John 14:6

God placed His word originally in Hebrew, Aramaic, & Greek for the simple reason that those were the languages He'd chosen for the people He'd chosen as His special people-the Israelites. From them, He chose the Jews to be the earthly people of Jesus(Gen.49:10), and through whom to present His oracles.(Romans 3:2) Nowhere does God exalt these languages above any other. But we must respect His decision, and I thank Him for allowing people such as Dr. Bob to understand these languages better than most of the rest of us.

Like it or not, Onlyists, those are the languages in which we have God's words passed down to us for translation into our everyday languages, and THEY GOVERN THE TRANSLATIONS, not vice versa. They are the Potter's tools, & the translations are the products.

 

Michelle,

Your husband may have a high I.Q. but he knows absolutely nothing about the study of Biblical languages and the people who study them. The translators of the King James translation were severely handicapped. There were no comprehensive concordances of the Bible in those days, nothing even close to one. There were only a few, brief Greek grammars and lexicons, and the translators of the KJV didn’t even know what dialect the Greek N.T. was written in. Compared to modern day language scholars they were still in the early years of grammar school.

I suggest that you encourage your husband to check into this for himself. I he does, he will discover that many of the brightest and most educated men alive today find the Bible to be so fascinating that they have devoted their very lives to the study of it. Who knows, Albert may come to respect these men and their love for the Bible so much that he will get saved himself.

 

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Dr. Bob,

Thank you very much for your prayers for my husband! I really appreciate your kind thoughts for him. Sorry I brought it up on these threads for this topic. I don't really know why I mentioned it. Now I am glad that I did.

Thank you all very much for answering my question. I was only curious.

craigbythesea, I don't think my husband will check into any languages anytime soon, but I appreciated your ending comments, and hope that he will in some way or another. And by the way, on one of the other threads, you gave me quite a few names. Please know that I was in no way negating study in greek or greek history of languages in that post. I was just speaking to Scott from the heart as a christian sister. I meant nothing more by it than what I said. I know it appeared that it was that way, but I honestly meant it from the heart, and said what I thought God would desire me to say to him. I hope you understand.

Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Michelle

When I read posts by Christians who slam every translation of the Bible other than the KJV, and along with them the Bible scholars who made them possible, and yet know nothing whatsoever about the subject, I hurt inside.

I have here in my library about 800 exegetical commentaries on the books of the Old and New Testaments written by scholars who have spent very many years studying the Bible in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin and German, and in some cases Syriac, Ethiopic, and Coptic. I also have about 200 expositional commentaries on the books of the Old and New Testaments written by authors who have spent very many years studying the Bible in English. And there are thousands more that I do not have, largely because they are terribly expensive. What you and many others do not understand is that very much of the scholarship that went into the writing of these books is reflected in the best of the contemporary translations of the Bible. The translators of the KJV certainly would have made use of this material had it been available to them, but it was not. As recently as the 1930’s and 1950’s, very important Biblical data was for the first time made available to translators of the Bible.

"In 1930-31 Chester Beatty purchased papyri containing parts of the Old and New Testaments. About the same time the University of Michigan purchased some fragments from the same codex. Sir Frederick Kenyon of the British Museum published the Chester Beatty papyri in five volumes from 1933-36. Henry Sanders of the University of Michigan published their papyri. Together there is almost a complete copy of the epistles of Paul dating to about 200 AD. The Gospels and Acts are known as p45, the Pauline epistles as p46, and Revelation as p47." (Institute for Biblical & Scientific Studies)

"In the early 1950's Martin Bodmer obtained 22 papyri in Egypt. They are longer in length and better quality than the Chester Beatty papyri. They contain segments of the Old and New Testaments, early Christian literature, and Homer. The most important ones for New Testament studies are p66 (John), p72 (I&2 Peter, and Jude), p74 (Acts and the General Epistles), and p75 (Luke and John). The oldest, p66 dates to about 200 AD." (Institute for Biblical & Scientific Studies)

 

Peace and love to you all in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour!

Craigbythesea,

Do you live by the sea? I gather you do because of your postname. I was just wondering. Pleasant weather there? It is getting nicer here, but raining today - which I sometimes like.

Thank you for the above information. I appreciate it. You are correct, that I know very little about languages and manuscripts. I am just a christian who loves the Lord Jesus Christ and his word of truth very much, for He is my life, and his word is my nourishment and where I get to know him.

I do not have a problem with scholars, and people who study these things and I am sorry I hurt you, I in no way meant to do this at all. I do question and do not trust the methods/manuscripts of those who are doing the translations, based upon what is evidenced with the modern versions taking verses out/ or adding them in that they are not in the KJV. I realize many manuscripts have been found since the KJV, but if they don't agree with the recieved text which underlines the KJV, and Bibles previous to this, then they are not God's word. God has promised to preserve his word forever, so if these manuscripts show contradictions, or changes from those things that have been long accepted within the churches, they should not even be considered. Ecspecially living in these apostate times, what are the chances of possible corruptions? It is not wise to trust all manuscripts absolutely, without considering that Satan also exists, and is out there trying to decieve God's people. What better way for him to do this, than to change God's word? or make us question it? We see he did this in the very beginning and decieved Eve, and we all know what came of that. I do not ever want to be deceived again, and I know and can trust the KJV as it has withstood the test of time, and has brought about many revivals. I can't say the same for the modern versions, although they have not been around as long. All I see is confusion and God is not the author of confusion. The MV camp blames those who trust the KJV, and the KJV blames the MV camp for this confusion. All I know, is that I trust what God has used for his english speaking people these past 400 years, and I will not question or doubt it, and I don't like having to. Reading the mv's compared to the KJV, would put doubts in my mind, which one is correct, and I do not need the confusion, and I don't think others do either.

