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!

Is this use of "bravery" in KJV unusual?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Logos1560, Oct 4, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Well, at least your arguments make sense now. There was no English Bible before 1611. I admire your courage in stating something that is so often implied but not clearly stated.

    Not on this thread, but I would be interested sometime to find out from your perspective when other major languages received God's word.
     
  2. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    In other words anyone who disagrees with our perspective is arguing against God?

    I would have an easier time if you had Bible support for that statement.

    Enough, enough from me. I have done my part in dragging this thread off topic.
     
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I cut & pasted correctly.

    2 Timothy 3:16 in the KJV1611 Edition (electronic
    version from E-sword.com ) says 'instrution".
    Sorry, I cannot be held accountable for errors in
    the KJV. However, I still consider the KJVs
    to be infallable and the Divinely Preserved written
    word of God - Inspired and useful for Divine Instruction
    in the appropriate century after produciton.
    The mistake: 'instrution' instead of 'instruction' also
    exists in the Nelson reprint of the KJV1611 Edition.

    BTW Brother, you misspelled the error.
    The error was 'instrution' but you said 'intrution'.
    Remind me to opt out of thine oopses.
     
    #83 Ed Edwards, Oct 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 15, 2007
  4. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Only this quick answer, since you did ask: Anytime there was a completely and totally harmonious translation would be God inspired.

    Anything else does pit God against himself.
     
  5. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you for pointing out man's fallability, now back to God's infallability.
     
  6. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    When that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part is done away.

    "Bravery" has much more an eloquent meaning when used in it's original meaning.
     
  7. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0

    Let me start by saying that I realise that commentaries on the bible are not the bible itself. Nevertheless, when I find that not one of the nine commentaries I have on 1 Corinthians interprets 1 Corinthians 13.10 as you do, then it seems that I have two options: to use different commentaries :) , or to assume that those I have were all written by heretics and cult members, and I should avoid them like the plague. Here are quotes from the nine on 1 Corinthians 13.10:
    Barnes: Thus, in the full and perfect light of day, the imperfect and feeble light of the stars vanishes. The sense here is, that in heaven—a state of absolute perfection—that which is “in part,” or which is imperfect, shall be lost in superior brightness.

    Calvin: But when will that perfection come? It begins, indeed, at death, for then we put off, along with the body, many infirmities; but it will not be completely manifested until the day of judgment, as we shall hear presently.

    Clarke: The state of eternal blessedness; then that which is in part—that which is imperfect, shall be done away; the imperfect as well as the probationary state shall cease for ever.

    Gill: When perfect knowledge of God, of Christ, and of the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven shall take place; which will not in this life, but in that which is to come.

    Matthew Henry: When the end is once attained, the means will of course be abolished. There will be no need of tongues, and prophecy, and inspired knowledge, in a future life, because then the church will be in a state of perfection, complete both in knowledge and holiness.

    Poole: But when we come to heaven, we shall be in such a state, as nothing shall or can be added to us; then our partial and imperfect knowledge shall be swallowed up in a knowledge perfect and complete.

    Abbot: Shall be done away; that is, the uncertain and imperfect attainments made in this life will be superseded by clear and certain knowledge.

    Family Bible Notes: That which is perfect; the perfect knowledge of heaven. That which is in part; our present imperfect knowledge, with our present imperfect means of gaining it through prophecies, tongues, etc.

    Trapp: As the old slough falls off when the new skin comes on. As a man returns no more to the free school that hath proceeded in the university.


    Seven on the nine explicitly say that the verse refers to the future state, to heaven. Trapp and Abbot are more general in their comments. But none of them takes the verse to refer to a particular translation of the bible.
     
  8. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then by estimation of your post you don't believe the prophecy to have been fulfilled and we cannot have a perfect Bible?

    The Bible is either perfect and complete or not, which is your belief?

    The relative metaphorical examples and idioms presented above concur with that which is perfect/ The Bible, is come, and prophecies and tongues have ceased.

    The remarks about cults and all is extreme. do you mind elaborating on the use of those extreme remarks?

    Thanks for the offerings.
     
  9. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    //Then by estimation of your post you don't believe
    the prophecy to have been fulfilled and we cannot
    have a perfect Bible?//

    Actually you misunderstood David Lamb so bad it will be
    hard to figure out what you mean. But it was
    obvious what Brother David Lamb mean.

    He believes the Bible is perfect AND that
    the prophecy in 1 Corr 13:10 has NOT been fulfilled,
    the exact opposite of what you got out of it. -- but you oopsed.

    Remember, there is a difference between what
    one might believe and what the Bible says.
    To those who are Baptists - we are supposed to
    let each other understand the scripture inside
    our own conversation with the Holy Ghost.
    This precludes us blindly agreeing with anybody else.
    And makes it a waste of your time to use phrases
    like "by estimation of your post you don't believe"
    AND an insult to both Brother David Lamb and the
    rest of the readers of this topic.
    Let Brother David Lamb tell us what he believes or
    does't beleive. You should feel free to say what
    you believe or don't believe (within the guidelines of
    the BB).

    While I'm choosing I'll believe what Brother David Lamb
    said and forget what you said, if anything??

    Speaking of commentaries on 1 cor 13:10, Brother
    David Lamb says: //But none of them takes the verse to refer to a particular translation of the bible.//

    Amen, Brother David Lamb -- Preach it!

     
    #89 Ed Edwards, Oct 16, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 16, 2007
  10. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    I guess 'things that are different are not the same' does not apply in this case.

