Real and perceived reasons

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Alcott, Jun 6, 2003.

?

If you prefer the KJV (<i>exclusively</i> or not), what are your reasons?

  1. Faith in the perseverance of the Word

    30.8%
  2. Influence of church, family, or friends

    2.6%
  3. Doctrinal agreement

    2.6%
  4. Language style

    2.6%
  5. Rightly dividing the biblical manuscripts

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. Tradition

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. Standing of those who authorized the translation

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  8. Special spiritual revelation

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  9. Understandability of language

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  10. Superior accuracy

    5.1%
  11. Other

    56.4%
  12. No answer; I am MV-preferred

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Alcott

    Alcott
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,456
    Likes Received:
    93
    Basically, this poll asks: What are the reasons for your position on KJV/MV, and what do you perceive as the reasons for the opposite view?
     
  2. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just for fun, how are we to delineate between "language style" and "understandablily of language?"
     
  3. Alcott

    Alcott
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,456
    Likes Received:
    93
    I only know how to explain that by examples...

    Psalm 37:4 (KJV)-- Delight thyself also in the LORD: and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart.

    Psalm 37:4 (NASB)-- Delight yourself in the LORD; And He will give you the desires of your heart.

    In the above example, there is no conflict about meaning; only in "style"-- the KJV type of Elizabethan English and the NASB's modern English.

    I Thessalonians 4:15 (KJV)-- For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

    I Thessalonians 4:15 (NASB)-- For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.

    In this example, the 'styles' do not differ, but the archaic meaning of the word "prevent" may lead one unfamiliar with Elizabethan English to conclude 'we who are alive can't stop them,' where it means 'we who are alive will not go before them.' So this is not style of language, but understandibility of language.

    Was that enough "fun?" ;)
     
  4. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Alcott - My favorite phrase centered on a question asked to our senior bible class in a ifb college (where every student took 30 credits in bible). What did Paul do at Syracuse?

    Acts 28:12 KJV1769 "And landing at Syracuse, we tarried there three days. And from thence we fetched a compass, and came to Rhegium: and after one day the south wind blew, and we came the next day to Puteoli:"

    Most popular answer? Stayed 3 days, got a compass, then sailed on to Rhegium.

    Now this is NO FAULT of the version and no "wrong" translation. Just style of language and understanding. Fetched a compass makes "compass" sound like a noun.

    BTW, the correct answer? Stayed 3 days, then sailed around the island (compassed as a verb) to Rhegium.

    Oh, MV translate the same text:

    NIV "We put in at Syracuse and stayed there three days. From there we set sail and arrived at Rhegium." Not particularly good translation, either.

    NASB "And after we put in at Syracuse, we stayed there for three days. And from there we sailed around and arrived at Rhegium." More accurate translation.
     
  5. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    So how did they get there w/o a compass? :rolleyes:
     
  6. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since when does the word "prevent" NOT mean "precede"?

    Me thinkest thou appliest thou onliest preference as the demeanor here.

    The problem with the nasb rendering is that the wording "until the coming of the Lord" possibly includes everyone whether saved or not. But the wording according to the Bible,"unto the coming of the Lord" is perfectly clear that those who are alive and remain are anticipating the Lord's return, and also are dedicated "unto" the Lord awaiting His return. "Until" indicates time, "unto" indicates dedication.

    Big difference between "unto" and "until" wouldn't you say? No "difference" in "prevent" and "precede" though.

    English IS a funny language, but IS relatively simple when one has the use of a dictionary.

    In the case of Psalm 37, I'm afraid you overlook the preceding/preventing "Fret not" and "Trust" as in conjunction with "Delight" by that word "also" found in the Bible.

    Verse 4 is indicative of "delight" being the "offspring" of "trust in the LORD" and "fretting not because of evil doers".

    Ever seen anyone who is "fretting" all the time, therefore failing to be "trusting" in the LORD, having delight? nasb is too vague, KJB is clear.

    [ June 09, 2003, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: Istherenotacause ]
     
  7. Pastor Larry

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

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since we became users of modern English. If you prevent your car from rolling down the hill by setting the brake, are you seriously trying to tell us that you will roll down the hill before it??? Did you even think before you said something like this? It doesn't appear that way. It appears that you have only one goal -- defend your position regardless of the truth that is put forth.

    You are right that you could use a dictionary but you will see many different definitions for prevent and the one you need will likely not be the first one and with more than one you will need something to see which one is the right one. For that you will have to look at the Greek word and when you do that you will find out that the NASB is right and clear. It is you are is wrong.


