Real and perceived reasons

Just for fun, how are we to delineate between "language style" and "understandablily of language?"

 

So how did they get there w/o a compass?

 

Since when does the word "prevent" NOT mean "precede"?

Me thinkest thou appliest thou onliest preference as the demeanor here.

The problem with the nasb rendering is that the wording "until the coming of the Lord" possibly includes everyone whether saved or not. But the wording according to the Bible,"unto the coming of the Lord" is perfectly clear that those who are alive and remain are anticipating the Lord's return, and also are dedicated "unto" the Lord awaiting His return. "Until" indicates time, "unto" indicates dedication.

Big difference between "unto" and "until" wouldn't you say? No "difference" in "prevent" and "precede" though.

English IS a funny language, but IS relatively simple when one has the use of a dictionary.

In the case of Psalm 37, I'm afraid you overlook the preceding/preventing "Fret not" and "Trust" as in conjunction with "Delight" by that word "also" found in the Bible.

Verse 4 is indicative of "delight" being the "offspring" of "trust in the LORD" and "fretting not because of evil doers".

Ever seen anyone who is "fretting" all the time, therefore failing to be "trusting" in the LORD, having delight? nasb is too vague, KJB is clear.

[ June 09, 2003, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: Istherenotacause ]

 

Since we became users of modern English. If you prevent your car from rolling down the hill by setting the brake, are you seriously trying to tell us that you will roll down the hill before it??? Did you even think before you said something like this? It doesn't appear that way. It appears that you have only one goal -- defend your position regardless of the truth that is put forth.

You are right that you could use a dictionary but you will see many different definitions for prevent and the one you need will likely not be the first one and with more than one you will need something to see which one is the right one. For that you will have to look at the Greek word and when you do that you will find out that the NASB is right and clear. It is you are is wrong.

Everytime I think I have heard it all, I get amazed once again. If you wrote this with a straight face you deserve many accolades. This is so ludicrous it is remarkable. It has to be a joke. There is no way that anyone says something like this seriously.

The text is talking about we are who alive and remain when the Lord comes back. It has nothing to do with dedication. It simply states that the believers who are on earth when Christ returns will not go before those who have died. Those who have died will rise first and "then" we will follow. Simply reading the text would have saved you from making this statement.

No difference in the first; big difference in the second.

At some point, we have to look at the issues of fundamental honesty. When someone will twist the word of God in such a fashion, what can we say? Can we really just pretend like "you're okay; I'm okay"? I don't think so. This type of flat out untruthfulness must stop. Your position on prevent/precede is technically right but it uses prevent in a way that it is never used in modern society. That is why it is not the best translation. However, your position on unto/until is far from truth; it is not even reasonable and you cannot even stretch a dictionary to back you up.

 

Celestial navigation. The compass was not invented for another 1400 years or so.

 

Here's a link to keep you from making a fool of yourself again:

http://dictionary.reference.com/

One of the primary definitions for "unto" is "until". The context of the passage demands this definition. Whichever word is used, it means time.

 

Methinks thou makest thy "demand" w/o defining "to" which is "unto" in all dictionaries EXCEPTING your "all too infallable website"

"Unto" is NOT "until" in the context, it is "to" by definition and NOT "until" which always denotes a future time.

I maybe a "fool" in your sight, certainly an inferior "to" most men, but never "until" most men.

Oh, and I just love your "snap" judgement made without due course of study.

IOW, look up the word "to".

I go "to" the Lord in prayer for wisdom sought, but am led "unto" wisdom that He offers by simple asking and He upbraideth not, a good example to follow huh?

I can go "to" the store, w/o ever following, but I can NOT go "unto" the store unless I follow. I'll never go "until" the store, because time has no relevence to my following the example to follow and I will in no wise follow yours.

 

Celestial navigation. The compass was not invented for another 1400 years or so. </font>[/QUOTE]Celestial navigation is impossible without incorporating the use of some sort of "compass", whether it be the naked eye or not, thus a "compass" either is used by the navigator to transcribe the details of the positioning of the stars through the use of a transit. Whether that "transit" being human or a sort of mechanical device. Knowing the positions of the celestial bodies in concordance with the region allows one the ability to become that compass to determine ones location and predetermining a selected path.

IOW, the ship NEVER could navigate those waters w/o incorporating a "compass" to achieve the location desired.

 

Methinks I will trust several dictionaries more than I trust you as they have demonstrated their objective reliability while you have shown yourself to be ruled by subjective presuppositions.

Is the rapture a future event or is it a place we can go to? If it is a place then by all means show the way.

