Just obey it!

I didn't say that position was unreasonable, I said he is unreasonable.

 

Then that is a personal attack.

 

A personal attack? I didn't say he was a bad person, nor did I call him names. I said, in this discussion, he is being unreasonable. Is that a personal attack?

 

I would love to hear you explain how my viewpoint is unreasonable. I would not use any Bible translated by a team of what I considered to be false teachers.

Simple enough.

How is that unreasonable?

That was point from the very start. The topic of the thread it a viewpoint that we should only use one translation, the KJT of the scriptures. Those great men who gave us that translation told us that we should use other versions.

If their opinion on the importance of translations is flawed, how can their opinions on translational choices be trusted?

I love their work, and I agree with their advice on how to use it.

How is that unreasonable?

 

Do I have to spell it out? I did not say your viewpoint was unreasonable, I said that in this thread you are being unreasonable.

 

Okay - I guess we are entitled to our feelings, but these threads are supposed to discuss topics, not individuals.

Lets see if we can stay on topic, shall we?

The topic is the wisdom or folly of using more than one translation.

Only one small segment has the philosophy of one translationism, and even the brilliant scholars who gave them their translation disagree with them.

 

Strong King James guy here:

I view using only one translation a lot like trying to use a dictionary where only one word could be used to define another. In fact I you hold to a single translation POV then you really can not use a Strongs concordance to help define the word because it uses other words as possible translation.

Like I said I am strongly a KJ guy, but I will view an ESV, NIV, etc. just to get another view of what the words mean. I find the wisdom of the KJ translators to be useful.

 

I fail to see what's wrong with someone saying he only wants to use one translation. I guess what I'm calling unreasonable is your assertion that since an individual uses a bible, he has to agree with the translators of that bible on things that have nothing to do with the actual translation. The KJ translators said they think that using several translations is needful/helpful. Person A likes the KJ, uses the KJ, and that's the only translation he really uses. Person A thinks it was translated accurately, and thinks it is the best. You would say to this person that he cannot feel that way because the translators said this or that.

Now, when I tried, and apparently failed, to present a like scenario that would expose this fallacy, you just completely ignored the reality that your position here is ridiculous. I'm not bound to every opinion of a translator of a particular bible and neither should anyone else be, yourself included.

But really, what this is all about is beating down on a viewpoint you aggressively disagree with. My question is, what's wrong with using one translation? If you want to use many, it doesn't bother me.

 

That is the point of this whole thread. The author of the OP claimed that using more than one translation adds confusion. I disagree and so did the brilliant translators who gave us that marvellous translation.

If there was a 'beating down' here it was in the OP. It is the one that told those of us who agree with the KJT team that is wise to use more than one translation. That was the post that first criticised our choice, and the wisdom of the men who gave us the translation that the 'one versionists' insist on.

I say again, use whatever reasoning and logic you want, but don't condemn those who agree with the very men who gave us the marvellous KJT of the scriptures.

 

I'll say this and quit. I don't care what their opinions where on how to best study scripture. That has no bearing on the translation used or anyone's opinion of how to use it.