    Everytime I think I have heard it all, I get amazed once again. If you wrote this with a straight face you deserve many accolades. This is so ludicrous it is remarkable. It has to be a joke. There is no way that anyone says something like this seriously.

    The text is talking about we are who alive and remain when the Lord comes back. It has nothing to do with dedication. It simply states that the believers who are on earth when Christ returns will not go before those who have died. Those who have died will rise first and "then" we will follow. Simply reading the text would have saved you from making this statement.

    No difference in the first; big difference in the second.

    At some point, we have to look at the issues of fundamental honesty. When someone will twist the word of God in such a fashion, what can we say? Can we really just pretend like "you're okay; I'm okay"? I don't think so. This type of flat out untruthfulness must stop. Your position on prevent/precede is technically right but it uses prevent in a way that it is never used in modern society. That is why it is not the best translation. However, your position on unto/until is far from truth; it is not even reasonable and you cannot even stretch a dictionary to back you up.
     
  8. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Celestial navigation. The compass was not invented for another 1400 years or so.
     
  9. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here's a link to keep you from making a fool of yourself again:

    http://dictionary.reference.com/

    One of the primary definitions for "unto" is "until". The context of the passage demands this definition. Whichever word is used, it means time.
     
  10. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Methinks thou makest thy "demand" w/o defining "to" which is "unto" in all dictionaries EXCEPTING your "all too infallable website"

    "Unto" is NOT "until" in the context, it is "to" by definition and NOT "until" which always denotes a future time.

    I maybe a "fool" in your sight, certainly an inferior "to" most men, but never "until" most men.

    Oh, and I just love your "snap" judgement made without due course of study.

    IOW, look up the word "to".

    I go "to" the Lord in prayer for wisdom sought, but am led "unto" wisdom that He offers by simple asking and He upbraideth not, a good example to follow huh?

    I can go "to" the store, w/o ever following, but I can NOT go "unto" the store unless I follow. I'll never go "until" the store, because time has no relevence to my following the example to follow and I will in no wise follow yours. :rolleyes:
     
  11. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    Celestial navigation. The compass was not invented for another 1400 years or so. </font>[/QUOTE]Celestial navigation is impossible without incorporating the use of some sort of "compass", whether it be the naked eye or not, thus a "compass" either is used by the navigator to transcribe the details of the positioning of the stars through the use of a transit. Whether that "transit" being human or a sort of mechanical device. Knowing the positions of the celestial bodies in concordance with the region allows one the ability to become that compass to determine ones location and predetermining a selected path.

    IOW, the ship NEVER could navigate those waters w/o incorporating a "compass" to achieve the location desired.
     
  12. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Methinks I will trust several dictionaries more than I trust you as they have demonstrated their objective reliability while you have shown yourself to be ruled by subjective presuppositions.

    Is the rapture a future event or is it a place we can go to? If it is a place then by all means show the way.

    Oh, and I just love your "snap" judgments made irrespective of fact but wholly a function of what you wish to be true.

    Denoting a place or state of being.
    Denoting a condition.

    Denoting a place and a state of being.
    No. You would not go "until" the store. You would remain "until" you went to the store.

    You certainly don't have to follow my example. I would expect you to follow the context of scripture though without compressing it into your preconceived mold.
     
  13. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Istherenotacause said:

    Celestial navigation is impossible without incorporating the use of some sort of "compass", whether it be the naked eye or not, thus a "compass" either is used by the navigator to transcribe the details of the positioning of the stars through the use of a transit.

    Translation: If the KJV says they "fetched a compass," then it means they navigated with a compass, provided you define a "compass" as "the naked eye" or "the use of a transit."

    In other words, the KJV-onlyists reserve the right to say that a compass isn't really a compass.

    A clear case of fallacious reasoning: specifically, "special pleading."
     
  14. Pastor Larry

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

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    The word you should be looking up is the word "eis" because that is the word God used. The word in its context is clearly used with reference to time. Notice the "then" that follows it. The rapture in discussion is a future event. The best translation is probably "at" or "till." The point is that there are some who will be alive when Christ returns and they will not go before (precede) those who are dead in Christ. But the dead in Christ will rise first (reference to time) and then (reference to time) we who are alive and remain will be caught up to meet them.

    I cannot even believe this is being discussed. This so far-fetched and ludicrous it doesn't even deserve the bandwidth used.
     
  15. Faith Fact Feeling

    Faith Fact Feeling
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    How about Psalms 39:5,

    *Behold, thou hast made my days as an handbreadth; and mine age is as nothing before thee: verily every man at his best state is altogether vanity. KJV

    *You have made my days a mere handbreadth; the span of my years is as nothing before you. Each man's life is but a breath. NIV

    *"Behold, You have made my days as handbreadths, And my lifetime as nothing in Your sight; Surely every man at his best is a mere breath. NASU

    Are you MVrs altogether vanity at your best state? Which verse is the most “understandable”?

