1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

translators of KJV

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by UZThD, May 18, 2005.

Top Posters
  1. UZThD

    UZThD New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did their Anglican theology influence their translation?
     
    #1 UZThD, May 18, 2005
  2. LarryN

    LarryN New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did JW theology influence the NWT?

    Did mainline, liberal theology influence the RSV?

    My answer: yes, their Anglicanism influenced the KJV.
     
    #2 LarryN, May 18, 2005
  3. UZThD

    UZThD New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, is it probable that a committeee of translators with errant (IMO) theology which allowed its theology to influence their translation could produce an inerrant translation as Dr. Bob defines the KJVO 5 Group to believe??
     
    #3 UZThD, May 18, 2005
  4. LarryN

    LarryN New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    UZ, you're "preaching to the choir" with me!
     
    #4 LarryN, May 18, 2005
  5. UZThD

    UZThD New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    UZ, you're "preaching to the choir" with me! </font>[/QUOTE]===
    Me? Preaching? :rolleyes:

    Bill
     
    #5 UZThD, May 18, 2005
  6. PASTOR MHG

    PASTOR MHG New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just as much as it is possible that God could use a bunch of sinners (disciples) who had flawed theology (judaism of their day) to bring about the original inerrant autographs.

    Max
     
    #6 PASTOR MHG, May 18, 2005
  7. UZThD

    UZThD New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    ===

    aha. someone to preach to :D

    The Bible tells us that God inspired the Scriptural writers , but it does not say that God inspired the six committees which produced the KJV . Neither did those translators think themselves inerrant, but the Biblical writers are said to be.

    God changed the beliefs of the disciples who wrote the NT, but the KJV translators continued in their Anglicanism of baby baptizing and dependence on ancient creeds.

    Possible? With God what is not? But, do we base dogma on that which is only possible? I think obviously not.

    IMO your logic breaks apart against the facts!

    [ May 18, 2005, 06:21 PM: Message edited by: UZThD ]
     
    #7 UZThD, May 18, 2005
  8. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No, it doesn't. The bible says God inspired the scriptures (graphe, writings) not the writers. The most we can say about the writers is that they were "moved" or "borne along" by the Holy Spirit.
     
    #8 TCassidy, May 18, 2005
  9. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,217
    Likes Received:
    405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, the Bible states that God inspired
    the Scriptures or that all Scripture is given
    by inspiration of God (2 Tim. 3:16). The process of holy men of God being moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet. 1:21) would seem to be referring to the same process of the inspiration of the Scriptures.
    In my opinion, the apostle Peter's description of the process of inspiration would justify the referring to of "inspired" prophets or apostles.
    What difference do you see in referring to divinely-moved writers and to inspired writers?

    The early English translators did not see a problem with indicating that a writer of the Scritpures was inspired. Tyndale's, Matthew's, Great, Whittingham's, and Bishops' Bibles all render Mark 12:36 as follows: "for David himself inspired with the Holy Ghost." KJV translator Lancelot Andrewes used this same early English Bible terminology when he preached that Christ "inspireth them [referring to the apostles] with the Holy Ghost" (NINETY-SIX SERMONS, p. 83). William Whitaker (1547-1595), a Puritan writer of that day and who had studied the Bible with KJV translator Laurence Chaderton,
    used this terminology when he wrote: "God inspired the prophets" (DISPUTATION ON HOLY SCRIPTURE AGAINST THE PAPISTS, p. 296).

    On the other hand, KJV-only author D. A. Waite claimed that referring to "inspired prophets and apostles" is "theological error" (FOES OF THE KJB REFUTED, p. 26).
     
    #9 Logos1560, May 19, 2005
  10. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The difference is that the bible says the writings are inspired but never says the people are inspired.

    God breathed the words but He did not breathe the people.
     
    #10 TCassidy, May 19, 2005
  11. UZThD

    UZThD New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    the bible says the writings are inspired but never says the people are inspired.


    ===

    "I have put My words in your mouth." Jer 1:9

    If God's words came out of Jeremiah's mouth , how can Jeremiah not have been inspired?
     
    #11 UZThD, May 19, 2005
  12. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Because the the words are God's words and not Jeremiah's words. The fact remains the bible NEVER says the writer was inspired. The bible ONLY says the writings were inspired.
     
    #12 TCassidy, May 19, 2005
  13. icthus

    icthus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    The difference is that the bible says the writings are inspired but never says the people are inspired.

    God breathed the words but He did not breathe the people.     </font>[/QUOTE]Cassidy, I think that you are splitting hairs here. Why do you see the need to distinguish between the "writings" and the "writers"? Inspiration is the act of God the Holy Spirit, whereby He supernaturally influences the "writers" minds, so that the end product of their work, is as good as the Holy Spirit doing the writing Himself. Agreed, that the Holy Spirit used the personalities of those who wrote as His command, but, nonetheless, they were at the time of their penning the Books of the Holy Bible, Infallable, Inerrant. Not to say that they became Infallable persons, but, only for the time of their writing did the Holy Spirit so control their minds. The Greek verb, "phero" used in 2 Peter 1:21, rendered "moved" in the KJV, also has the meanings, "to convey", "to produce", or, "impell".
     
    #13 icthus, May 19, 2005
  14. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,217
    Likes Received:
    405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The early English translators did not see the need to distinguish between them.

    Tyndale's, Matthew's, Great, Whittingham's, and Bishops' Bible all translated Mark 12:36 as follows: "for David himself inspired with the Holy Ghost."
     
    #14 Logos1560, Jun 11, 2005
  15. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,490
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Just goes to show how poor those early bible's were, and in serious need of revision, which explains why we really needed the KJV.

    Anyone with even an ounce of sense knows "eipen" (2nd aorist active indicative of epo) means "said" "spoke" "told" etc. Praise God the KJV corrected such gross theological error!
     
    #15 TCassidy, Jun 11, 2005
  16. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    We must distinguish between the writings and the writers. The writers were mere mortals, tools used by God to produce His result. The writings are permanent and the results of the tools.
     
    #16 TomVols, Jun 11, 2005
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...