Definition of Terms Please

Bible -- the collection of books that the KJVs have in common.
(the KJV1611 Edition has some extra books that aren't part
of the Bible)

 

Here is an extended definition of 'inerrant':

Version 6 of the poll:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=30182

Version 5 of the poll:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=2509

But generally inerrant = without errors

I believe that all faithful English translations/versions
are each and collectively the inerrant written word of
God, the Holy Bible. If there seems to be some error
within or among such versions, it is NOT GOD'S FAULT
but is a problem of our understanding that can be
resolved in nice places like this Forum.
Recall that each person must answer personally to God
so each person has to figure out for themselves which
is the right understanding of each and every 'disputed'
passage.

 

1. Inerrant = without error

2. Bible = book(s)


You're welcome

God bless

 

Lifted from the Baptist Faith & Message:
"The Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is the record of God's revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter."

 

inerrant means no errors; without errors [no errors made by copiers, printers, editors, or translators]

 

Technically, none. However, each valid version is perfect for its target readership.

 

Over here is your answer:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=34374&page=8

According to that Poll
the starred & Bolded Bibles are inerrant:

*Geneva Bible of 1587 7 10.94%
*KJV1611 Edition 6 9.38%
*KJV1762 Edition 7 10.94%
*KJV1873 Edition 8 12.50%
The Message by Peterson 43 67.19%
*NASB = New American Standard Bible 15 23.44%
Reader's Digest Bible 47 73.44%
*NIV = New International Version 17 26.56%
BWT = New World Translation 55 85.94%
*ESV = English Standard Version 16 25.00%


These are not the only Bibles which are inerrant,
but is an interesting selection of Inerrant Bibles.

 

Oh well, I'll start a new poll:
Pick the Bibles that are inerrant.
This poll is at:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=35366

Caveat: The Poll format only allows ten choices.
People who have other inerrant Bibles can make their
own polls

 

There are several inerrant Bibles in circulation today. They are all inerrant in that they convey to us the things God intended for us to know - the history, the poetry, the prophecies, and, most importantly, the plan of salvation. None of today's legitimate Bible versions are errant in these matters.

AVB, which of the Bible versions readily available today would you consider inerrant? Are there any of them which do not convey the history, the poetry, the prophecies and the plan of salvation? If there are, then please point them out to us. And what are your definitions of "inerrant" and "Bible?"

inerrant=without error

bible=a book

Bible=the compiled collection of sacred writings inspired by God

 

Then by your own words you admit that you limit God's power to provide the inerrant word for all generations. You limit God's ability and falsely claim that He could provide only a single inerrant English Bible translation. Then you go on to make the errant claim that only the KJV is inerrant, despite the fact that it contains what you call "errors." Your belief that God's power was limited to providing only a single legitimate Bible version in English is not only wrong, it is pathetic. I pray that you will learn to accept truth and that you will have a stronger belief in the power of God, AVBunyan.

 

Doc Cassidy once wrote:

The Originals: The Word of God by Inspiration
The mss copies: The Word of God by Preservation
The Translations: The Word of God by Derivation

HankD

 

Good job, Doc Cassidy!

 

Since the KJV is not copyprotected in the US, any publisher can do whatever they want with the text, unlike in the UK where only a few (two, I think) publishers are licensed to print the AV.

AVB, you must exclusively use a 1611 version, correct?

Otherwise, it would be completely illogical to complain about contemporary publishers making the spelling change from "throughly" to "thoroughly" when thousands of spelling changes have already been authorized and accepted. I don't think it is possible to obtain an original, or even a reprint, of the 1611 anywhere for only $5.95!

"Throughly" is just simply an archaic spelling of "thoroughly". Of course, now "throughly" would appear to any ordinary living, breathing English reader to be a typographic error. The only way to justify "throughly" as being right is to believe all the other archaic spelling was also right.

It must have been frustrating for you, being unable to obtain the original archaic spelling for so long... it hasn't been readily available for about 200 years!

 

On this board when the word 'Bible' is employed we generally assume that it means a Protestant English translation of recovered ancient Greek and Hebrew sacred manuscripts collected together into a single volume. However, the word 'Bible' gets applied to many other writtings.

The holy scriptures of Judaism (equivalent to our 39 books of the OT) is a Bible of itself. The Roman Catholic, Sumaritan, Ethiopian, and Eastern Orthodox Church each have different Bible texts (that appear somewhat similar to ours). Even the Satan worshippers have a 'bible'. I have seen incomplete children's 'Bibles' (with mostly illustrations). I believe that The Message and The Living Bible paraphrases are improperly called a 'Bibles'.

Perhaps you have seen contemporary books with self-proclaiming authoritative titles: The Shooter's Bible (for gun collectors) or The French Cooking Bible, for examples. There seems to be many 'Bibles'. I do not think it is now possible to rescue the word from these connotations.

I have not seen a satisfactory definition of "Bible" beyond simply "book(s)". Perhaps this word cannot stand alone (without modifiers) and have an exact meaning.

 

If you wanted to spend the money for the paper and ink you could print off (page by page) a photographic facsimile of a 1611 First Edition AV at the following site:

http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?textID=kjbible&PagePosition=1

HankD

 

Who took the liberty to change "shamefastness" (original AV1611) to "shamefacedness" at 1 Timothy 2:9 in my KJV?!