Questions for those holding an extreme KJVO position

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Thermodynamics, Jul 6, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Thermodynamics

    Thermodynamics
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I may I would like to ask you a couple of questions.

    First of all is it your contention that the translators of the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible were wrong when they wrote "The Translators to the Reader?" You will note below that the King James Translators not only did not claim their translation was perfect, but they went so far as to refute that opinion.

    "Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgement not to be so sound in this point. For though whatsoever things are necessary are manifest, as S. Chrysostome111 saith, and as S. Augustine,112 In those things that are plainly set down in the Scriptures, all such matters are found that concern Faith, Hope, and Charity; yet for all that it cannot be dissembled, that partly to exercise and whet our wits, partly to wean the curious from loathing of them for their everywhere plainness, partly also to stir up our devotion to crave the assistance of God's Spirit by prayer, and lastly, that we might be forward to seek aid of our brethren by conference, and never scorn those that be not in all respects so complete as they should be, being to seek in many things ourselves, it hath pleased God in His divine providence here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness, not in doctrinal points that concern salvation, (for in such it hath been vouched that the Scriptures are plain) but in matters of less moment, that fearfulness would better beseem us than confidence, and if we will resolve, to resolve upon modesty with S. Augustine,113 (though not in this same case altogether, yet upon the same ground) Melius est dubitare de occultis, quam litigare de incertis: it is better to make doubt of those things which are secret, than to strive about those things that are uncertain. There be many words in the Scriptures which be never found there but once,114 (having neither brother nor neighbour, as the Hebrews speak) so that we cannot be holpen by conference of places. Again, there be many rare names of certain birds, beasts, and precious stones, &c., concerning which the Hebrews themselves are so divided among themselves for judgement, that they may seem to have defined this or that, rather because they would say something, than because they were sure of that which they said, as S. Hierome somewhere saith of the Septuagint. Now in such a case, doth not a margin do well to admonish the reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident, so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgement of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine115 saith, that variety of translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded. We know that Sixtus Quintus116 expressly forbiddeth that any variety of readings of their vulgar edition should be put in the margin, (which though it be not altogether the same thing to that we have in hand, yet it looketh that way) but we think he hath not all of his own side his favourers for this conceit. They that are wise, had rather have their judgements at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other. If they were sure that their high priest had all laws shut up in his breast, as Paul the Second117 bragged, and that he were as free from error by special privilege as the dictators of Rome were made by law inviolable, it were another matter; then his word were an oracle, his opinion a decision. But the eyes of the world are now open, God be thanked, and have been a great while: they find that he is subject to the same affections118 and infirmities that others be, that his skin in penetrable;119 and therefore so much as he proveth, not as much as he claimeth, they grant and embrace." The Translators to the Reader

    I would also like to ask you if you do not realize that the constant insistence that the Authorized Version is "perfect," "inspired," et cetera is in fact doing more harm to the cause of the Authorized Version than good? Can you not see that your radical claims are driving people away from the AV rather than to it?

    I believe that the AV is by far the best version of the Bible avaliable in English. I would like to see more Christians who have moved to what I consider lesser versions move back to the AV. However, I do realize (as any clear thinking person would) that the AV does contain errors in translation. To insist otherwise and to perform mental gymnastics in an effort to prove it and to then attack those people who see and point out these obvious errors as any honest and logical person should, has an negitive impact not only on those people's preception of you, but also on their opinion of the AV.
     
  2. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    This thread won't last long, especially when one pseudo-inspires the translators words over the very words of God.:laugh:
     
  3. Thermodynamics

    Thermodynamics
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    Likes Received:
    0
    You may be right, but I hope not. I don't know why people can't talk about issues like this withouh fighting.
     
  4. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is one of the better posts I have seen on the subject. No one on here is saying the KJV is not Inspired. I use the KJV for several things, especially reading along in church when the reader or pastor is using the KJV. Looking at it objectively, it seems the fights start from those who trash all other versions. My guess is that 90+% of those who start such threads do not have a clue about Hebrew, Greek, or the original manuscripts.
     
  5. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    I am not what I would consider as an "extreme" KJVO in any stretch of the imagination. In fact, there aren't many of those left around here. They get banned quicker than any single group of posters. Granted, it was their disposition rather than their position that led to their demise.

    That being said, the translators may not have understood that they were being providentially used by God to preserve His Word. It is the doctrine of preservation that causes us to conclude that the KJV is the Word of God for English speaking peoples. The Translators to the Readers is not on the same plane as inspired Scripture. Certainly what they penned for us should be of interest, but not to the degree that it equals the holy Scriptures. You see, their writing came from fallible men, whereas their translation came from an infallible God.
     
  6. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    How is this not a claim for double inspiration that "their translation (the KJV) came from an infallible God."
     
  7. Samuel Owen

    Samuel Owen
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    It all depends on what you call a KJVO person. I am not KJVO, I concede people are going to use other versions. But I consider the KJV the standard, against which all other Bible translations must be compared. If the Bible in question? fails to compare to the standards of the KJV, it cannot be an accurate, trustworthy copy of Gods word.