Please don't take my statements and beliefs as an attack on you personally, or anyone else. That is absolutely not my intention, nor in my heart. I do not believe, nor will I ever say that those who use the modern versions are not saved. I also understand that it is taken this way, and I am really sorry for that. But I cannot compromise my beliefs on something so vital to our christian faith. You might also say the same. I can understand that. I am not out to win an argument, I really am not. I am only sharing with you what I believe, and see, and try to convince, but that is all I can do. I am not here to tell anyone you must use the KJV. The Lord gave us the ability to be able to choose, and He doesn't force us to do things we do not want. I hope that you can better understand me.

May the Lord richly bless you.

love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

My next door neighbor’s cat knows more about breeding dogs than I do, and for me to post in a thread about breeding dogs would be, to say the least, inappropriate. Just because I am crazy about my Siberian Husky would not justify my posting about Alaskan Wolf hounds when I haven’t even seen one up close. And for me to say that Siberian Huskies are real dogs, and French Poodles are probably not, but rather the result of one of Satan’s tricks, would be very much over the edge. Sure, I have read a few things about dogs, and I know my Siberian Husky from cover to cover, but I do not have the necessary knowledge to post anything instructive about dogs.

But, since I am writing about dogs, I would like to share something really cool about a dog that fascinated me. I was down on a beach one breezy afternoon where dogs are allowed to run and play without being leashed. And there was this dog there playing with a Frisbee. The dog’s owner (I assume) was throwing the Frisbee into the wind, and the dog would stand and watch the Frisbee for a few seconds, do the calculus in his head, and run out to catch the Frisbee at the place the dog calculated the Frisbee would descend to the appropriate elevation for him to catch it. I watched for about a half hour, and the dog’s calculations were correct every time, and he never failed to catch the Frisbee.

That dog knew more about advanced calculus, physics, and meteorology than I even will, and I don’t plan on posting in a calculus, physics, and meteorology thread on this or any other message board. Well, that is not 100% true—I did post a message once on quantum mechanics in a time travel thread on another message board.

Now that dog, however, probably should do some posting on some message boards. He appeared to me to be eminently qualified.

 

Very nice, craigbythesea.
But as I understand it, KJVO's reject modern versions because of the many footnotes in them that effectively is saying, "you know, we can't really say the Bible is accurate because some versions have this and some that and some scholars say that this or that scripture is not found in this or that text."

Now, I am not a KJVO but a KJV Preferred person, and the reason I prefer a KJV is because back in those days I was active in discipling my thinking was to help the person I was discipling get to spiritual maturity first before exposing him to the "other" side of Christianity with its modern scholars and modern translations.

You know. Get him/her to understand and trust that God's Word is absolutely true before exposing him to those who may cast or plant doubts in his/her mind. Get him to know his dog well, and understand that not all dogs are the same in temperament and personality, before exposing him/her to other dogs. A German Shepherd is a dog. Some people want, some people need, a German Shepherd, some people want, some people need a French Poodle, which is also a dog, but basically a companion dog.

Modern versions are okay for me, as far as clarifying certain passages in the KJV goes, and I will not go to the extreme that KJVO's go in refusing to fellowship with those who use modern versions, or even enter a church where the KJV is not used in the pulpit.

 

Precepts,

What do you suppose is the national language in Greece today? It is Greek! Greek is not a dead language and it has been preserved over the past 2,000 years much better than English has been preserved over past the 1,000 years. Modern day Greeks can easily read Koine Greek from the first century, but can you read anything in English that was written even 1200 years ago?

I have several contemporary Greek New Testaments and I will send you one if you will promise to read it and compare it word for word with the Koine Greek New Testament.

The same applies to the Old Testament. The Biblical languages are Hebrew and Greek, and both of these languages have been preserved by God much better than what man has been able to do with English. The English language is changing so rapidly that in order for an English translation of the Bible to be written in current English idiom, it is necessary to revise it every 30 or 40 years. That is not at all the case with Hebrew and Greek.

Seminaries all over the world study the Bible in Hebrew and Greek, not in English! The only two universal languages for Bible study are Hebrew and Greek. In the world of Bible study, English is very common, so is German, and both languages are very helpful, but Hebrew and Greek are essential. </font>[/QUOTE]Many years ago I had a roomate from Greece. He was a new believer and asked to see a Greek New Testament that I had. He was able to read it slowly. He compared it to us reading old English. I found it interesting as he told me about the modern day culture and language.

 

Precepts,

Again, another personal attack on a brother. Why can't this stop. Beware of the "Raca" statement. Read your KJV in Matthew 5:22 and maybe you will heed Jesus' words and restrain yourself.

Bro Tony

 

I guess for some people "good-bye" doesn't mean GOOD-BYE

 

Precepts literally doesn't understand that he often makes the same attacks that he points out to other people. It's the whole splinter/log thing, and it's very sad. I'm glad to see that so many other people recognize this as well.

 

If the shoe fits wear it Precepts. .....I see your vanity outweighs rationality. Thanx qs for being the #1 poster on the BB, in my view, when it comes to making assinine statements

 

Scott, you are a genius (b/c you agree w/ me )