For KJBOOs: how Version Onlyist was Jesus?

Let's also remember the differences in Acts 8 and Isaiah 53 from which Acts 8 quotes as being read by the Ethiopian official and Philip. Now, did Philip say, "No wonder ya don't understand it, chum-You got one of dem new versions there and it don't exalt God like de old one do."

"Well, today's yer lucky day-I got a copy a de OLD Isaiah. So ya cain't read de 800-yr-old Hebrew? Never fear, ME is here, ta read it & translate it. Ya don't really need them Scriptures in YER language-ya allus got peoples like ME ta explain dem! So heave dat bogus scroll in de crick over dere & I'll read de REAL scriptures to ya!"

 

Still going in cirles, eh, Cranston?

 

QS, Why don't you explain why Jesus read from a version of Isaiah that isn't the same as the one used to make the KJV translation of Isaiah.

Remember, the Bible (KJB) says that Jesus was reading from the scroll.

 

The author of anything written has the right to ADD or make changes as He deems fit.

Take into consideration Matt 5:31-33,and Mark 10:11,Jesus ADDED to Duetoronomy 24:1...


Are you going to "yeah,but...." that one away too?

 

Newp! That would be the Onlyist who makes statements he/she can't prove.

 

The author of anything written has the right to ADD or make changes as He deems fit.

Take into consideration Matt 5:31-33,and Mark 10:11,Jesus ADDED to Duetoronomy 24:1...


Are you going to "yeah,but...." that one away too? </font>[/QUOTE]YERP!!

YEAH, BUT...

Your argument was torpedoed years ago, by sumpin' like this:

In Luke 4, Jesus was reading/speaking to a skeptical crowd who did NOT believe He was God, as is evident from the context.(His family's right here among us!)Had He not read from the scroll VERBATIM, the crowd would've gone ballistic. There's not one peep of Scripture indicating He added to that written Scripture, as there is in Jeremiah after the king destroyed the first copy.

And of course your point does NOT address the differences between Acts 8 & Isaiah 53.

 

I hold to the same exact view that Jesus did when He was on this earth. He was, and I am an "accurate representation of the originals onlyist."

I do not believe for one minute that Jesus would quote/read something as Scripture that was not, in fact, an accurate representation of the originals.

If you do a little searching, there was a thread regarding the Luke 4/Isaiah 61 question a while back. I'd have to dig up the answer I gave, but I do remember that it was the right one.

 

Pastor Bob, I remember Will Kinney's posting some possibilities, but they were more excuses than anything. I, too, don't believe Jesus would read aloud anything BUT Scripture from what was already established as Scripture. After all He reminds us that Scripture cannot be broken.

There's simply no legitimate denial that Jesus was reading from another version of isaiah besides that which is translated into our Bibles. Same with Philip in Acts 8. This is simply more empirical evidence against KJVO. Unlike the Onlyists, WE can support our assertions.

 

I believe Jesus was reading from Isaiah and that the words He read are accurately translated into the Bible I use.

In Jesus' day, there were no chapter or verse divisions. The portions that He read from that day came from what we know as Isaiah 61:1 and Isaiah 42:7. When Jesus was reading from the scroll that day, these two portions of Scripture may have been together or close enough for Jesus to read them together.

In short, just because they are in one verse in our English Bible doesn't mean that was the way it was written by Isaiah. To arrive at the conclusion that it had to be another version is a rush to judgment IMHO.

 

KJBOO? Is that the ghost of a king james bible onlyist?
What's the last o stand for?
Gina