    :laugh:
     
  11. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    I did not say that; all I meant by my previous post was that I did not agree that 1 Corinthians 13.10 is talking about any translation of the bible. I believe "that which is perfect" means heaven.

    I believe that the scriptures as originally given are perfect, because they were written by holy men as they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

    Sorry, but I cannot agree that what is written in the verses leading up to 1 Corinthians 13.10 were metaphors and idioms. What leads you to think that "when that which is perfect is come" refers to the 1611 English translation?

    I just meant that if you were correct in taking 1 Corinthians 13.10 to refer to the AV/KJV of 1611, that would make all the nine commentators I quoted wrong. If that were so, I would be faced with a choice: 1. Try and find some commentaries that agree with your idea that 1 Corinthians 13.10 to refers to the AV/KJV of 1611, or 2. I would have to assume that Barnes, Abbot, Calvin, Trapp, Matthew Henry and the rest were all heretics. But I am not faced with such a choice, because I don't agree with your understanding of 1 Corinthians 13.10. I assure you I wasn't making "extreme remarks" about anyone.

     
  12. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    The original question--
    The answer--
    The request --
    The response --
    The reinforcement --
    The summary --
    Salamander has interpreted 1 Corinthians 13:10 as a fulfilled prophecy supporting his assertion that the word of God DID NOT exist in English before the publication of "that which is perfect" (the KJV text) because all English translations prior to 1611 were only "in part" the word of God.​

    The unanswered question --
    The forgotten 'gift' --
    How did "knowledge" manifest itself until 1611, and then "vanish away"? (1 Corinthians 13:8)​
     
    #92 franklinmonroe, Oct 17, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 17, 2007
  13. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Never. Nice try though.

    And if you're the Bible critic you say you are, then you will be honest as to what the Scripture refers to as being the words of that day in time's prophets. But I won't expect much to that effect.
     
  14. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    You just said it again.


    Then when did God become imperfect to preserve His word which He promisewd He would do?


    Me neither, but the commentators remarks addressed to the Scripture you offered are eat up with idioms and metaphors. That is what I was referring to, not the Scripture as you would like to think.


    No, they agree with the fact that I Cor 13:10 is directly speaking of the completed word of God then present in the Greek ansd present to day in English, and they used idioms and metaphors to express that.

    I guess I'll have to ask you, do you believe in advanced revelation?
     
  15. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Gotta ask YOU the same Q, Sal...Do YOU believe in advanced revelation? If not, it's hardta be KJVO since we have God's word in TODAY'S English. I think of this as I see my wife coming home from work and taking off her bravery for the resta the day.
     
  16. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    Please forgive me, but I don't understand your comments. Will you clarify for me? Specifically, to which part of my summary (or the question), is your reply "Never"? Maybe it will help you specify if what was cited in your post is broken down --
    1. You never did interpret 1 Corinthians 13:10 as a fulfilled prophecy? or
    2. You never did assert that the word of God DID NOT exist in English before 1611? or
    3. You never did imply that other English translations prior to 1611 were only "in part" the word of God? or
    4. Were you denying (any) two above, or even all three parts of my summary? or
    5. Knowledge never did exist before 1611? or
    6. Knowledge never vanished away?​
     
    #96 franklinmonroe, Oct 17, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 17, 2007
  17. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am glad I wasn't the only one. I thought at first it was the "language difference" between one side of the Atlantic and the other. :)
     
  18. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    God is never deceived neither does He leave all men unsure of life. So I must ask, is the NKJV also this "word of God" as you presume?
     
  19. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll leave you guessing, especially since you're one of those who keep on guessing what the word of God is.
     
  20. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    The answer is that "bravery" as used in KJV text of Isaiah 3:18 is uncommon today, but is a proper and current meaning of the word (it is not considered archaic).

    It seems that "bravery" comes into English by way of the French word braverie, meaning 'finery' (the French word bravoure, meaning 'courage' is spelt similarly). You can perhaps appreciate the overlapping and merging meanings of "bravery" ('courage' and 'finery') in synonyms such as boldness, daring, gallantry, audacity, rashness, defiance, or confidence.

    In the Shakespearean pastorial comedy As You Like It (1599/1600?) the word "bravery" is used in the same KJV-sense in Act II, Scene 7 which is set in the Forest of Arden, these words are spoken by Jaques. This is the original text in modern spelling --
    What woman in the city do I name, (Line 75)
    When that I say the city-woman bears
    The cost of princes on unworthy shoulders?
    Who can come in and say that I mean her,
    When such a one as she such is her neighbour?
    Or what is he of basest function
    That says his bravery is not of my cost,
    Thinking that I mean him, but therein suits
    His folly to the mettle of my speech?
    There then; how then? what then? Let me see wherein
    My tongue hath wrong'd him: if it do him right,
    Then he hath wrong'd himself; if he be free,
    Why then my taxing like a wild-goose flies,
    Unclaim'd of any man. But who comes here?​
    A modern interpretation --
    What woman in the city am I talking about
    when I say that the clothes on a city-woman's unworthy back
    are rich enough to suit a prince?
    Who can say I mean just her
    when all her neighbors are exactly like her?
    And when some lowlife protests
    that his fancy clothes aren't my problem,
    isn't he basically admitting that I'm talking about him?
    Well, then. Tell me how I've wronged him.
    If I was right about him, he's the one who's done wrong.
    If he isn't guilty of the faults I'm talking about,
    well then, my accusations fly by like wild geese,
    whom no one owns, since they don't apply to any man. But who is this?​
     
    #100 franklinmonroe, Oct 17, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 17, 2007
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...