IF it were so critical for men to have a PURE, and PERFECT copy of God's Word, then WHY-
1. Did God allow the actual original autographs, which (I trust) we ALL would agree were perfect and pure, to be LOST?
2. Did God allow us instead to have multitudes of manuscripts, folios, fragments and so forth, none of which agree 100 percent in every way?
3. Does God allow there to be TWO editions of the KJV which do not 100% agree with each other if purity and perfection are so important? Which one is preserved?
4. And why in the world would God allow it to be preserved in English which is one of the most difficult languages to read and learn? (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1233-english-is-toughest-european-language-to-read.html- and others)
"Logic" and Bible versions
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Mexdeaf, Apr 21, 2010.
Page 3 of 4
-
-
-
Baptist4life Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
Pray tell exactly HOW?
I am asking honest questions based upon what you and Winman claim- that there MUST be a perfect, preserved and pure Word of God- yet not even the various KJV editions agree 100% perfectly. Which one is letter- and word- perfect?
You set up that standard and denigrate any modern version which does not meet it when your own version of choice does not. How is that logical? -
Nice twisting of my post TommyV. Kind of like what some liberals and revisionists do with scripture.
-
When the rest of us say "Word of God", thankfully we are not talking about man-made translations but, uh, the actual WORD of GOD!!
BTW, it proves their mindset. The #1 mark of a cult (Josh MacDowell) is replacing the Word of God or adding to the Word of God with man-made writings -
-
Winman and Cutter, FWIW, some brotherly advice.
Study Koine Greek, you can do it:
James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
Then transfer to TR (Scrivener's, the one underlying the AV) Only, then at least you are dealing with the original languages which are the words of inspiration attested to by the KJV translators in their introductory To the Reader AD1611:
-
Please attempt a response. -
-
-
By the way, did any biblical character ever identify himself as being full of faith -- or did others report that of him? -
And I think Well la dee da is a very fitting benediction for your post. :laugh: -
Rippon, you made a terrible mistake. See, you have to actually believe the Bible that contains the 1 Pet 3:15 admonition to "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear" before you can do it. You have to believe this to be true, and Christ must be Lord to have an answer. Hence, those of us that do have this hope get so frustrated with those who do not.
-
Herein lies the hypocrisy of KJVOism-
When they find something that does not fit their standard, WE are expected to investigate and try prove to their satisfaction that they are wrong- an impossibility. Why? Because ONLY their standard is "perfect".
But when they are confronted with logic- Why would God allow His Words to be "lost" until 1611- which is what you MUST Believe if you proclaim that the KJV is the ONLY PERFECT TRANSLATION- they claim the question is not worthy of a response.
Oh, and my faith? My faith is in God and Christ, NOT IN A TRANSLATION! -
I think we should go easy on winman and cutter, after all they are our brothers in Christ.
Though we disagree with them, they both have demonstrated restraint to a great degree.
Again, my advise FWIW is that they shift to the original language documents, then all they have to deal with is the scribal blunders.
One day, should the Lord tarry, I believe the church(es) will shift attention back to the traditional text of the historic and apostolic churches of Asia Minor.
Just my opinion.
HankD -
"Restraint" to me would be holding to the KJV as one's preference and not trying to hack down other versions just because they don't agree with it.
But that's MY opinion. :smilewinkgrin: -
It is you that is saying the word of God was lost until 1611, not KJVOs. And it is an illogical argument.
Page 3 of 4