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!

Will the NKJV become the Next Version of the KJV?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Phillip, Oct 13, 2004.

  1. natters

    natters New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    michelle said "I never said I was perfectly inerrant in all matters, nor do I believe this."

    Ah, good. [​IMG] So how does one recognize when they are wrong? Everyone always thinks they are right, nobody ever says "I'm wrong about this but I believe it anyway", so how do we recognize when we have made a mistake in our interpretations about something?
     
  2. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    I beg to differ,
    Which is limiting God? To say that He perfectly preserved His Word without error in one Bible? Or to say that He was not able to and so His Word is today contained in many imperfect translations that need our "great wisdom" to, "properly translate and pull nuggets of His Word out of them"? That is reducing God to our level. And also, exalting ourselves to His level in claiming that we can tell what is Scripture and what is not! This is exactly the same type of attitude the religous leaders had that Jesus rebuked them for! It is because of this pompous attitude that todays christians have a lot of cute excuses for not doing what the Bible tells them to. Take witnessing for example, most able bodied christians today will not go out and witness and door-knock, but instead pompously state that they "are not called"! What rubbish!! Our churches today are filled with lukewarm pew warmers that do absolutely nothing! This is one of the reasons why our great country is steadily going down hill!! If you have a graveyard shift or are sick or are a missionary in a place where it would be taking your life in your hands to do it or something like that then its fine not to go. But if you have your saturdays free at least then why arent you out there for at least an hour door knocking or publicly witnessing?! Christians today are ashamed to wear a gospel shirt to work! They are ashamed to pray over their food in a resturaunt!
    If the apostle Paul was here today I dont think ANY of us, and I am including myself here, could face him. I trace all this back to the point when christians relaxed their faith and standards and let worldliness creep in and when they abandoned the Bible for "new and improved modern versions"!
    In Christ,
    KJVBibleThumper
     
  3. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly, you should stick with ONE version that you believe is the only Word of God and declare all other versions wrong! This raising ourselves to godhood by saying that we can interpret what is Scripture and what is not MUST STOP!! If we stopped adjusting the Bible to fit our beliefs instead of adjusting our beliefs to fit the Bible then things would straighten out in the churches! People might actually (gasp) go out and witness and DO something for Christ instead of sitting and warming a pew and thats all!
     
  4. Trotter

    Trotter <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    One problem, Thumper. You are raising yourself to the level of godhead when you take it upon yourself to declare what that one version should be.

    Me, I choose not to worship the work of men's hands. The KJV is a fine translation, but that is all it is. If you and Michelle feel compelled to bow before it, that is between y'all and the Lord. We have tried to help you see the truth, but you both prefer to cover your eyes and sing "Row, row your boat" at the top of your lungs.

    In Christ,
    Trotter
     
  5. russell55

    russell55 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,424
    Likes Received:
    0
    To say that God perfectly preserved His Word without error in one Bible is not limiting God, if you have a statement from God saying that's the way he chose to do things.

    But to say that that's the way he must have done it because that's the only way that seems right to me is limiting God. To say that it's impossible for many faithful translations to be the word of God is limiting God, unless God made a definite statement somewhere that that's not the way he did things.

    Except no one says he's not able to. They just say that it appears that he chose not to, but rather, he preferred to give us thousands of copies of copies of original writings, which have been translated many different times into our English, and into many different translations in other languages too.

    Is saying the Christ didn't heal everyone who was sick--not because he couldn't have, but because he chose not to--reducing God to our level? Or is it simply dealing with the facts we were given? Perhaps it is really just allowing God to chose to do miraculous works when it is his sovereign choice to do so, and also allowing him to chose to simply work providentially through fallible human beings when he chooses to work that way...

    Oh, the irony!
     
  6. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    Wasn't it you who wrote that the KJV is the very words of God? If that is true then there should have never been a need for correction. God does not need to correct what he inspired. But the KJV has been corrected many times. It just goes to show it is not inspired by its very nature and by the understanding of inspiration.

    Certainly scripture is 100 percent accurate in its wording and content. But the words have had to be corrected in the KJV. There is an obvious diference between what God inspires and what man does as a translation. God never needs correction but man may.
     
  7. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    One problem, Thumper. You are raising yourself to the level of godhead when you take it upon yourself to declare what that one version should be.

    Me, I choose not to worship the work of men's hands. The KJV is a fine translation, but that is all it is. If you and Michelle feel compelled to bow before it, that is between y'all and the Lord. We have tried to help you see the truth, but you both prefer to cover your eyes and sing "Row, row your boat" at the top of your lungs.