    As for being the Inspired word of God, it has to be, or at least you should believe it to be. God promised to preserve his word, do we feel he has failed?. Since the original manuscripts were written by the Apostles, inspired men of God, the copies of this word must also be considered inspired.

    Are they 100% accurate, that depends. The Hebrew scribes considered every jot, and tittle had to match the original; or the copy was destroyed. The Hebrew and Greek did not contain the same, or were not as extensive in grammatical punctuations, as English is. So changing from the originals to English, and the subsequent editing for grammatical punctuations that went on until 1769, changed that of the original text (not to mention Hebrew and Greek words do not spell the same as English words). So no you cannot consider the AV text, to be 100% accurate to the original on that basis. But on the basis of accuracy to Gods word 100%. :)
     
    #7 Samuel Owen, Jul 6, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 6, 2009
  8. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where did the KJV tell you to use it as a standard? Or are you admitting that you have a standard of truth outside the KJV that told you to use the KJV?

    This is not true. The Hebrew text is not as uniform as many think it is. Nor is textual criticism nearly the same in Hebrew as in Greek.

    So you are saying that the original was not 100% accurate? Or that two different things can be 100% accurate? Please explain.
     
  9. Samuel Owen

    Samuel Owen
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please don't piddle with what I said, read it in its full context. You just don't pull, partial statements out of context to discuss. That's what politicians do, and we all know what big liars they are.
     
  10. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Therefore, it is not found in the pages of the KJV Bible -- but a theory which all true Christians who own English as their native language must accept lock, stock and barrel.
     
  11. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Mr. Miles Smith's forward is diametrically against the KJVO position. KJVO proponents do not want that forward in the hands of their people.

    Did the NIV come from an infallible God?
     
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I read your statement in its full context. Rather than pick it apart, which I could have done, I asked a few simple questions to elicit an explanation from you about what you believe. Don't insinuate I am a liar. Just answer the questions.
     
  13. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is going on with the thread similar to this about Titus 3:10 and the heretics?
     
  14. Samuel Owen

    Samuel Owen
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    I did not insinuate you were a liar. I said that is the way of Politicians and Lawyers, when trying to trip someone up.

    Now as to what I said, I went over it several times to be sure! it was an accurate reflection of my feelings. And even to someone as stupid as I am, it seemed to be pretty clear.

    So I don't see it needs any further explanation??.
     
  15. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, but you said that what I allegedly did was what politicians do and we know they are liars. That seemed an insinuation.

    It may be an accurate reflection of your feelings, but I am interested in what you believe, how you came to your beliefs, and some of the implications of those beliefs. If all we need are feelings, then the Word matters not anyway.

    So I would appreciate some interaction with the questions I asked in order to clarify in my mind exactly what you believe. I don't want to falsely accuse you or pigeonhole you with something you dont' believe.
     
  16. Samuel Owen

    Samuel Owen
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have you ever walked a road so many times, that you don't want to walk it anymore, because you know where it goes.? Well that's! how I feel about this one.

    As far as that goes, I prefer the KJV Bible, and believe it to be the inspired word of God. As for how you feel about your Bible, well that's up to you.
     
  17. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Samuel, You need to realize that some things you said have some implications that are pretty serious. If you position is simply that prefer the KJV, that is one thing, but some of the things you said leave the door open for more, which is why I asked.
     
  18. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    To equate man-made work as "infallible" or "inspired" or "perfect" is the height of arrogance and lifting the work of man to the level of God.

    God's Words are perfect. He breathed actual words (in Hebrew and Greek) and I am so blessed that we still have them. They were preserved as He promised.

    These inspired perfect God-breathed words may be translated into 7000 languages on earth so that the message of Law and Gospel might be proclaimed.

    NOWHERE did God promise to preserve man's words, translations, or such.

    The AV1611 translators were correct in their preface and realization that there was no "miracle" of God here. It is modern extremists who want to elevate them and their work to the level of God.

    Foolishness.
     
  19. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    I fail to understand why this issue causes such a uproar. You all arguing about the KJV and the other translations ought to thank God that you have anything to read in English. It sounds like a bunch of kindergarten kids. "My version is right, no my version is right." As I pointed out in the thread about Titus 3:10 (which disappeared), why do so many harp on the 1611 version. There were many versions over many years before that. Dr. Bob IMO has this whole issue right. Personally, I use KJV for following readings at church, and either NKJV or NIV for study. That is just me.

    There are countries where people would die for a copy of the Bible period, and here we are ripping each other apart over wording. A real class act.
     
  20. Samuel Owen

    Samuel Owen
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    0
    You ever heard the little saying, my dogs bigger than your dog.? That is what applies to the uproar.

    I don't know? but to have an argument, you have to have two contesting sides. Since I have not contested anything, having only made a simple statement, I see no arguement.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...