Salamander is offline
3,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: God Bless the USA!!!
Posts: 3,965
Default Dual Inspiration

Explain dual inspiration and why it is you think many KJVO's believe this is true, and are wrong,and how it is you don't have the inspired word of God?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-04-2008, 05:00 PM
Salamander's Avatar
Salamander Salamander is offline
3,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: God Bless the USA!!!
Posts: 3,965
Default

Didn't think " they " could respond.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-04-2008, 05:26 PM
robycop3's Avatar
robycop3 robycop3 is offline
7,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 7,459
Default

God inspired, influenced, stimulated, "caused", "jumpstarted', etc. ALL valid translations in whatever language, old or new, just the same. Betcha can't prove any differently.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-05-2008, 09:18 AM
Logos1560 Logos1560 is offline
3,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,040
Default

In the May, 2008, issue of Ruckman’s Bible Believers’ Bulletin, Tom Waddle wrote: “Dr. Ruckman doesn’t teach that the King James is inspired. He teaches that it was ’given by inspiration.’ That’s the Biblical terminology” (p. 7). Peter Ruckman wrote: “I teach that the AV was ‘given’ to us ‘by inspiration’ while knowing as well as I know my own name that an EXACT word-for-word in ANY language, from any so-called ‘original Greek text,‘ would be an awkward, stilted, ambiguous, ROTTEN Bible revision” (Christian Liar’s Library, p. 141).

James Son contended that God "finalized His pure word into English almost 400 years ago" (New Athenians, p. 39). He also acknowledged that he believed in double inspiration and that he believed that God inspired the translators of the KJV (Ibid., p. 25). When interviewed by Texe Marrs on his radio program, Gail Riplinger stated: "Since the King James Bible was authored by God, there is no copyright" (audiotape #4896). On the John Ankerberg Show, Gipp stated: "I believe all question of Greek translation, of proper translation, ended in 1611" (Which English Translation of the Bible Is Best, p. 23). Gipp even wrote: "A true Bible-believer can truly say, 'Well, the King James was good enough for the Apostles Peter and Paul and for the Lord Jesus Christ, so it's good enough for me'" (Answer Book, p. 56). In his recorded interview with Gipp, Texe Marrs stated: "When you read the King James Bible, my friends, you are reading the originals" (audiotape #4395). Marrs wrote an article in his newsletter claiming that "God wrote the King James Bible" (Flashpoint, March, 1996, p. 1). Len Smith claimed that “like the original book of Malachi, the King James is an original autograph because it is not a translation” (Age of Reason, D22, p. 21). Smith contended that “the KJV came out in 1611 because it closed the canon roughly 1600 years after the writing of the New Testament began” (Ibid.). Charles Mainous wrote: “This King James Bible I hold in my hand is not a copy, is not a translation” (Revival Fires, Sept., 2005, p. 4).

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-05-2008, 09:25 AM
Logos1560 Logos1560 is offline
3,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,040
Default

In his book entitled The Pure Words of God and subtitled Where to Find God's Words Which We are Commanded to Receive and Keep, H. D. Williams wrote: "Every person holding the view that the King James Bible is inspired, derivatively inspired, derivatively pure, or derivatively perfect is not only linguistically and historically incorrect, he is theologically incorrect" (p. 21).

Williams wrote: "It is hoped that men would drop their use of the words inspired and pure to refer to any translation because of the tremendous confusion that is generated by these claims. The claims cannot be supported by a careful examination of the Biblical meaning of the words inspiration and pure in the Bible. Furthermore, great scorn is generated around the world by the false claims of inspiration and purity for the English Bible only. Lastly, the incorrect application of these terms is transferring God's innate power and character to man. In effect, it is transferring God's glory to man by claiming man's translations are equivalent to the God-breathed Words" (p. 22).
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-05-2008, 09:53 AM
North Carolina Tentmaker's Avatar
North Carolina Tentmaker North Carolina Tentmaker is offline
2,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Western North Carolina
Posts: 2,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamander
Explain dual inspiration and why it is you think many KJVO's believe this is true, and are wrong,and how it is you don't have the inspired word of God?
I'll bite Salamander.