    In Christ,
    Trotter
    </font>[/QUOTE]One problem Trotter,
    I am not raising myself to godhood by believing that God preserved His Word for me to believe as it says in Psalm 12:6-7, YOU are the one worshipping the work of mens hands by placing yourself above God and believing that "you" can correctly say what it is you like and what you dont in the Bible and then find a version, or better yet make up your own translation to support your view. Both michelle and I have tried to bring you to your senses but you insist on "fiddling while Rome burns".
    In Christ,
    KJVBibleThumper
     
  8. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    To say that God perfectly preserved His Word without error in one Bible is not limiting God, if you have a statement from God saying that's the way he chose to do things.

    (Strangely enough I do, look in Psalm 12:6-7)

    But to say that that's the way he must have done it because that's the only way that seems right to me is limiting God. To say that it's impossible for many faithful translations to be the word of God is limiting God, unless God made a definite statement somewhere that that's not the way he did things.

    (I quite agree that the modern versions are faithful to the manuscripts they were translated from, the only problem is that they were translated from Roman Catholic manuscrips and are NOT the Word of God.)

    Except no one says he's not able to. They just say that it appears that he chose not to, but rather, he preferred to give us thousands of copies of copies of original writings, which have been translated many different times into our English, and into many different translations in other languages too.

    (Yes they are saying that He was not able to, they are saying that He "needs" them to make it clear to the "uneducated layman" just what God has said. I dont have to rely on some puffed up scholar of today to tell me which bibles to use. I can go straight to the the Bible and see what God has to say to me directly.)

    Is saying the Christ didn't heal everyone who was sick--not because he couldn't have, but because he chose not to--reducing God to our level? Or is it simply dealing with the facts we were given? Perhaps it is really just allowing God to chose to do miraculous works when it is his sovereign choice to do so, and also allowing him to chose to simply work providentially through fallible human beings when he chooses to work that way...

    (I see... God has provided you personally with the wisdom to accurately sort among over 100 bibles and find the truth. Thats quite a gift.)

    Oh, the irony!
    </font>[/QUOTE]( Tell me about it, all the self-made "scholars" on here are choking me to death with their amazing gift to sort good from bad in the many bibles out)
     
  9. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wasn't it you who wrote that the KJV is the very words of God? If that is true then there should have never been a need for correction. God does not need to correct what he inspired. But the KJV has been corrected many times. It just goes to show it is not inspired by its very nature and by the understanding of inspiration.

    Certainly scripture is 100 percent accurate in its wording and content. But the words have had to be corrected in the KJV. There is an obvious diference between what God inspires and what man does as a translation. God never needs correction but man may.
    </font>[/QUOTE]May I suggest a beginners course in the history of printing in the 1600s and the difficulties therein in getting it right the first time before any further discussion?
     
  10. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    How can you you honestly say that the KJV has not used underlying manuscripts that have had added verses since the 4th century? And, was first published with the apocrypha. And I'm talking about fact, not belief of the translators. You still obviously haven't downloaded the 1611 Bible pages and reviewed them.
     
  11. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I am not mistaken, Kinney has no training in Biblical study whatsoever. He makes his own interpretation and is one of the heavy KJVO fanatics.
     
  12. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    I beg to differ,
    Which is limiting God? To say that He perfectly preserved His Word without error in one Bible? Or to say that He was not able to and so His Word is today contained in many imperfect translations that need our "great wisdom" to, "properly translate and pull nuggets of His Word out of them"? That is reducing God to our level. And also, exalting ourselves to His level in claiming that we can tell what is Scripture and what is not! This is exactly the same type of attitude the religous leaders had that Jesus rebuked them for! It is because of this pompous attitude that todays christians have a lot of cute excuses for not doing what the Bible tells them to. Take witnessing for example, most able bodied christians today will not go out and witness and door-knock, but instead pompously state that they "are not called"! What rubbish!! Our churches today are filled with lukewarm pew warmers that do absolutely nothing! This is one of the reasons why our great country is steadily going down hill!! If you have a graveyard shift or are sick or are a missionary in a place where it would be taking your life in your hands to do it or something like that then its fine not to go. But if you have your saturdays free at least then why arent you out there for at least an hour door knocking or publicly witnessing?! Christians today are ashamed to wear a gospel shirt to work! They are ashamed to pray over their food in a resturaunt!
    If the apostle Paul was here today I dont think ANY of us, and I am including myself here, could face him. I trace all this back to the point when christians relaxed their faith and standards and let worldliness creep in and when they abandoned the Bible for "new and improved modern versions"!
    In Christ,
    KJVBibleThumper
    </font>[/QUOTE]You are the one showing the pompous attitude. You are right; however, about people sitting in their pews. In all humbleness, I might add that the KJVO churches I have seen since I started looking for them after hearing about it on this bulletin board, it seems that they are so busy pushing their KJV Only issue that it tends to overshadow the gospel itself.

