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!

Featured Particular Baptists

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by evangelist6589, Mar 17, 2017.

  1. Tim71

    Tim71 Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    23
    Faith:
    Baptist

    1. The text of the AV has always been the same. It's readings have always been the same. Orthographic adjustments, spelling standardizations, and correction of errors of the PRESS do not constitute changes in the text or the underlying readings.

    2. Scrivener's text was not "reverse engineered". Otherwise its readings would not differ from those underlying the KJB. But it does. Scrivener admitted this in his preface and in the appendix. The reason for the difference is that Scrivener limited himself to a handful of PRINTED, GREEK [only] editions. His stated goal [read the preface to his edition] was to find the KJB readings among those printed editions.The KJB translators did not so limit themselves when finding the best attested reading.

    3. Psa. 12:6-7 does indeed have to do with the words of God and not with the poor. [This would probably require a separate thread. But it is clear that the poor are/were not preserved from that generation for ever.]

    4. Though much of the KJB follows some of the earlier English versions, the translators made it clear in their preface that they were translating, not merely revising. Read the preface.

    5. Differences resulting from orthographic adjustments, spelling standardizations, and correction of errors of the PRESS do not constitute changes to the scriptural TEXT of the KJB.

    6. Be that as it may, the conclusion was that the translation could not be justly excepted against.

    Though the following wasn't addressed, I will address it here in addition to the above: God promised to preserve His words [If one doesn't like Psa. 12:6-7, then Prov. 22:17-21, Mt. 4:4; Lu. 4:4; and II Tim. 3:15-17 would work, among others]. If the KJB is not all the preserved words of God, then where are they to be found? It is just as plausible that God Himself was providentially involved in the translation of the KJB.
     
  2. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,082
    Likes Received:
    3,480
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Nope. Lots of changes. Compare the 1611 to the 1769 for yourself and you will see that all those KJVO websites you are getting your information from are lying to you. Even KJVO Waite admits to "changes of substance."

    Sorry, but changes of words that change the meaning. Fact. Check it for yourself.

    Scriveners TR gives the Greek text which underlies the KJV. There were about a half dozen places where he could not find the source of the KJV reading.

    Nope. Even the KJV 1611 says in the note for Psalm 12:7 "him. i. every one of them."
    Nope. Revision of the Bishops Bible.

    Nope. Completely different words.

    Huh? Sorry but that sentence doesn't seem to mean anything. Can you restate it.

    I have not said other wise. Just that Psalm 12 is not talking about bible preservation, but of the poor and needy of verse 5. Context. Context. Context.
     
  3. Tim71

    Tim71 Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    23
    Faith:
    Baptist

    I have over 50 pages of documented CHANGES in the multiple varying editions of our English Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures. I have personally collated the multiple varying editions of "THE" King James Bible on my desk and found MULTIPLE VARIANTS - textual in nature.

    "Appendix A. Catalogue of the VARIATIONS from the original edition of the Authorized Version of the Holy Bible (1611), which, being found in all modern editions, have been retained in the Cambridge Paragraph Bible. Obvious misprints and peculiar orthography of the original are EXCLUDED, and the dates annexed are those of the EDITIONS in which the SEVERAL VARIATIONS originated, so far as these can be ascertained." F.H.A. Scrivener, M.A. D.C.L., LL.D., The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611), its subsequent reprints and modern representatives.

    These are textual variants which include, but are not limited to, added words, singulars to plural, feminine to masculine, pronoun changes, article changes, noun changes, verb changes, etc.

    These types of DIFFERENCES are rightly called Textual Variants when found in manuscripts. Of course from my perspective even orthographic differences upset the cart of "jot and tittle preservation". Especially by those who hold to a literal "jot and tittle" on a page preservation and spout the oft abused jingle, "Things different are not the same."

    Preservation has never been about preserving jots and tittles, word counts, word order, orthography, etc. Scriptural preservation should never be compared to grandpa's coin collection "preserved" down in the vaults at 1st National Bank & Trust Jerusalem where every "generation" can come and take a peek at the exact same mint condition coins. No, that type of preservation doesn't fit the Scriptures or history! Scriptural preservation is more like grandma's pickles where the nutritional value is preserved even though the form (jots, tittles, word counts, etc.) changes. In the form that God wants each generation and language to have.

    God's word does indeed "remain the same", but "the same" is not defined, nor can it be, by word counts, differences in pronouns, tenses, plurals, etc. The word of God is always pure (doesn't change), always true (doesn't change), always infallible (doesn't change), always given by inspiration of God in its written form (doesn't change), always the final authority in matters of doctrine (doesn't change), etc. It is the CHARACTER of God's word that "remains the same" and not language, syntax, jot & tittles, word counts, etc.
     
  4. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,082
    Likes Received:
    3,480
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Good to see you have learned something and now admit the 1611 and the 1769 have a lot of significant changes.

    Now would you like to work on Psalm 12:6-7?
     
  5. Tim71

    Tim71 Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    23
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It's clear that the poor are/were not perserved from that generation forever
     
  6. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,082
    Likes Received:
    3,480
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Do you really think there are no poor people today? Really? Are you that desperate?
     
  7. Tim71

    Tim71 Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    23
    Faith:
    Baptist
    There are poor people today. The people are not preserved they're dead
     
  8. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,082
    Likes Received:
    3,480
    Faith:
    Baptist
    All poor people are not dead. They are everywhere. My church fed 140 families this past week. The poor are with us still.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Tim71

    Tim71 Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    23
    Faith:
    Baptist
    [QUOTE="TCassidy, post: 2343082,
    Now would you like to work on Psalm 12:6-7?[/QUOTE]

    TCassidy. I believe the word of God is always pure - it doesn't need purification. How pure is the word of God? As pure as silver tried seven times in a furnace of fire.

