Damnation?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by natters, Aug 9, 2004.

  1. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    The KJV teaches that you can receive "damnation" for resisting appointed authorities (Rom 13:1-2), eating meat while doubting (Rom 14:23), eating and drinking the Lord's supper unworthily (1 Cor 11:29), or if you're a widow under 60 and remarry (1 Tim 5:9-12).

    Most other versions use "judgment" or similar in these passages instead of "damnation".

    Are any/all of these doctrinal errors in the KJV? Any KJV-perfectionism supporters care to comment? What say ye?
     
  2. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    The word "damnation" might have been appropriate in 1611.

    That was then....

    HankD
     
  3. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Natters, we today associate being "damned" with condemnation to Hell. The Elizanethan meaning of the word is broader. To be damned roughly equates to us saying that we are being judged. The Greek context referrs to judgement. However, I don't think that the word difference is a matter of doctrinal error. It's a matter of language evolution.
     
  4. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    ...this is now.

    HankD
     
  5. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would agree with both comments above. But then I wonder: how would KJV-only people argue that using "judgment" instead in these verses (like other versions) would be an error, corrupting God's word? Wouldn't they have to argue that damnation is correct and judgment is incorrect?

    Michelle? RaptureReady? Askjo? I'm curious what you think about this.
     
  6. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    No problem with the word "damnation" in its 1611 sense.
     
  7. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Everyone with a functioning brain realizes that the inspired Greek word might have 4-5 different English words that COULD be used legitimately. Look in a Strongs and see the various ways almost every Greek word IS translated in various NT passages.

    So damnation, which does NOTand DID NOT mean "consigned to an eternal hell".

    Strongs: krima, kree'-mah; from G2919; a decision (the function or the effect, for or against ["crime"]):--avenge, condemned, condemnation, damnation, go to law, judgment.
     
  8. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again, I agree. But would a KJV-only person be OK with changing "damnation" to "judgment" or "condemnation" in these verses? If not, why not?
     
  9. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    They shouldn't because in there KJV 1611 1 Corinthians 11:29 when damnation is used there is an alternate rendering at the bottom of the page "Or, judgement" so there is their own version saying it could be translated judgement.
     
  10. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    DH,

    You're correct, but KJVO's don't accept the margin note for lucifer which reads "or day starre".
     
  11. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good point I guess the translators thoughts don't count.
     
  12. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's OK, since most KJVO's don't think...except to follow Gail & Pete & any other yahoo who toots his horn loud enough to be heard over the din.

    Seriously, it is the choice to be 'wilfully ignorant' that characterizes most KJVOites. When someone shoves their fingers in their ears, shuts their eyes tight, and shouts, "LA-LA-LA-I-CANT-HEAR-YOU-LA-LA-LA!", then you know just what you are dealing with.

    My question is: Why? What are they afraid of? That they may find out that they are wrong? That they may come to realize that they have bought into a lie? That they may be bored to sleep?

    I just cannot understand anyone choosing to remain in ignorance. But, then, once they have heard what really is and ain't, you don't call it ignorance, do ya?

    In Christ,
    Trotter
     
  13. Lacy Evans

    Lacy Evans
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,364
    Likes Received:
    0
    A whale is a fish.

    Lacy
     
  14. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    A lucifer is a morning star. ;)

    Brian
     
  15. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
  16. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    You don't live in 1611.
    You live in 2004. Your 1611 talk is not the
    talk of 2004.

    Consider FUNDAMENTALIST.
    From 1920-1980 it meant a member of a
    protestant movement that stressed the
    basics of the Bible in a literal way.
    1980-1990 it mean any member of any
    book Religion (usually Christian, Muslim,
    or Jewish) who stuck to the main
    fundamentals of their religion.
    1990-2004 it means BIGOT, especially one
    who interperts their religious book
    literally.
     
  17. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I figured it out. Here is my cut:

    ----------------------------
    The fundamentals of fundamentalism:

    1. the inspiration and infallibility of scripture
    2. the deity of Christ (including His virgin birth)
    3. the substitutionary atonement of Christ's death
    4. the literal resurrrection of Christ from the dead
    5. the literal return of Christ in the Second Advent

    The fundamentals of anti-fundamentalism
    (these are the noisy ones called "fundies"):

    1. Anti-Modern Version (KJBO = King James Bible Only)
    2. Anti-education
    3. Anti-success
    4. Anti-women pants on women
    5. Anti-Semetic

    Typical statements of the anti-fundamentalist called
    by the world "fundies":

    1. The KJB replaces the origial language manuscripts
    as being God's word
    2. Calling "seminary": "cemetery"
    3. Billy Grahmn sold himself to the Devil
    4. (this is generic for all cult-like rules of behavior;
    all majoring on minors)
    5. Jews killed Christ

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    [​IMG] Granny [​IMG]

    I'm still trying to find definite answers to WHEN the KJV revisions began REMOVING the translator's notes, thereby implying that there were no other choices of words than those in the text.
     
  19. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    A conversation is a lifestyle.
    An ouch is a brooch.
    A morning star is either Jesus, or something He gives the believer.
     
  20. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    And why not today? Damnation is still in existence today, judgement has not yet occurred.
     

Share This Page

Loading...