    Every KJVO church I have seen keeps pretty much to themselves and don't grow. This may not be standard across the nation, but I predict that it is probably true.

    See, another thread taking off in the KJVO direction with a simple question of what version you wouldn't recommend. The same old arguments, the same old circular reasoning. And, they still won't tell us what the Word of God was in 1590. They just remain silent on that issue. Because they know if they answer, then it would have to be the KJV that wasn't written yet. Otherwise, why would the KJV need to be written, if a perfect version in English was available before that? ;)
     
  13. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wasn't it you who wrote that the KJV is the very words of God? If that is true then there should have never been a need for correction. God does not need to correct what he inspired. But the KJV has been corrected many times. It just goes to show it is not inspired by its very nature and by the understanding of inspiration.

    Certainly scripture is 100 percent accurate in its wording and content. But the words have had to be corrected in the KJV. There is an obvious diference between what God inspires and what man does as a translation. God never needs correction but man may.
    </font>[/QUOTE]May I suggest a beginners course in the history of printing in the 1600s and the difficulties therein in getting it right the first time before any further discussion?
    </font>[/QUOTE]This is SOOOO true that a history lesson is needed. I would highly recommend a great book "The Journey from Texts to Translations"
     
  14. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    Wasn't it you who wrote that the KJV is the very words of God? If that is true then there should have never been a need for correction. God does not need to correct what he inspired. But the KJV has been corrected many times. It just goes to show it is not inspired by its very nature and by the understanding of inspiration.

    Certainly scripture is 100 percent accurate in its wording and content. But the words have had to be corrected in the KJV. There is an obvious diference between what God inspires and what man does as a translation. God never needs correction but man may.
    </font>[/QUOTE]May I suggest a beginners course in the history of printing in the 1600s and the difficulties therein in getting it right the first time before any further discussion?
    </font>[/QUOTE]I am fully aware of some of the history of printing. But my point is that when someone says the KJV is inspired I would like to see the perfect document. The point is that there is not one and 1611 is only almost 400 years. That is not that long. I have personally seen some old editions of the KJV and some Bibles that are even older than the KJV. I have even picked some of them up.
     
  15. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Phillip, it is obvious to Bible believers that God has blessed the KJV beyond measure. [snip] It is the Bible God has put His stamp of approval on throughout the past 300+ years for the English-speaking people. To believe anything else is to be foolish.

    [ October 18, 2004, 09:35 AM: Message edited by: Pastor_Bob ]
     
  16. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Terry, no doubt the Lord has used the KJV for His mission; it is a good translation. But, it is more like 200+ years.

    Your statement of the Word of God as being "perverted and sodomite influenced" is not correct and therefore you are in violation of the rules of the board.

    The administrators of the board are obviously knowledgeable enough to know that the KJV theory is not scriptural, just an opinion on your part. But, don't twist this into saying I do not like the KJV. It is a great translation, but the language is quickly becoming archaic.
     
  17. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Let me repeat in case you did not understand, the NIV is a translation that has been influenced by a perverted sodomite. This is a fact. You can deny it, but it is still a fact!
     
  18. GeneMBridges

    GeneMBridges New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2004
    Messages:
    782
    Likes Received:
    0
    And Terry, a great many of the translators of the KJV were paedobaptists who believed in baptismal regeneration as late as 1864! Not only that they believed in a difference between mortal and venial sins, as shown in their rendering of the Greek verb Parapwma as "faults" in some passages and "tresspasses" in others. And let's not forget dear Old James, who is on record as wanting to "harrow out" Baptists. The man's got the blood of our own forebears on his hands.

    As for the NIV, as I recall the "sodomite" to whom you refer was a single lesbian who was a consultant and whose work was not included at all. :rolleyes:


    Hmmmm, slaves of Rome vs. the rejection of a lesbian...

    Based on that, and using your logic, the KJV should be rejected.
     
  19. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    Then why is there such oppressive racism in your part of the country? The way people talk there about people with different colors of skin was appalling to me when I lived there. Frankly I was shocked to hear such things from those who attended churches. And that is where KJV is most prominent. You explain that to me.

    [ October 18, 2004, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: Pastor_Bob ]
     
  20. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "so spiritual", "becoming fools"? That is harsh. Would like to see you say such to the Lord Jesus (HE didn't use the KJV, remember).

    We just ask you WHERE the Bible (version of your choice) is said to have God prserving His Word perfectly and without error in YOUR translation?

    If you can't support it from Scripture, don't pass it off as a fundamental of the faith!
     
Loading...