Damnation?

This is a test to see if it works.


BOLD

 

Thank you Natters. I appreciate that.


love in Jesus Christ,
michelle

 

Yea!

Also be sure to remember [ i ] for italics !

Also be sure to remember [sarcasm] for sarcastic statements

Doesn't work here, but other venues
use [ u ] for underlining.

 

No, some of the old English words have fallen completely out of use and were replaced with different words and even old English letters have fallen out of the modern alphabet. I will go back again to prove this if you force me to do so. Also the old English Luke 1:15 passage had 27 words, the middle English Luke 1:15 passage had 30 words and the 1611 Luke 1:15 had 33 words, the 1611 has 6 more words than the Old English which disproves your the last part of your statement "Obviously the words in Old English are not understandable to us today because of the spelling differences in the words,however they were the same words and meanings then, as they are today,". Why then did it take 5 more words in 1611 than in 1300 to say the same thing?

I will get to this when you respond to my 1300 vs 1611 statements above.

HankD

 

Now as to the following:

I didn't say this exactly though I may have indicated or suggested the same because in fact it is at least partially true and it is completely true that the English language is currently changing not only as to the addition/deletion of words but as to the order, grammar and syntax of the language.

I’ll give you a web site to start on to verify this for yourself.

I realize that you have a disdain for the writings of men (unless of course it suits your purpose such as posting from a modern English dictionary and supporting The Two Babylons by Hyslop) nonetheless it is a start.

Also, it is only attested to by experts in the field of linguistics and probably does not have the imprimatur of the comic book theologians. Show the same daring as you did with The Two Babylons

The site has several blurbs (under “site map”) under the banner of the changing English language.

http://www.lsadc.org/faq/index.php?aaa=faqengl.htm

HankD

 

--------------------------------------------------
Why then did it take 5 more words in 1611 than in 1300 to say the same thing?

--------------------------------------------------

You are focusing on irrelevent things to this issue. God does not require me to know these
things, nor you for that matter. WE live in the present, here and now. KJB vs. mv's. KJB has been known, used and believed as the infallible words of God in the Believing churches even until this present day. Those prior Bibles are irrelevant to this issue, and these little nitpicky and language issues have NOTHING to do with this issue today.


--------------------------------------------------
I didn't say this exactly though I may have indicated or suggested the same because in fact it is at least partially true and it is completely true that the English language is currently changing not only as to the addition/deletion of words but as to the order, grammar and syntax of the language.

--------------------------------------------------


Even if this was true, to which it is not in this present day, this still has nothing to do with the apparent and obvious errors in the mv's. The only thing you have shown, is that in the future, there may be a need for updating the KJB. I do not think this will ever happen however, because the Lord Jesus Christ is returning any day to call up his church - what a joyous day and I long for it.
The day of the Lord seems to be soon at hand. If the Lord decides to tarry, it is up to Him to inspire a better translation for the English language of the day accordingly. We however, have not seen He has done this, nor has had a need to do this yet, as His faithful continue to know and understand what He has given to us already in the KJB. Yes, the ignoramous, every day common stupid people like me, and others (you all enjoy labeling us as being these things) still understand and know God's words today as God saw fit to give them.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

--------------------------------------------------
I realize that you have a disdain for the writings of men (unless of course it suits your purpose such as posting from a modern English dictionary and supporting The Two Babylons by Hyslop) nonetheless it is a start.

--------------------------------------------------


I don't have a disdain for the writings of men. I just don't put the writings of men on the same level or above that of the words of God, the scriptures.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

So when you challenge me to a debate and you lose, suddenly the issue becomes irrelevant. Very convenient michelle.

On the other hand when it suits your purpose what the Latin Vulgate says or Hislop says becomes the truth but what I say is “nitpicky”. Another convenient ploy michelle, shame on your duplicity.

I think we have at last found an area of total agreement.

And IMO, (if He tarries) it will be "derived inspiration" through able translators.

Please show me where I have I done this michelle. Personally I believe and have told you so that you are an amazing person in terms of tenacity and faith. I have not come up short in pointing out your duplicity but I have never insulted you.

But in one thing we totally agree

…Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he [is] like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:

HankD

 

--------------------------------------------------
"Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not." In a more recent translation, the last phrase is translated as "they do not toil". English no longer places not after the verb in a sentence.
--------------------------------------------------

And as many have stated, these type of changes in the modern versions are not necessarily the problem. The problem is with the alterations that affect the context of the passage and change the truth from the already established truth, that is the problem. Changing things that are not necessary to change. Word changes that are not necssary to change, or that have been known for generations even until this day, that have been changed to alter the message and/or cause confusion, or that change God's truth into a lie, or half truth. The omittion of long known and currently known, believed and taught verses or words. These are the problems, and show forth altering of the words of God under the guise that our language is currently changing. You have bought into their lies, hook, line and sinker.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

You are almost there michelle, lose the accusations and judgments that belong
to GOD ALONE and you might have a beginning with this statement.

