The Bible Debate

Nice to have you back, Thumper, welcome!

What we have has been preserved as God would have it.

Rob

 

Good post and well reasoned.

However, what gives mortal man the right to pick which translation is 'perfect' if there is one? Also, is that one 'perfect' translation to become the basis for all translation into other languages?

It would seem to be that man picking one translation to be the perfect one would be akin to every man doing that which is right in his own eyes since God's word itself never specifies which translation is the perfect one.

My problem with the Psalm 12v6-7 issue is that even if we accept for argument's sake that it does refer to the words (This thread will not be allowed to turn into the same old fight over that passage) it does say to 'this generation.' That would imply that one generation should look for its own perfect translation and not have to seek a translation preserved for a previous generation of people. This present generation of English speakers is not the same generation that lived 400 years ago.

As for 'He is powerful enough to make sure that we get a perfect translation in English of the entire Bible." I would say that if He does this, He is powerful enough to do so for every generation and not bind His children to a words and sayings no longer used by English speakers.

If each poster, even those who disagree with the OP, can post with the same maturity as its author, I see no reason why we cannot let this thread run for a while.

(So I am not taking a total holiday from the BB just mostly)

 

"The definitions of the words "holiday" and "mostly" are stretched almost beyond "the breaking point" where they are used in the above quoted sentence!"

Signed, Language Cop

Personally, I pretty much agree with ol' L.C. on this one!

Ed

 

He inspired the originals and providentially governed its transmission. It is obvious that he did not miraculously preserve his word since there are thousands of manuscripts and no two that are complete and identical.

But Psa 12:6-7 is not about words, but about people. It is about God's promise to preserve the faithful man.

 

Hi Thumper, welcome back. Just so you know, any PCC student gets favorable consideration from me.

Let's assume for this discussion's sake that in Scripture God did promise to preserve His 'words' in Psalm 12:7. Please list Scriptures that assist us in identifying those preserved words of God (with a dash of levity added in :laugh: ) --

Are all His communications to humanity in 'word' form?
In what specific language(s) did He promise to preserve them? In Hebrew, Latin, Navajo, Swahili, and/or Morse code?

In what exact location(s) did He promise to preserve them?
Was all His revelation to humanity preserved in just one place? Is that single location on the Earth?

What physical media did He explicitly promise to utilize for their preservation? As cave wall paintings, and/or CDs (PDF or MP3)?
​

 

This is incorrect. The "Critical text" as you call it, considers all manuscripts evidence ... 100% of it. It does not consider just a part of it.

Again, not true. The KJV is based on the TR which was compiled by Erasmus from less than a dozen manuscripts in his first effort, and then was revised multiple times both by Erasmus and then by others. So there are very few manuscripts that support the KJV "pretty much exclusively."

Furthermore, perfect preservation is not compatible with "pretty much." By the standard you have set up, it is either perfect or it is not. If God allowed even one error in transmission, you have lost the argument.

The truth is that there are not perfect manuscripts. We all have to do textual criticism on some basis to determine which reading is the best. The question is not whether we will do textual criticism, but how we will do it.

 

Hi KJVBibleThumper

You were here before my time, but nice to have you back.

Also nice to see that you chose the right college.
I have heard a lot of great things about Pensacola Christian College, and from your firm stand on God’s word, what I have heard must be right.
--------------------------------------------------
I have only been here a relatively short time, and I have already learned how much trouble a person can get into, by talking about “a perfect Bible”.

The general argument is......
“That we should not be calling the KJV perfect.

This is not really an argument against the KJV at all, but against the idea of there being “a perfect Bible”.
--------------------------------------------------
C4K’s response here(Hi C4K), demonstrates what I am talking about.........

Most of the folks here, feel compelled to add that statement of doubt, to every post they make about the Bible.....
“if there is one?”
--------------------------------------------------
But I am in full agreement with C4K’s statement about maturity........

Once again, nice to meet you.

 

Roger, if you determine this post to be the 'same old' argument then I will respect your judgement. And Thumper, if you have seen the evidence below before, I apologize for wasting your time (but it may be a benefit to some one else).

Have you considered the Hebrew term for "words" used twice in Psalm 12:6? It is 'imrah (Strong's #565) meaning an utterance, speech, or command. In fact, the first two occurrences in the KJV this word is translated as "speech" (Genesis 4:23, Deuteronomy 32:2). In all of the verses where this term is found it is most likely spoken words.

There are about 10 Hebrew words translated as "word" in the KJV and almost all of them do refer to verbal communication. But the Hebrew term normally associated with written words is dabar (Strong's #1697). See Exodus 34:1 & 27, Deuteronomy 10:2 & 27:3, and Jeremiah 30:2 & 36:2 as examples.

Correspondingly, for a relatively short Psalm (less than 150 English words) there is an abundance of references related to speaking. Notice the phrases "They speak vanity", "with flattering lips", "cut off all flattering lips", "and the tongue", "that speaketh proud things", "Who have said", "With our tongue", "our lips are our own", and "saith the LORD". Even the word puwach (Strong's #6315) in the phrase "from him that puffeth at him" is more often rendered "speak" in the KJV.

There seems to be a contrast between the vile speech of men and the holy promises that come from God. There are no terms relating to writing or written material in this Psalm. I find it too difficult to apply Psalm 12 to the written recording of God's words.

 

Are you trying to speak for God or as God?

Do you really think God would have several translations which omit verses, "add verses", and/or translate verses and verb tenses totally different than what is found in the MSS?

I firmly believe we have God's word without error. Only those who demand there be any errors can compile a "meadow muffin" of sorts out of what they deem to be an "error".

One has to apply their "science" to come up with anything viewed as such when all the while thew Scripture is to be taken in context keeping in mind there is to be complete harmony in all of the entirety of it. Doing so affirms that we have the word of God preserved. Contrarywise to this is inadvertantly an attack against God himself.

 

What gives any man the right to pick one translation and divinely declare it to be the perfect word of God? Does that put man in the place of God?

 

Herein you have perfectly described the KJV itself. So what is your answer to your own question?

 

I will have to ask "What gives man the right to pick and choose when it is evident of the contradictions inserted by using MSS which have been rejected for many years?

Wrong. God specifies the "right one" when we study to show ourselves approved and come to the conclusion of God has never instituted disharmony over His word.

The "historical present tense" of the verse would disagree with your premise.

I have never even felt like God is subject to the plethora of ever changing words of men to bow down to perversions of the meanings of words as we see in this day over days of the past.

There has to be a milestone in versions, we have it already.

I would hope the maturity of the moderators will also allow everyone the grace to discuss this without the regular accusations we have seen to be so prevelent in the past.:wavey:

Just recently I have found out that an "Emo" is something to do with the gothic style of dress and appearance. Do we now need a version just for this counter-culture group?

 

Man has the right to determine the harmony of the Scripture by study.

Introduction of false "proofs" against the word of God is of the serpent, wouldn't you agree?

 

The you're saying you have the rule of thumb which to judge all the above accordingly?

Can the rest of us have this verses the harmony of the Scripture?

 

Let's try John 15:2, in your fave version: what does the word of God stipulate about the branches which produce "no fruit"?

 

And God has done just that by preserving His perfect word.