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!

HCSB > KJVs (examples)

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Ed Edwards, Oct 18, 2004.

  1. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    My opinion is still that the KJV is superior to any other English translation, especially the HCSB in every way except casting doubt in people's minds as to what God really says.
     
  2. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    My opinion is that the KJVs are superior in
    that department also.

    - the average KJV does not have the
    translator notes. The KJV was translated
    by vassals of the Church of England
    which would have been Roman Catholic save
    if the Pope would have let the English
    King get away with adultry.

    - the average KJV reader
    does not know that there are variations
    in the sources of the Bible.
    The sum of the
    variations is greater than any individual
    translation.

    - the HCSB is superior from 2003 on.
    The KJVs were superior 100s of years ago,
    when there was no KJVs.
     
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is another variation in the KJVs:

    Luke 11:13 KJV1611 - holy Spirit
    Luke 11:13 KJV1769 - Holy Spirit

    In the KJV1611 "holy" is a modifier, "Spirit" is the name.
    By KJV1769 "Holy Spirit" is the name

    This is a change of doctrine regarding the nature
    of a the third member of the Triune God.

    Luke 2:25 KJV1611 holy Ghost
    Luke 2:25 KJV1769 Holy Ghost
    Well, seems the KJV first translators couldn't
    stick with "Ghost" or "Spirt" for the name.
    But i don't guess translating Greek is like
    technical documentations where the same item has
    to be called the same name each time the name appears.

    Other comments are as before: the name of the third
    member of the Trinity is altered.
     
  4. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Michelle: "This is not just speaking of Jesus Christ, but the Godhead."

    Your statement shows you do not understand the
    term "Godhead".

    I looked it up in my dictionary (I don't have your
    dictionary to look into):

    Godhead - n. the essential being, nature, or
    condition of God. [ME]

    here n. = noun, and [ME] means derived from middle English

    Romans 1:20 (KJV1769):
    For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world
    are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,
    even his eternal power and Godhead;
    so that they are without excuse:

    Romans 1:20 (HCSB):
    From the creation of the world His invisible attributes,
    that is, His eternal power and divine nature,
    have been clearly seen, being understood through
    what He has made. As a result, people are without excuse.

    the HCSB is clearer here. Where the KJVs use the
    Middle English term "Godhead", the HCSB uses the stronger
    modern English phrase "divine nature". Note that
    the term "Godhead" has a definition of "divine nature" -
    the two mean the same. But the HCSB is cleare.
    I admit for years i invisioned the "Godhead" as being
    a head with three faces: God the Father, God the Son,
    and God the Holy Spirit. (And this is how the term
    is used in the first quote on this page).

    Here the HCSB is clearer to the unsaved.
    Here the HCSB is clearer to the new Christian.
    Here the HBSB is clearer to all but leftover saints
    from the 18th Century (1701-1800).
    The HCSB is certainly clearer to long time saints
    who don't bother to use their dictionary.
    Ed notes that dictionaries are NOT inerrant but
    that dictionaries do help decrease errors in understanding.

    The divinity of Iesus is seen much easier
    (the Holy Spirit can do His job faster) when using
    the HCSB than the archaic KJVs.
     
  5. Trotter

    Trotter <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,818
    Likes Received:
    1
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Amen, Ed!
     
  6. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Elias" is mentioned in the New Testament 30
    times in the KJV1769 but not in the Old Testament.
    "Elijah" is a transliteration of the prophet's
    name from the Hebrew.
    "Elias" is a transliteration of the prophet's
    name from the Greek.
    Why did the KJVs choose to use two different
    names for the same person, one for the OT and one
    for the NT?

    By constrast, the HCSB mentions "Elijah" 95
    times in the OT and NT (but does not use "Elias").

    What is wierd is that the false prophet Joseph
    Smith who started the Later Day Saints (LDS) denominations
    didn't understand about the Elijah/Elias problem
    with the KJV. He saw a vision where they show up
    as two different persons (DOCTRIN AND COVENANTS
    110:12-16). Tee hee, lack of understanding
    of the language of the KJVs makes another
    sect founder look the fool.
     
  7. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tee hee [​IMG]

    The subject of this topic is: HCSB &gt; KJVs,
    showing the HCSB is greater than the KJV.
    In one of my posts about i gave an
    example where the KJV was better than
    the HCSB. Nobody took the bait :confused:

    One of the failures of KJVOism is that
    many adherents have lost their humor.
    Humor is from God as are all gifts good
    and fine. What does that say about
    KJVOism?

    Most KJVOist at the deep end are ardent
    "black & white"ist. A "black & white"ist
    sees all things as black or white, totally
    good or totally bad. Life is not like that.
    There are many shades of grey and a whole
    world of non-black/non-white COLOR out there.
    So the knee-jurk KJVOist lives a dull humorless
    life.

    And radical KJVOism can never allow that
    anything other than their KJB is the best.
    If you can find ONE THING wrong with a KJB
    or one place where another version is better,
    then the KJVOism image is shattered.
    What a dull humorless belief [​IMG]
     
  8. JohnBaskette

    JohnBaskette New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2004
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    0
    JD;
    1] You wrote, "If anyone comes up W/something different or finds 'finds an error' in single quotes meaning SUPPOSED ERROR.
    Also you write, "And radical KJVOism can never allow that
    2] "...anything other than their KJB is the best.
    If you can find ONE THING wrong with a KJB
    or one place where another version is better,
    then the KJVOism image is shattered.
    What a dull humorless belief"

    Addressing the first point; Who are you finding error W/The WORD OF GOD? Are you or anyone-else inspired by God. The Holy Gost, to ADD or TAKE AWAY FROM NTHE WORD OF GOD? &lt;-Im effect, Correcting God?

    My second point is like the first, Who determines if another version is better? bARE THEY INSPIRED?
    NOT 1 TIME IS GOD'S WORD SUPPOSED TO BE HUMOROUS! Read a comic book for laughs...
    It a ppears you have the wrong spirit...
    In Christ; John

     
  9. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    This thread is past page 5.

    It really is no longer discussing KJV vs. HCSB so has run its course.
     
Loading...