    Ps 12:6 The words of the LORD ARE pure words...
    - not "will be" pure words after a seven fold purification process.

    Ps 119:140 Thy word IS very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.
    - God's word IS always pure - it is in fact incorruptible (1P 1:22-24).

    Pr 30:5 Every word of God IS pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
    - Whenever and where ever God speaks you can be sure that every word IS pure.

    Verse seven is a little bit tougher for me to interpret. Mainly because I have a hard time identifying what the pronoun is referring to, is it the godly man, the poor and needy, his words, his promises?. Seems like it could go both ways in English and Polish. The marginal note in my "THE " KJV says, Heb. him. the Spanish has "los" (masculine not "las") Coverdale has "preserve us", Bishops has "thou wylt kepe the godly, O God: thou wylt preserue euery one of them", etc. Many good godly men differ on the interpretation of this passage. I find all of their argument compelling.

    I can take it either way. I will say once again that Scriptural preservation is not about preserving word counts, jot and tittles, word order, etc. I came to this conclusion for several reasons:

    1) The exact finger of God copy of the 10 Commandments became the habitat of worms after Moses crushed them at the foot of the mountain Ex 31:18, 32:15-16,19). It is not preserved.

    2) God made another copy (Ex 34:1-4) like unto the first copy. That copy is no longer extant - it is not preserved - at least not anywhere that is useful to the Church of God. And if preservation isn't about practical availability to the Church of God in all matters of faith and practice then I'm not interested in it. I'll let the theologians in Seminary jump through their theological hoops and gnat strainers, I'm too busy preaching the word of God and building up the Church of Christ.

    3) Moses & Joshua both made copies of the law. None of those copies are extant - they are NOT preserved.

    - As to points 1 - 3 please try and determine the exact word count, word order, with jot and tittle precision and try and tell me: Was the finger of God copy of the 10 Commandment more like the list in Exodus 20 or more like the list in Deut. 5? Note the DIFFERENCES!

    4) Jehudi took the words of God and burned them (Jeremiah Jr 37:23)! They were NOT preserved! Ok, I know, Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire (Jr 37:18), but did you notice that the WORD COUNT CHANGED, because we read, "there were added besides unto them many like words" (Jr 37:18). The word count was NOT PRESERVED in its original form it was added unto!

    5) None of the original copies of Moses, Joshua, Ezra, the prophets, etc. are preserved they are in fact no longer extant. None of Gospels, Paul's epistles, or Peter and John's original writings are preserved. They are no longer extant - not preserved.

    6) It sure looks like Hezekiah's men added unto the book of Proverbs (Proverbs 25:1). That produced a DIFFERENCE in word count and added a whole lot of jots and tittles.

    7) Entire books including the entire New Testament have been added to the words of God since David supposedly got the promise of preservation in Ps 12:6-7; this in spite of the admonition of Solomon, "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Proverbs 30:5-6.

    8) Rarely do the quotes of the Old Testament as found in the New Testament match.

    9) Jesus (Luke 4) and the Eunuch (Acts 8) both read from the Book of Isaiah and the text that they read from doesn't match any extant book of Isaiah in any language - not Hebrew, not Greek, not Latin, and not English! They are in fact DIFFERENT! The Scriptures that Jesus and the Eunuch read from are in fact no longer extant! That goes for Timothy's Holy Scriptures as well!

    10) I've asked, begged, pleaded, implored, and beseeched the brethren, who insist that David was promised that God's words would be preserved in every generation, to produce any one copy of the Reformer's multiple translations in any language that they believe demonstrates this preservation; so that I could compare it to "THE" KJV in my hand and see what kind of preservation they are talking about. After all preservation "from this generation for ever" (Ps 12:7) has to include all the generations prior to 1611 and pass through the Reformers. The Reformer's Bibles are EXTANT - preserved!!! Here are the responses I've gotten:

    1) I do not believe there is or ever was a complete and inerrant Bible either before or after the KJB.
    - A flat out denial of preservation in every generation.

    2) All of the pure, perfect, true, inerrant copies of the Reformer's Bibles were burned up by Roman Catholics! All that remain are corrupted versions of Luther, Tyndale, Coverdale, Valera, Huss, Wycliffe, the Czech (Moravians), Polish, Spanish, German, French, Italian, Dutch, Russian, etc.
    - Ah, excuse me, burned up and preserved are mutually exclusive!

    3) I wasn't alive back then i only know what I know today. I know that the KJV in my hand is exactly pure, perfect, true and inerrant down to the jot and tittle and any version or edition that doesn't match it jot and tittle is corrupt.
    - Ah, they weren't alive in 1611 yet they believe the KJV was translated perfectly in 1611.
    - Double ah, the 1611 edition doesn't match THE KJV in their hand - certainly not jot and tittle.
    - Triple, ah, we have the EXTANT (preserved) editions of the Reformers many of them are still being read, believed, received, preached and lived today.

    Preservation has never been about preserving jots and tittles, word counts, word order, orthography, etc. Scriptural preservation should never be compared to grandpa's coin collection "preserved" down in the vaults at 1st National Bank & Trust Jerusalem where every "generation" can come and take a peek at the exact same mint condition coins. No, that type of preservation doesn't fit the Scriptures or history! Scriptural preservation is more like grandma's pickles where the nutritional value is preserved even though the form (jots, tittles, word counts, etc.) changes.

    Mark this phrase down and keep it in your little black book:

    In the form that God wants each generation and language to have.
     
  10. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    12,854
    Likes Received:
    1,596
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Putting on my Admin Hat:
    Take this text discussion to the appropriate forum. Other wise, I'm shutting this one down without further warning.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
Loading...