What is your absolute final authority?

There's a couple of different ways to approach this problem. One is to take the verses from all the valid translations and drop them in a hat and let God decide which is the 'most valid'. Or you can take them all, put them into a blender until you have a nice even shade of grey. This is the AWG, or Average Word of God. No black, no white, just grey. You can see that this is the method that God prefers. When he gives us one passage that says wine is a curse and not to look at it, and another passage that says to drink abundantly, He wants you to blend them together until they say 'drink in moderation!' Isn't that grey, I mean great?
Cheers:flower:

btw, the sarcasm meter should be registering off the scale by now.

 

Ok, I'll bite.

1) No. I do not possess an absolute, final, written authority. If I had the original manuscripts I would, but I now have no way of knowing 100% of those readings.

I simply use what I have while seeking God, who is my ultimate authority.

 

Is your question suggesting that the final authority beyond which there is no other did not exist before 1611?

Is it as simple as you say? I can take an edition of the KJV off my shelf that was printed in 1841 that has thousands of emendations, some of which may be greater or more major than those in completely different translations. I have also several varying present-day editions of the KJV on my shelves or desk.

 

Yes, but its not God Breathed (inspired).
I do believe God uses translators, theologians, etc.. but I'm not sure its on par with what He did then.

 

Several have already answered for me.

Yes, I have a final authority. That authority is the leading of the Holy Spirit through His word... whatever translation I happen to be using or verses that are running through my head.

 

And we also grow weary of the KJVO myth which is repeatedly disproven every time a new KJVO believer comes along. It gets a little ridiculous.

The final written authority is the word of God - and that word can come in the forms of the various legitimate English Bible translations. These variuos Bible versions, despite your errant statements to the contrary, do not contradict one another. If you're looking for contradictions, you have to look no further than between the covers of the KJV - there are conmtradictions in the KJV no matter what some of you KJVO myth believers may say.

The KJV is a great Bible version translated by great scholars. It is not perfect. God did not miraculously inspire the translators of the KJV any more than He miraculously inspired the translators of the NKJV, the NASB or the NIV. It's really quite simple, but the truth is rejected by those of you who fall for the KJVO myth.

 

You see the difference in this type response and the response from KJVO believers. In nearly every response given by those who use MV bibles I find one of the following words(my,I, to me,or valid) all of these include ones personal opinion which isn't worth fifteen cents when it comes to the Word of God. Many things can cause ones opinion to change, but friends the Word of God never changes. This is what has corrupted many MV bibles. The "translators" had their own personal opinions which unfortunately influenced their "translation" of the unchangeable Word of God.This thread has really revealed a lot about how much the personal opinion of many have hindered their study of the Word of God. Thank God for the Holy Ghost and a KJB.

 

Tee Hee, reminds me of this Passage in the Bible
(Please note that I use the KJV on this board more than
anybody else)

Act 9:1, 4-5 (KJV1611 Edition):
And Saul yet breathing out threatnings & slaughter
against the disciples of the Lord, went vnto the high Priest,
...
Act 9:4 And he fel to the earth, and heard a voice saying
vnto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
Act 9:5 And he said, Who art thou Lord?
And the Lord said, I am Iesus whom thou
persecutest: It is hard for thee to kicke against the prickes.

 

Heb 12:1-2 (KJV1611 Edition):
Wherefore, seeing wee also are compassed about
with so great a cloude of witnesses,
let vs lay aside euery weight, & the sinne which doth so easily beset vs,
and let vs runne with patience vnto the race that is set before vs,
2 Looking vnto Iesus the Authour and finisher of our faith,
who for the ioy that was set before him,
endured the crosse, despising the shame,
and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Praise God for his manifold witnesses: many Viable, Living,
Respected, Useful, and Inerrant Versions of God's Holy
Written Word in both Modern and earlier English Versions! :saint:

 

Deacon jd: //You see the difference in this type response
and the response from KJVO believers.//

Here you go, a little help from your friends:

http://www.godstruthfortoday.org/Library/bullinger/FiguresOfSpeech.html#omission

Yep, E.W. Bullinger on FIGURES OF SPEECH. It has lots of
good techniques used by both the Author of the Bible and
by BB (Baptist Board) posters to

....

...

...

... (are you ready for this?)

...

...

...

COMMUNICATE.

 

deacon jd:You see the difference in this type response and the response from KJVO believers.

Yes...KJVOs generally follow the Wilkinson-Ray-Ruckman-Fuller "party line".

In nearly every response given by those who use MV bibles I find one of the following words(my,I, to me,or valid) all of these include ones personal opinion which isn't worth fifteen cents when it comes to the Word of God.