The idea of dual inspiration as held by the KJVO sect is that God inspired the original autographs and then secondly He inspired the King James Version. By their way of thinking the KJV is the only inspired version we have copies of now and should take priority over all other versions including Greek and Latin manuscripts. Because they hold that the KJV is the ONLY inspired version all other versions are corrupt. This puts the O in KJVO.

Why do they believe this? Well there are lots of reasons and I don't believe they all believe this for the same reason. Some I believe are just mislead and believe the lie that is taught to them, they believe out of ignorance. Others I think choose this route out of laziness because they don't want to have to study Greek and Hebrew. They don't want to have to study God's word. Others I think have been driven to this position by the also false teaching that because some versions don't match up word for word they are somehow less inspired or less God's word. They see this correctly as an attack on the inerrency of scripture and fall back to the KJVO position because it restores their faith in the accuracy and authority of God's word.

By contrast people like myself that believe God not only inspired his word but also preserved his word for us believe that the inspired word of God is contained not in the KJV only but in other modern and ancient versions as well. Furthermore we believe that through the study of the original languages we can learn even more. By going back to the Greek and the Hebrew, by learning what the individual words mean in the original languages even more of God's word can be revealed.

I do have the inspired word of God and the more I study that word the more I can learn about God and his special revelation of his word to us. That inspired word is not limited to the KJV but comes to me in many translations.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-05-2008, 03:11 PM
Salamander's Avatar
Salamander Salamander is offline
3,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: God Bless the USA!!!
Posts: 3,965
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Logos1560
In his book entitled The Pure Words of God and subtitled Where to Find God's Words Which We are Commanded to Receive and Keep, H. D. Williams wrote: "Every person holding the view that the King James Bible is inspired, derivatively inspired, derivatively pure, or derivatively perfect is not only linguistically and historically incorrect, he is theologically incorrect" (p. 21).
This si nothing more than a man and his opinion who can easily be seen as thinking he has some authority over the word of God that was never granted to him by God.

Quote:
Williams wrote: "It is hoped that men would drop their use of the words inspired and pure to refer to any translation because of the tremendous confusion that is generated by these claims.
Nope. When the original masterpiece is shown it offers no cnfusion, only that it is the origianl and perfectly original as the first. All other copies always refer back to the original. Although it could be said that any contruction of men may need adjustments, it does not mean that God inspired his word to imperfect men and they perfectly penned it down the first time. And it can be argued after close examination, that the word of God has been duely reviewed and perfectly construed into a most pure state as we already have given to us.
Quote:
The claims cannot be supported by a careful examination of the Biblical meaning of the words inspiration and pure in the Bible.
Hogwash is what comes off the hog when you wash him!
Quote:
Furthermore, great scorn is generated around the world by the false claims of inspiration and purity for the English Bible only.
As any false calim should, but the real scorn comes from those who disagree with the word of God in the first place and think it needs changing.
Quote:
Lastly, the incorrect application of these terms is transferring God's innate power and character to man. In effect, it is transferring God's glory to man by claiming man's translations are equivalent to the God-breathed Words" (p. 22).
To believe this he must also believe that God is incapable of communicating to man what his intent is and leaves men at the mercy of satan. This fellow holds a higher standard of his own words than the very word of God!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-05-2008, 03:17 PM
Salamander's Avatar
Salamander Salamander is offline
3,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: God Bless the USA!!!
Posts: 3,965
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by North Carolina Tentmaker
I'll bite Salamander.

The idea of dual inspiration as held by the KJVO sect is that God inspired the original autographs and then secondly He inspired the King James Version. By their way of thinking the KJV is the only inspired version we have copies of now and should take priority over all other versions including Greek and Latin manuscripts. Because they hold that the KJV is the ONLY inspired version all other versions are corrupt. This puts the O in KJVO.

Why do they believe this? Well there are lots of reasons and I don't believe they all believe this for the same reason. Some I believe are just mislead and believe the lie that is taught to them, they believe out of ignorance. Others I think choose this route out of laziness because they don't want to have to study Greek and Hebrew. They don't want to have to study God's word. Others I think have been driven to this position by the also false teaching that because some versions don't match up word for word they are somehow less inspired or less God's word. They see this correctly as an attack on the inerrency of scripture and fall back to the KJVO position because it restores their faith in the accuracy and authority of God's word.