HankD

 

--------------------------------------------------
michelle said "Yes, the ignoramous, every day common stupid people like me, and others (you all enjoy labeling us as being these things)"

That is untrue. We have neither labelled you this, nor would enjoy it. For some reason, you seem to enjoy the thought of us doing it and enjoying it - maybe you have a martyr complex or something. Also, I would appreciate it if you stopped pretending you have the ability to exercise the occultic practice of telepathy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Many on here have, and many others imply it. I do not have a matyr complex, and I do not practice telepathy, nor do I believe it. Although you seem to buy into the fact that some do have it, as the modern scholars of the day seem to have telepathic abilities, since they can determine what they "thought the intent of the origional writers was" and you believe them and their decisions based upon these telepathic abilities concerning the intent of and thoughts of the origional authors, even though many times it conflicts, or contradicts the already established words of God in our language.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

--------------------------------------------------
You have bought into their lies, hook, line and sinker.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are almost there michelle, lose the accusations and judgments that belong
to GOD ALONE and you might have a beginning with this statement.
--------------------------------------------------

Please tell me then Hank, how this statement is not reflective of the truth? Why is it that you turn to the modern versions for a better understanding of the scriptures, if this is not the truth? You have said that you understand the scriptures, but you sometimes turn to the mv's to give those you are teaching a better understanding, because they do not understand the KJB. Why go to these versions, if you understand the problem, and you also understand the scriptures? Why not expound to them the truth from the scriptures themselves and let the Lord give them understanding? You see, many do not have a misunderstanding of the English language in the scriptures. Many do not understand the spiritual language, truth and meanings in the scriptures. Why lead these souls to polluted waters to which will make them think that they are understanding and receiving pure water? They will then rely only upon the polluted waters, and neglect and reject the pure water, because they have been led to believe that the pure water is that to which is polluted. I am curious to know why, and I am not trying to judge you, even though you are taking it this way and I am sorry if you did/are.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

You have addressed many things here michelle.

You have asked and I will be frank and honest with you.

Personally, I don’t accept the blanket statement that modern translations are to be discarded because they perhaps have some defects. This is in the very same attitude of the King James translators who said even the worst (meanest) of them are the Word of God. In this they were correct and I agree with them. In fact one of their favorites was the Latin vulgate of the Mother Church, The Church of Rome.

In addition they said that the proliferation of translations was a good thing so that one could get the “sense” of the Scriptures. They used these principles in their work, in that they did well even though they used the Vulgate and included the Apocrypha in their work (there was a one year jail sentence for even saying the Apocrypha did not belong in the AV).

I am also able to forgive them for the atrocities that they perpetrated on my fellow Baptists believers who took the same stand as I and others here at the BB have taken, that their work was flawed by their Anglo-Catholic heresies. For this I have an absolutely clear conscience before God and in fact I would have probably been martyred along with Tyndale and others had I lived then.

I tried to show you where some of these problems were “baptize with water” should be “baptize IN water”, the improper use of “bishop” ,etc but you calumniated me in return (as a compromiser of error) as did the Anglican bishops who perpetrated atrocities upon us (dissenters against the Church of England) before you.

This is a long request you have made and I will make further answer later.

HankD

 

--------------------------------------------------
Then why did you say "you all enjoy labeling us as being these things"? None of use have labelled you these things, and even if we did, you could not know if we enjoyed it or not, unless you thought you could read people's minds.
--------------------------------------------------


Go back for months, and read all the posts, and all the implications about us and of the man-made and false labels and packages that go with it, placed upon those who come here believing we have the words of God perfectly in our language. Then tell me that my understanding of this is wrong. I will rephrase it for you in a better way: You all "seem" to enjoy labeling/implying us of these things. The accusations and implications of nasty and untrue things towards us is ever present. If you look honestly at all the posts from the mv camp toward us, you will see what I am talking about. And if one enjoys something, it tends to be done often. People do often what they enjoy. There have been some that have come right out and said it. There are many others who imply it, in many different ways. Is this telepathy? NO. It is being observant and discerning. To label us heretics, believing false doctrines, and disciples of who they call sect leaders, perpetrating the cancer of christianity, nitpicking on words we use, or spelling errors we have made, not heeding to the scholars understanding today of Greek and Hebrew words, that the KJB is not understandable today, does not say much for what many are implying of us. Maybe you have not been guilty of all of these things, but you have not stood up for us either. Saying that we are Ruckmanites, or disciples of Riplinger, isn't exactly stating that one has all their marbles. It is an insult and an attack against not only our intellectual abilities, but our faith also and is quite simply untrue.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Are you now saying that these people don't "have all their marbles"?
Why is it an insult? You agree with them concerning "easter", etc.


HankD

 

This is dfficult because the rules for "relevant" change from time to time. Sometimes before the thread has run it's course.

HankD