Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by peperoni123, Dec 6, 2006.
And welcome to the board. Please introduce yourself!
To steal a phrase from C4K:
Here we go 'round the mulberry bush again.
Hey, why don't we try something new and only respond in links! LOL!! Atleast that could make it interesting!!
My name is Justin. I am 18. I am an Independant Fundamental Baptist. I only use the KJV. I faithfully attend church and surrendered to preach the gospel last year. I am going to Faithway Baptist College next year to take a four year course to be a pastor.
Since you are brand new I will let your post stand until the personal attacks start.
I am grateful that you are a young man with a desire to serve the Lord. Please be aware however that this issue has been debated ad infinitum on this board. There are godly men on both sides of this issue, some of whom are going to disagree with you.
For those who do, may I ask that you understand that we are dealing with a young man here, who, I am sure, has the right heart. Let's be careful not to do anything to dampen his spirit. Just be careful how you deal with this young man please.
VERY cool! Nice to 'meet' you, Justin!! I'm Ann and am much older than you (LOL) - my oldest child is 16. I'm an independent Baptist minister's wife and we attend Northport Baptist Church on Long Island (www.nbc.org). You'll meet KJVO people here and those who are not (I'm obviously of the not side), and you'll also find strong feelings on both sides. Please do a search on KJV and you'll see lots of threads on this (thus ccrobinsons's comments), and you'll get an idea of how long a thread this will end up being! LOL!!
Again, nice to 'meet' you.
Welcome to the BaptistBoard Justin, anybody that likes pepperoni is alright by me.
Study to shew thyself approved.
Way to step in with both feet. But to quote a source with Marrs, Ruckman and Riplinger as primary sources wont win you any debates when it comes to using valid, logical, sound or biblical sources.
Anyway welcome to the BB--I fear your stay here will not be long unless you take the time to really research your statements and not regurgitate the garbage of those who are intellectually, logically and theologically bankrupt.
PS--my reply is not a slam of you. It is given as an encouragement to spend some time really studying and using reliable sources. Blessing as you minister in the name of Jesus and not get caught up in non issues.
This is the kind of statement I am asking regular posters not to make in this thread. Here is a chance for godly instruction of a young man. Please let us do so in a spirit of teaching a younger man.
I hope posters on both sides of the issue can help this young man in a way which demonstrates to him how men of God can differ and still respect each other.
Unfortunately we've already defused any meaningful argument
at that site as well as many others. :tonofbricks:
Which King James Version do you use?
Here is a sample test:
1. Ruth III:15d (KJV1611):
... and he went into the citie.
2. Ruth 3:15 (KJV1769):
... and she went into the city.
3. Ruth 3:15 (KJV1873):
... and he went into the city.
It was not my intention to cast any dispersions on the young man who wrote the OP. It was my intention to strongly state the importance of where one finds their source material. If I went into a class with those individuals as sources for a paper on Bible translations, the professor would rip the paper to shreds. So if that kind of warning is inappropriate, I will apologize. I just hope this young minister gets the kind of theological training that instructes him to use valid sources.
Here is a sample quote from the link you posted:
Now, you need to read this kind of statement carefully and think logically.
Can a perfect Bible have errors? The writers of this link on one hand claim the Bible is perfect, yet here say it had errors. Can it be perfect and have errors?
These are the kinds of issues you need to think through while drawing your own conclusions on this explosivel issue.
BTW Toney. thanks for your comments. I just want us to try and and avoid inflammatory language considering the youth of the author of the OP.
I understand Roger and will I stay within that spirit. Thank you for your leadership here.
I will deal with another statement for you to consider...
FABLE: The King James Bible cannot be infallible because the translators were only men, and all men are sinners. The human element prevents the KJV from being infallible.
FACT: If this is true, then even the ORIGINAL AUTOGRAPHS in Hebrew and Greek were not infallible, because they too were penned by men!
The fact of the matter is that the King James translators were only INSTRUMENTS of preservation (which is exactly what they called themselves in the Dedicatory to the A.V. 1611) God has always been the Divine Preserver of His word (Psa. 12:6-7), but He has used men as tools and instruments of preservation, just as He uses men to teach and preach His words. When men humbly yield themselves to the will of God, God can use them to accomplish His will (Rom. 12:1 2), and this is precisely what happened between 1604 and 1611.
While I agree with what is being said here about the KJV being infallible, the author of this statement is not willing to use the same standard or logic when dealing with other translations besides the KJV. The same thing they say about the KJV can be said about all valid translations.
Do you use only the KJV by PERSONAL PREFERENCE, or by what you read from the link you posted?
Please check out the link Annsni posted in the 2nd post of this thread.
Are you aware Justin that the KJV translating team included cross references to the Apocrypha in the marginal notes and included in their suggested daily readings?
One thing I have to say about many of the KJV only sites is that they want every translation to use the exact words that the KJV uses when it uses them. When they say that a word is removed, many times it's in the same sentence or in the very next - having the same meaning as the KJV. Just because it's not in verse 2 doesn't mean that the word in verse 3 is wrong. Remember that the originals didn't have chapter and verses. I did a study on that stuff once (on another board where we had someone who was a venimous KJVOer) and that's what I found - if they read the PASSAGE, then they'd see that those sites are actually wrong.
I really enjoy going through the site I posted in the 2nd post. I think the guy has some great info.
I hate to leave this discussion, but it is bedtime on "this side of the pond" .
Could you share some of your own views with us please Justin instead of what you have found in other links.
Your youthful perspective may help some of us "old guys" to understand where you are coming from.
Welcome, Justin. I praise God you have been called. Be ready to give an answer!