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!

1 John 5v12

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by NaasPreacher (C4K), Aug 18, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    All the ones which hold true to the thought process implied by the correct wordings.

    Linguistics demand it. Altered words and new defintions go contrary to the laws of simple linguistics.

    MV's use these "lawbreakers" often which effect the thought process in the adverse to cause the reader to think something other than what is intended by the Spirit.

    Thus our objection to the MV's is sustained, again.
     
  2. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    As is always the case, you're wrong Salamander. You accept different wording in particular versions, yet you condemn different wording in other versions. Your position is not at all consistent.

    Salamander, just which of the differing KJVs is the perfect one in the case of 1 John 5:12? It is not "splitting hairs" to demand an answer to this question from those who condemn the MVs because they have different words yet convey the same thought. There are none of the legitimate MVs that preach another Gospel. So why is there a problem accepting different words in the MVs while embracing different words in the KJVs? Again, you're not at all consistent, and because of this you destroy your own credibility.
     
  3. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Is this an acceptable rendering of 1 John 5v12?

    "He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life."
     
  4. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    So then by your definition, the 1611 KJV must have been wrong for omitting "of God." C'mon, Salamander, you can do better than this!
     
  5. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    You have again introduced another false dichotomy. There is no true bifurcation of advanced theology where the KJB into the MV realm is concerned.

    The KJB is definable and without error. That statement cannot always hold true to what we all consider as "MV's".

    Linguistic studies have proven that over and over and countless times. It's time yall accept the facts.
     
  6. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Which edition had no error in 1 John 5v12 - 1611 or 1769?
     
  7. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    An acceptable commentary which holds to the accuracy of God's word, yes, but only in that scenario.
     
  8. tinytim

    tinytim <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    which one?
     
  9. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    It must be perfect - it says the same thing as 1769.

    Quit splitting hairs please
     
  10. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Neither they both say the same thing. No thought process can be altered to think otherwise. You have no point to make, only your assertion lacks credibility in that it serves no actual purpose.:wavey:
     
  11. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which "one" doesn't?
     
  12. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rightly dividing the word, nothing "hairy" about that.

    If you attempt to rightly divide "Son" when compared to "Son of God" you find no contradiction, well, except in........
     
  13. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Then the NKJV rendering is also perfect - it says the same thing.

    Do you believe Sal that EVERY WORD of God is important? Apparently not - you defend the exclusion or addition of two of His words as being acceptable.
     
  14. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Which of these three renderings is perfect?

    KJV1611 - Hee that hath the Sonne, hath life; and hee that hath not the Sonne, hath not life.


    KJV1769 - He that hath the Son hath life: and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

    NKJV - He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
     
  15. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Um, C4K, in case you didn't notice the Son is the Son of God. I never said the NKJV didn't have most things right, it's only some things that it has wrong.

    Nice playing this little game with you though.

    If I were to say, "The Son of God: Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, Prince of Peace, King of kingd, Lord of lords." Would I be contradicting myself in adding to, or taking from the word of God?

    No, of course not.:godisgood: :jesus: The same yesterday, today and forevermore.
     
  16. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Do you think every single one of God's words is important Sal?
     
  17. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    All 3 render the same thought in this particular offering. It's just like I said, you have no point here.

    Now if you're trying to go somewhere with all this, may I suggest you at least crank your truck befiore you put it in gear?
     
  18. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80

    So rendering the same thought is perfection? Can we get that for the record?
     
  19. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    Every single word that reflects the correct meaning and without error in the thought process is of course "right" and "perfect".

    Since you cannot accept that, I won't continue in your game any longer.

    If you're gonna go anywhere you'll have to release the clutch before you blow your motor.
     
  20. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you think that when God inspired holy men as they were moved by the Holy Ghost to pen the word of God He wasn't perfect.:tonofbricks:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...