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!

Link to Dr. Wilkinson's book!

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by robycop3, Jun 29, 2009.

  1. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Mr. Garvey: The KJV is complete while others have less, thus why settle for less?

    Less WHAT?

    Less WORDS? Not.


    Jude 25, KJV...2"To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen."

    NIV... "to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

    Less ACCURACY? Not.

    Acts 12:4, KJV..."And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

    NKJV..."So when he had arrested him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four squads of soldiers to keep him, intending to bring him before the people after Passover.

    1 Tim. 6:10, KJV..."For the love of money is the root of all evil......"

    NKJV..."For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil

    So, what do other versions have less of, Mr Garvey?

    I'll tellya what the KJVO DOCTRINE has less of...SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT! In fact, it has NONE!But the MAN-MADE 'support' is quite apparent if you READ THAT BOOK to which I supplied a link, and some of the subsequent KJVO material, to see it's derived largely from that book, authored by a CULT OFFICIAL.

    Meanwhile, wanna tryta supply some SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for KJVO, or willya man up and admit it's wrong?
     
    #21 robycop3, Jul 16, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 16, 2009
  2. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    I would say more, but then I'd be a "martyr". :laugh:
     
  3. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why does the NIV make it sound like Jesus is not God but a simple man?

    I had a conversation with a Jew once who claimed that sacrificing a man for the people's sins was a pagan ritual.

    Always trying to start another Easter/Passover debate. This example doesn't prove anything except you don't know exactly when the time frame was.

    Define "money" COMPLETELY and without leaving anything out, ok?

    It is basic criminal intent to subdue one by attacking his manhood as if that gains some sort of ground against him.

    Proliferation of the verses is proven by your examples above and this is really saddening to see it.

    What you have shown is why I'll stay with the KJV.
     
  4. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    By the way, if you can't speak in decency without all the smart-elic ways as you have done then don't bother replying.

    You do your "side" more harm than you'll ever realize.
     
  5. Forever settled in heaven

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    um, which part of the God's words "make it sound like Jesus is not God but a simple man?"

    was it their calling Him a mediator, Lord, or a being existing "before all ages"?

    or the mere mention of His blessed name?

    and how's that pertinent? did u personally agree with that view?

    or perhaps, are u doubting the text of the Textus Receptus?

    irrelevant. both versions agree on that. if u have a problem with either the KJB or NKJV, state your "complete" definition of money.

    or just look it up in a dictionary.

    huh? asking a KJBO to own up (if man up somehow offendeth) to the truth of Scripture n not to lie about Scriptural evidence where there's none is, um, "basic criminal intent"?

    o yeah, do stay with the KJB. nobody's asking u to do otherwise.

    but it won't do u any good going around a-hissin.
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In other words, you CANNOT ANSWER the lacka Scripture thingie, can you, Mr. Garvey?

    Mr. Garvey:Why does the NIV make it sound like Jesus is not God but a simple man?

    Same reason the KJV calls the Holy Spirit "it".

    I had a conversation with a Jew once who claimed that sacrificing a man for the people's sins was a pagan ritual.

    What's that got to do with the current discussion?

    Always trying to start another Easter/Passover debate. This example doesn't prove anything except you don't know exactly when the time frame was.

    Apparently I know better than YOU do, or you wouldn't try to defend that goof. And this example is one of several that proves the KJV aint perfect.

    Define "money" COMPLETELY and without leaving anything out, ok?

    Sure!

    From the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: something generally accepted as a medium of exchange, a measure of value, or a means of payment: as a: officially coined or stamped metal currency 2 a: wealth reckoned in terms of money b: an amount of money cplural : sums of money : funds3: a form or denomination of coin or paper money4 a: the first, second, and third place winners (as in a horse or dog race) —usually used in the phrases in the money or out of the money b: prize money <his horse took third money>5 a: persons or interests possessing or controlling great wealth b: a position of wealth <born into money>

    Now, I've answered this request, although it does NOT cover the fact that the KJV's rendering of 1 Tim. 6:10 is incorrect.

    The resta your post does not merit a reply as it's completely off-subject nonsense. I'm beginning to wonder if you're even capable of carrying on a SENSIBLE internet discussion. You've failed to address a single point I've made.