By contrast people like myself that believe God not only inspired his word but also preserved his word for us believe that the inspired word of God is contained not in the KJV only but in other modern and ancient versions as well. Furthermore we believe that through the study of the original languages we can learn even more. By going back to the Greek and the Hebrew, by learning what the individual words mean in the original languages even more of God's word can be revealed.

I do have the inspired word of God and the more I study that word the more I can learn about God and his special revelation of his word to us. That inspired word is not limited to the KJV but comes to me in many translations.
Study of the English words, in context, reveals the very same meanings of the Greek and Hebrew from which they come, in the KJB.

I have only found the original tongues to enhance the KJB and not to disagree in any aspect anywhere within its pages.

W/H wittingly invented a way to interpret Greek to cause questioning of the word of God and only introduced confusion. Those version also carry the same characteristics of their work that rely heavily upon their technique.

I will have to say that I don't hold to a dual inspiration ideal, but rather that God inspired all Bibles in any langauge that hold true to the Originals, the KJB being the Pinnacle of all of them in English.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-05-2008, 07:39 PM
North Carolina Tentmaker's Avatar
North Carolina Tentmaker North Carolina Tentmaker is offline
2,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Western North Carolina
Posts: 2,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamander
Study of the English words, in context, reveals the very same meanings of the Greek and Hebrew from which they come, in the KJB.
While often this is true, it is not always. There are some nuances to the original languages that we only find if we study hard. I will give you an example from a devotional I read recently. The text verse came from Genesis 22:13. This is part of the story of Abraham offering Isaac as a sacrifice. In the KJV Gen 22:13 says
Quote:
And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.
Now if you look at your KJV Bible you will see the word him is in italics. I am sure you know this means an added word not found in the Hebrew. Often these help make a passage easier to understand but they should always alert you to look close. The Hebrew word right before this translated "behind" is "achar." Now look up achar in your Hebrew dictionary. This word can mean behind when relating to a place or it can mean after or afterwards when relating to time. In fact the King James Version translates this word after or afterwards 500 times and only translates it behind 44 times. Now think about this in relation to the ram. Yes the ram was behind Abraham and he did not see it until he looked behind. But the ram was also a picture of Christ, that sacrifice that would come after. Jesus and his sacrifice was still in the future, it would come after, but Abraham could see the picture of Jesus Christ and the sacrifice that would come afterwards in the ram. Now that might not mean much to you, but to me it was really cool and moved my heart. I don't believe I would have discovered that looking only at the English no matter how well I examined the context. Perhaps you would have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamander
I have only found the original tongues to enhance the KJB and not to disagree in any aspect anywhere within its pages.
Yes I would agree with this with the possible exception of details not vital to the message of God's word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamander
W/H wittingly invented a way to interpret Greek to cause questioning of the word of God and only introduced confusion. Those version also carry the same characteristics of their work that rely heavily upon their technique.
Any interpretation that causes us to question God's word or robs it of its authority is not genuine study but a work of confusion. I would stay away from any such method.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamander
I will have to say that I don't hold to a dual inspiration ideal, but rather that God inspired all Bibles in any language that hold true to the Originals, the KJB being the Pinnacle of all of them in English.
And yes I think I agree with you on that as well.

Last edited by North Carolina Tentmaker; 08-05-2008 at 07:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-06-2008, 06:23 PM
Askjo Askjo is offline
3,000 Posts Club
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamander
Explain dual inspiration and why it is you think many KJVO's believe this is true, and are wrong,and how it is you don't have the inspired word of God?
We have 2 groups of KJVO in regard of the inspiration. They answer:

1. The KJV is the inspired Word of God.

2. the KJV is the Word of God of God-inspired Hebrew and Greek texts that underlied it.

Any thoughts?

Last edited by Askjo; 08-06-2008 at 06:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:57 AM.


The Fundamental Top 500   The Best Baptist Web Sites at Baptist411.com  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Style Copyright: Wrestling Clique Wrestling Forum
Ad Management plugin by RedTyger
 
 

Web Hosting for BaptistBoard.com is provided by BaptistHost.net