Multiplicity of English versions

[Johnv]

Originally posted by av1611jim:
Now I ask you. Do you seriously think this is NOT confusing for the newbie?

Probably. But whether it's confusiong or not does not in any way support single-translation-onlyism as a doctrine.

Would you have him trust his luck in picking "the right one for him"?

If I were him, I'd probably ask the storekeeper which is the best selling one. BTW, the best selling one is the NIV.

You all know my stand.

Yes, we all know your stand. You're doctrinally KJVO, despite the fact that there is no scriptural support for such doctrine. If there's no scriptural support for a doctrine, it's false doctrine.

You also know my stand. Show me scriptural support for KJVOism, and I'll adopt KJVOism. This is my 46th request on this board for scriptural support ofr KJVOism.

 

[av1611jim]

Johnv;
I addressed your request either in this thread or another one in this very forum. Whether you saw it or not makes no difference to me. Try searching for it.
BTW, my answer was deflected and twisted by some other fellow (un-named) so it was (as usual) discounted and tossed aside out of hand.

Thank you for admitting that it "probably" is confusing for the newbie.
Thank you for doing what I asked you all NOT to do, i.e. turning this into a KJV vs MV discussion.
I only wish you would address my questions.

In His service;
Jim

 

[Scott J]

Jim, This should be handled the same way it was in 200 AD when not only were the hand copies of various epistles varied but few had a whole 66 book Bible. Some accepted non-canonical books as scripture. Some rejected canonical books.

Discipleship is the answer. A new Christian shouldn't be out there alone trying to select a Bible translation or books on doctrine.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by av1611jim:
I addressed your request either in this thread or another one in this very forum. Whether you saw it or not makes no difference to me. Try searching for it.

You've never posted scriptural support for KJVOism. If you have, kindly do it again. After all, if it's such an important doctrine to adhere to, and, since I desire to live a life as scripturally centered as possible, the least you could do is post it again.

Thank you for admitting that it "probably" is confusing for the newbie.

Youre welcome.

Thank you for doing what I asked you all NOT to do, i.e. turning this into a KJV vs MV discussion.

I didn't turn it into a KJV vs MV discussion. I addressed the OP. It's clear (and you cannot deny) that the agenda of the OP is single-translation-only. I replied that the scenario you described does not support single-translation-onlyism.

I only wish you would address my questions.

I answered the questions very concisely. I simply didn't answer them in a way that you like.

 

[av1611jim]

I answered the questions very concisely. I simply didn't answer them in a way that you like.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DITTO!

And I can deny the assumed agenda you charge me with, because that was not my intent!

Read ALL of my comments on this thread again, with comprehension.

In His service;
Jim

 

[KeithS]

I wonder if the sons of Zebedee argued as much as our James and John.

My 2 cents. There are probably way too many versions on the market for a new believer to really have to digest, but there are only a small handful of "major" versions carried by most Christian bookstores that I frequent and I doubt a new believer would be led astray by reading any of them. Discipleship and mentoring are the keys to guiding these folks.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

So, back atcha my friend. Should there be a stopping point? Shouldn't we at least come to a place where it could be said, "These four and no more"?

Of course there are a very limited number of solid translation, we agree, btw, on which is best.

Now, how do you solve the problem? A law that says, "No we already have 4 Bibles, no more canbe published"?

Very few if any posters here would ever recommend a list like what you first posted Jim. I don't think that arguing from the absurd helps any cause - especially an emotionally charged issue like this one.

 

[av1611jim]

Good points Keith.
BTW, you crack me up. "Sons of Thunder" indeed!
LOLROFLMHO

C4K; since it can be relatively agreed that the list is absurd, what then? And why do you guys keep insisting that I have a "cause", hidden "agenda" or some such nonsense? Can't we just stick to the simple, yet complicated problem as demonstrated in this list? While I have no problem with some who would choose say the NASB over the KJV out of personal preference, what, or rather who decides which of the 90+ are good and which are a waste of time?
I suppose there really is no sound and acceptable solution at this point. It may indeed have gone so far as to be irredeemable 'til Jesus comes back. Certainly we cannot propose a law. That smacks of RCC don't you think?
I suppose, now that we have talked about it a bit...I only wanted to present what I find to be unacceptable in the "race for better translations". Some may not see it that way, (obviously). Nevertheless, there it is.


In His service;
Jim

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

There can be no doubt that a major reason for a great number of the translations is money. With that I agree.

 

[Ransom]

av1611jim asked:

Do you seriously think this is NOT confusing for the newbie?

Sure. But all we have to do is get him God's Pure and Preserved Word for the English Speaking Peoples, the 1611 AV, and not only will he not be confused, he'll be so not-confused that no one will even have to tell him how to find Philemon when the pastor tells the congregation to turn there!



(In other words, the purpose for the various Bible translations, and the reason for the differences between them, are just more of the many things the newbie will have to learn as he goes, just like the rest of us did.)

Please guys. Let's not deflect this to a KJV vs MV discussion.

No, let's just get your [poorly] hidden agenda out in the open, shall we av1611jim?