    And I see NO RESPONSE to the OP of this thread, that is, about Dr. Wilkinson's book. It appears you just cannot handle the fact that it is by a CULT OFFICIAL & is the source of the current KJVO doctrine.
     
    #26 robycop3, Jul 17, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 17, 2009
  7. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Obviously some one isn't too well learned on the use of English grammar.
     
  8. TC

    TC Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,244
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Still have nothing of substance to say I see. :sleeping_2:
     
  9. Forever settled in heaven

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    but boy, can they hissssssss.
     
  10. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Moderators, Mr. Garvey should be admonished to STAY ON TOPIC. Now, while we all stray off-topic occasionally in many threads, this gent hasn't even come close to staying with it!

    I shaoul like to see some commentary, especially from some KJVOs, including Mr. Garvey, if he dares, about Dr. Wilkinson's book, and the fact that most subsequent KJVO worx are largely derived from it, and NONE are derived from SCRIPTURE.

    Roger, I hopeya leave this thread open long enuff to give folx time to READ THAT BOOK & comment on it. it SHOULD go a long way toward ending KJVO here, or at least proving how wrong it is.
     
  11. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "And he's got high hopes --- high apple pie in the sky hope..."
     
  12. AntennaFarmer

    AntennaFarmer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    610
    Likes Received:
    0
    The KJV rendering at 1 Timothy 6:10 is correct.
    A.F.
     
  13. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No, it is NOT. I can post countless examples of evils done NOT for lova money. However, the Columbine HS shootings, the 9/11 airplane crashers, & the Texas Tower shootings should be all you need.

    Have YOU read Dr. W's book, A. F?
     
  14. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    The translators of the NKJV, LIT, ASV, NASB, HCSB, YLT, AMP, ESV, and NIV, among others, apparently disagree.

    Incidentally, there is no question as to how the Greek Language reads, FTR.

    Ed
     
    #34 EdSutton, Jul 20, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 20, 2009
  15. AntennaFarmer

    AntennaFarmer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    610
    Likes Received:
    0
    Regarding 1 Timothy 6:10...

    To Robycop3: What kind of evil isn't a kind of evil? When taken as formal English the implications of the passage in the MV's are not unlike the passage in the KJV. Your understanding of the passage is wrong. "all kinds of" literally means all kinds without exception.

    To EdSutton: Evidence that others translated it differently isn't evidence of error. The Greek doesn't require the rendering of the MV's.

    A.F.
     
  16. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    A.F. I'm glad somebody else can see past their self-inflicted blinders.
     
  17. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Oh, how SILLY! Your twisting of English definitions will NOT work here!

    Now, this thread is about Dr. Wilkinson's book. I ask that you stick with that theme on this thread. If ya wanna go on about 1 Tim. 6:10 or any other KJV goofs, please start a thread on that subject, & I'll be more-than-happy to demolish your arguments there. But here, let's stick to Dr. Wilkinson's book, & the subsequent KJVO material derived from it, OK?
     
  18. AntennaFarmer

    AntennaFarmer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    610
    Likes Received:
    0
    Robycop3, you are the one who brought the love of money into the discussion. There are no silly definitions in my argument. You misread the KJV AND the MVs at this verse. Neither conform to your reading.


    To address the topic - from the little I have read in Wilkinson's book it is no worse than some of the stuff the other side comes up with.

    A.F.
     
  19. AntennaFarmer

    AntennaFarmer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    610
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks,..... I think.......(?)

    A.F.
     
    #39 AntennaFarmer, Jul 20, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 20, 2009
  20. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Never said it was. And most definitely I did not suggest this to be any translation error. I merely noted that not all translators agreed with the rendering, as found in the KJV.
    Not all "MV's" translate this in this manner, and I did not say they did, FTR. The LIV, PES, TMB, and DBY, to name but four, all follow the KJV rendering here.

    I was merely pointing that some do render this differently than the KJV, since you made a blanket statement that the KJV rendering was the correct one.

    The point is, two people or two sets of good translators can have an honest difference of opinion, as to how something should be properly translated. And in addition, this does not happen to be a case of any textual differences.

    I will say the intended pejoratives are not called for, in either case, from anyone on any 'side' on the Board, that I can see.

    Ed
     
Loading...