    Or say Ephesians 5:1,

    *Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; KJV

    *Be imitators of God, therefore, as dearly loved children NIV

    *Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children; NASU

    Are you an imitation Christian? Where’s the up-to-date language? Is this the language style you MVrs prefer? Doesn’t imitate convey “fake” or “counterfeit” in the modern idiom? Follower connotates heart knowledge, or one that has internalized the belief system of another. The biggest imitator of Christ is the devil.

    As I have seen time and time again, MVs have watered down and distorted the words of God. I’ll read a verse in the KJB and think wow, that’ll preach (I am a preacher BTW). Then I look in the MVs like the NIV and NASB and find the verse completely butchered. Many of the powerful verses used in preaching during the Great Awakening have been utterly butchered in the MVs, for language understandability’s sake of course.

    Funny how people from the most educated time in America’s history cannot understand the KJB, but our predecessors did. In fact, they did well enough to add the Great Awakening and formulation of the fundamentals of the faith to their vitae. Interesting.

    It’s also interesting how these new Bibles were originally marketed as “easier to read”. They just left out the little insignificant fact that they changed the Greek NT to the tune of 10,000 places. Just a minor point I guess. I wonder how many would have bought these new Bibles if that was touted as loudly as readability, huh? Was this just their language style (not telling the whole truth)?

    Here are two of literally thousands of key verses in the Bible whose “language style” if you will, is far superior to that of MVs. “Compass” compared to “imitator” is, well, straining at a gnat.
     
  16. Pastor Larry

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

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    What do you think "vanity" is??? The point of the verse is that man's life is but a breath, which is very short. The context of the verse is clear in the MVs. The KJV makes it confusing as your attempt here has shown.

    Another great example of nothing. The word imitate means to act like. It can be good or bad. Here, the context is clearly good. We are to imitate God. It is interesting that you bring this up. There is a clear word in Greek for "follow" and it is used quite frequently. For instance, Jesus told his disciples to "follow" him. That word is not used here. The word used here is mimetai, which means to imitate. Had Paul wanted to say "follow," he could have done so. But he didn't. He said "imitate."

    Then why don't you share these verses here with us. Many times this claim has been made. Every single time it has failed. Perhaps you have some new information you would like to share with us.

    What is interesting is that you don't understand the reason for this. The reason is not education; it is language change.

    Another example of an error in the KJV. This verse mistranslates the word. It is to strain "out" a gnat.
     
  17. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    No Larry, Jesus was talking about grunting heavily and squinting your eyes when you look at a gnat. Come on man, you should know this stuff.
     
  18. Alcott

    Alcott
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,456
    Likes Received:
    93
    Going by the way the poll respondants identified their own position...

    The 2 leading reasons KJV proponents prefer the KJV: "Faith in the perseverance of the Word" (85%) and "Superior Accuracy" (77%).

    The 2 leading reasons MV proponents think KJV proponents prefer KJV: "Tradition" (84%) and "Influence of church, family, or friends" (74%).

    The 2 leading reasons MV proponents prefer the MV's: "Superior Accuracy" (100%) and "Understandability of language" (74%).

    The 2 leading reasons KJV proponents think MV proponents prefer the MV's: "Influence of church, family, or friends" (69%) and "Language style" (62%).

    While neither 'side' is monolithic in their approach to this issue, MV-preferreds are a little more solidly behind the leading answers.

    Neither side seems to put much trust in the others' given reasons, obviously, since these answers are different for 'Reasons I prefer ... compared to the opposition's 'Reasons I think they prefer ... '

    The greatest difference is in the answer, "Tradition." No KJV-preferreds say that is one of their reasons for preferring the KJV, but 84% of MV-preferred think that is a reason. A fairly close 2nd (in 'greatest difference') or either group is in the answer "Influence of church, family, or friends."

    Perhaps the chief conclusion to be drawn from this poll is that this is such an emotionally-charged issue that we (all who hold one position or the other) are quite unobjective about both our own position and that of the opposition. Denying that 'tradition' and 'influence of church, family, and friends' has had a significant part of forming our position is largely denying reality; especially since we can see that in those who hold the opposing view.
     
  19. Istherenotacause

    Istherenotacause
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2003
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    I sure am glad I don't have to rely on a poll to KNOW what the Word of God is! KJB 1611 AV
     
  20. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    What *do* you rely on to KNOW what the word of God is (KJB 1611 AV)?
     

Share This Page

Loading...