 

[Ransom]

I have a better scenario, and more realistic, since it actually happened to a friend of mine in high school.

Just for fun:

Pretend you are a brand new believer who just got saved this past sunday. You were saved out of a very anti-religious home. You have no clue.

Got the picture?

OK.

Let's say that you start attending the same church as the friend who led you to the Lord. It's a very conservative, Fundamentalist congregation. Your friend also bought you a Bible - a paperbound NIV.

Some time later, while taking a walk with an older member of the church. Having an important question about the Bible, you pull it out of your backpack. When the older gentleman sees that your Bible is an NIV, he becomes angry, takes it from your hands, and throws it into the nearby lake.

Now I ask you. What would be more confusing for the newbie? A row of Bible translations on the shelf, or a professing "Christian" deliberately destroying the one he had gladly received?

As I said, this actually happened. And thanks to that old fool, my friend never darkened the door of a church again, so far as I know. I have yet to hear of anyone's faith being shipwrecked by a shelf of Bibles, outside of KJV-only fantasyland.

 

[av1611jim]

Ramson;

No, let's just get your [poorly] hidden agenda out in the open, shall we av1611jim?
-----------------------------------------------

Thanks for your non-contribution. It was SOOOOOOO helpful. NOT!
In His service;
Jim

 

[Phillip]

Here is my humble answer to the whole thread. When you walk into a Bible bookstore, you will find a limited number of Bibles. You will NOT find the ridiculous list posted in the first thread post.

You will find basic: KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV(Maybe The Message, which is a problem in my view, but what store is perfect, they are owned by humans), and if it is Lifeway a Holman. I don't know of many who will have trouble with these basic translations. With very little exception, those will be your selections.

Secondly, I have NEVER heard a young or new Christian confused, until some person says the KJV is the only good Bible---you want to see CONFUSION. THAT causes confusion and I have seen it. I have NEVER heard any confusion based on the multiplicity of translations.

Thirdly, I agree with the other poster, the thinly vailed purpose is another agenda: KJVo vs. MV (obviously the multiplicity of MVs).

At least that is what I see here.

 

[Ed Edwards]

I think the new Christian in that case can deal with
what is going on better than this new Christian.

The new Christian is told that this KJB is the true
un-alterable word of God. Then the new Christian
finds out the KJV that they have is a KJV but does
not admit inside it that it is a KJV1769.
Then comparing this KJV1769 to a KJV1611 or KJV1873 (some
say it is similiar to a KJV1850) the upset person
finds they really are different. Which KJV is the
real KJB?

 

[GeneMBridges]

Why, Ed, only the one that has "HOLY BIBLE" printed on the front cover of course .

 

[robycop3]

AV 1611 Not likely to happen Brother. The KJVO you describe would not be caught DEAD even working in a place that had more than the KJV for sale.

I reckon you've never had to look for a job that hard. That KJVO would accept ANY honest, non-evil employment if he/she had bills to pay and hungry mouths at home.


[Laugh] [Laugh] Don't you think?

Newp!


[/i]That scenario is not germaine to the topic anyhow.
No gold star for you. Nice try though! [Razz]
Jim:[/i]

Of COURSE you don't agree...It doesn't agree with your philospohy. But it IS a quite-possible scenario.

 

[av1611jim]

Some time later, while taking a walk with an older member of the church. Having an important question about the Bible, you pull it out of your backpack. When the older gentleman sees that your Bible is an NIV, he becomes angry, takes it from your hands, and throws it into the nearby lake.
-------------------------------------------------

Sadly, that happens. Had I been around at that time, I would have found that old goat and given him the tongue lashing of his life.

Offences will happen on both sides. I also know of instances of kids going to "Bible" college with a Bible and leaving without one. IOW They trust what they have and the "professor" tells 'em that it can't be trusted. i.e. no virgin birth, no creation, no resurrection, etc.
This happens as a direct result of leaving faith in a perfect Book.

We could swap horror stories all day long my friend. Only proves carnality on both sides. Never really solves anything though. Sad but true.
Your point is acknowledged.
In His service;
Jim

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by av1611jim:

This happens as a direct result of leaving faith in a perfect Book.

Jim, I don't know if you are implying that their failure began when they stopped believing KJVO but if you are...

Liberal indoctrination goes beyond the KJV. It rejects the originals, the mss, and any translation.

I would suggest that one entry made by liberals is to deny that the Bible means what it says when it speaks in ways that the context imply a literal account. There are places where context implies or allows figurative/non-literal meanings. But there are others that fly against human reasoning that give no such indication.

Specifically, there are several threads running now on whether evolution agrees with Christianity. To believe that it does, large portions of scripture must be allegorical and other portions have to be radically interpretted. I am not talking about OE vs YE but rather theistic evolution.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by av1611jim:
Read ALL of my comments on this thread again, with comprehension.

The OP is CLEARLY a KJVO agendized post.

 

[av1611jim]

Perhaps in your zeal you have read into it WHAT YOU CHOOSE TO SEE, rather than what was said.

In His service;
Jim