Oh, and I just love your "snap" judgments made irrespective of fact but wholly a function of what you wish to be true.

Denoting a place or state of being.

Denoting a condition.

Denoting a place and a state of being.

No. You would not go "until" the store. You would remain "until" you went to the store.

You certainly don't have to follow my example. I would expect you to follow the context of scripture though without compressing it into your preconceived mold.

 

Istherenotacause said:

Celestial navigation is impossible without incorporating the use of some sort of "compass", whether it be the naked eye or not, thus a "compass" either is used by the navigator to transcribe the details of the positioning of the stars through the use of a transit.

Translation: If the KJV says they "fetched a compass," then it means they navigated with a compass, provided you define a "compass" as "the naked eye" or "the use of a transit."

In other words, the KJV-onlyists reserve the right to say that a compass isn't really a compass.

A clear case of fallacious reasoning: specifically, "special pleading."

 

The word you should be looking up is the word "eis" because that is the word God used. The word in its context is clearly used with reference to time. Notice the "then" that follows it. The rapture in discussion is a future event. The best translation is probably "at" or "till." The point is that there are some who will be alive when Christ returns and they will not go before (precede) those who are dead in Christ. But the dead in Christ will rise first (reference to time) and then (reference to time) we who are alive and remain will be caught up to meet them.

I cannot even believe this is being discussed. This so far-fetched and ludicrous it doesn't even deserve the bandwidth used.

 

How about Psalms 39:5,

*Behold, thou hast made my days as an handbreadth; and mine age is as nothing before thee: verily every man at his best state is altogether vanity. KJV

*You have made my days a mere handbreadth; the span of my years is as nothing before you. Each man's life is but a breath. NIV

*"Behold, You have made my days as handbreadths, And my lifetime as nothing in Your sight; Surely every man at his best is a mere breath. NASU

Are you MVrs altogether vanity at your best state? Which verse is the most “understandable”?

Or say Ephesians 5:1,

*Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; KJV

*Be imitators of God, therefore, as dearly loved children NIV

*Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children; NASU

Are you an imitation Christian? Where’s the up-to-date language? Is this the language style you MVrs prefer? Doesn’t imitate convey “fake” or “counterfeit” in the modern idiom? Follower connotates heart knowledge, or one that has internalized the belief system of another. The biggest imitator of Christ is the devil.

As I have seen time and time again, MVs have watered down and distorted the words of God. I’ll read a verse in the KJB and think wow, that’ll preach (I am a preacher BTW). Then I look in the MVs like the NIV and NASB and find the verse completely butchered. Many of the powerful verses used in preaching during the Great Awakening have been utterly butchered in the MVs, for language understandability’s sake of course.

Funny how people from the most educated time in America’s history cannot understand the KJB, but our predecessors did. In fact, they did well enough to add the Great Awakening and formulation of the fundamentals of the faith to their vitae. Interesting.

It’s also interesting how these new Bibles were originally marketed as “easier to read”. They just left out the little insignificant fact that they changed the Greek NT to the tune of 10,000 places. Just a minor point I guess. I wonder how many would have bought these new Bibles if that was touted as loudly as readability, huh? Was this just their language style (not telling the whole truth)?

Here are two of literally thousands of key verses in the Bible whose “language style” if you will, is far superior to that of MVs. “Compass” compared to “imitator” is, well, straining at a gnat.

 

What do you think "vanity" is??? The point of the verse is that man's life is but a breath, which is very short. The context of the verse is clear in the MVs. The KJV makes it confusing as your attempt here has shown.

Another great example of nothing. The word imitate means to act like. It can be good or bad. Here, the context is clearly good. We are to imitate God. It is interesting that you bring this up. There is a clear word in Greek for "follow" and it is used quite frequently. For instance, Jesus told his disciples to "follow" him. That word is not used here. The word used here is mimetai, which means to imitate. Had Paul wanted to say "follow," he could have done so. But he didn't. He said "imitate."

Then why don't you share these verses here with us. Many times this claim has been made. Every single time it has failed. Perhaps you have some new information you would like to share with us.

What is interesting is that you don't understand the reason for this. The reason is not education; it is language change.

Another example of an error in the KJV. This verse mistranslates the word. It is to strain "out" a gnat.

 

No Larry, Jesus was talking about grunting heavily and squinting your eyes when you look at a gnat. Come on man, you should know this stuff.

 

I sure am glad I don't have to rely on a poll to KNOW what the Word of God is! KJB 1611 AV

 

What *do* you rely on to KNOW what the word of God is (KJB 1611 AV)?