They're worth as much as the common KJVO responses.


Many things can cause ones opinion to change, but friends the Word of God never changes.

But the languages of the translations change.

This is what has corrupted many MV bibles. The "translators" had their own personal opinions which unfortunately influenced their "translation" of the unchangeable Word of God.

As if the AV translators didn't? Some clear examples of translators' opinion in the KJV are its frequent translation of 'me ginomai' as 'God forbid' and 'Easter' in Acts 12:4. Ya shouldn't point out specks in others' eyes.....


This thread has really revealed a lot about how much the personal opinion of many have hindered their study of the Word of God. Thank God for the Holy Ghost and a KJB.

Actually, this thread has revealed that some people are attached to a man-made myth, and that some of us use more of the materials provided by God throughout our generations.

I,too, thank the Holy Spirit for His teaching and guidance. But is He restricted to any one English Bible version? Not hardly...and YOU shouldn't be, either, unless it's by PERSONAL PREFERENCE.

 

I answered your questions, Mr. Bunyan...now, will you please answer mine?

1. What English version(s) was/were the inspired, perfect, inerrant word of God before 1611?

2. By whose authority, other than that of King James was/were it/they replaced?

3. Is/are that/those version(s) still valid enough to be the source(s) of one's final authority?

 

I've never looked at the Geneva, Tyndale, etc.. in depth.
I did see a page or two from them at the scriptorium in Florida which was pretty cool.
The question I have is do all the bibles before the King James differ other than spelling?

 

Yes, when He first gave scripture it was suited to the languages of His chosen penmen. He later caused it to be translated into other languages, knowing that no language He made would translate 100% into another. However, I fully believe He was and is in full control of his own word, and causes it to appear in the various languages exactly as HE chooses. Thus, we have a final written authority in our own language, as well as the past versions of that final authority in the language styles of their times.

 

The Words of God had existed before the human languages were diverged.
The Holy Spirit is the Author of the Bible and has the final authority.
For Human understanding and reading, the written Bible serves as Words of God.
Masoretic Text (OT)-Textus Receptus (NT) - KJV reflects the Words of God most accurately.

 

You were doing good till the last line. That line is opinion, and a guess.

 

But then neither is the belief in the KJVO myth that you advocate so srongly. And you also just used the "I" you spoke so harshly against, indicating your own personal opinion. It's hard to reconcile the KJVO myth with the truth without contradicting yourself, isn't it?

It is good you are finally coming to realize this. But you still need to reconcile the facts. The KJV has differences from the originals. In these instances the word of God did not change, but the KJV did not give an accurate rendering of the word of God.

The MVs are no more corrupted by opinions than is the KJV. It is only your personal opinion that the MVs are corrupt while the KJV isn't. The facts show otherwise.

Just as "the 'translators' of the KJV had their own personal opinions which unfortunately influenced their 'translation' of the unchangeable word of God.

And it has also revealed what has already been revealed here at BB time and time again - that the belief in the KJVO myth has hindered the study of the word of God.

...and the NASB and the NKJV and the NIV! Amen!

Deacon, your personal opinion that final authority lies in only the KJV to the complete exclusion of all other English translations is not very likely to influence anyone else on this board. The facts show that your opinion is not based in fact but is based in the error that supports the KJVO myth. "Freedom readers" have examined the facts and know that the KJVO myth is exactly that - a myth which is not supported by truth. KJVO myth believers have not examined the facts and they follow their own erroroneous opinions and the erroneous opinions of others such as Riplinger and Ruckman.

 

I asked the question, but your reasoning does not seem to add up. Since you acknowledge that the final authority beyond which there is no other existed before 1611, how can you then imply that a new final authority was created in 1611? Since you admit the final authority already existed before 1611, implying that another final authority was created in 1611 would seem to be creating two final authorities.

 

There are many more differences between the KJV and the earlier English Bibles (Tyndale's to Bishops') of which it was a revision than just spelling.
There are differences in number of words (sometimes the KJV has fewer words and sometimes more words than one of the pre-1611 English Bibles). Some of the pre-1611 English Bibles did not have two whole verses (Mark 11:26, Luke 17:36) that are found in the KJV while the KJV does not have three or more whole verses in the book of Psalms that are found in the 1535 Coverdale's and the 1540 Great Bible. There are differences in meaning of words, in number of words (whether singular or plural), in parts of speech used, etc. Basically, there are the same-type differences between the pre-1611 English Bibles and the KJV in less than 100 years than there are between the KJV and later English translations based on the same underlying original languages texts.