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!

Slandering God

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by stilllearning, Oct 3, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    My view was adulterated, again, by the moderator accusing me of questioning one's dependence upon the Spirit, FOUL!

    I did NO such thing and find it reprehensible you would stoop to such hodge-podge.

    I only said if she were to do both it would benefit her and you, just as if I submit more to the Spirit I would benefit and so would my whole family.

    If yall would get this enormous chip off your shoulders you MIGHT understand what some one ACTUALLY is saying!:mad:

    try the actual words and stop the presumptive process of beguiling those who read what you've read into my posts.

    Submitting to the Spirit leads one into an understanding they did NOT have before.

    If you want to continue placing everything on an intellectualism plain try not impugning your wife's ability to read for starters.

    Good, then stop embarassing her in the public forum!

    I just might agree on the first statement:D :p , the second is suspect; are you asking she do anything inappropiate? I certainly hope not! Yet some preachers do.

    BTW, for everyone: I said in general that anyone who submits to their authority is benefitting.

    Anyone care to disagree with this??????????
     
  2. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    Nope; we have only flawed translations.
     
  3. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    Why do we need a 'perfect' translation to "accurately" present the Gospel? Jesus, His apostles, and the early Church were able spread the Gospel and grow the Church without even a New Testament! :applause:
     
  4. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    And.....how was the gospel spread during the dark ages? How was it spread when the only Bible was chained to a pulpit in a church?
     
  5. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    After the invention of the printing press some big Bibles were chained in the back of churches.I don't think they were chained to pulpits.

    The Gospel was spread around by various means.Portions of the Scripture were copied by-hand and distributed.Peter Waldo's followers were lay priests (some women too) and visited villages far and wide.They would preach/teach.
     
  6. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    Thanks Bro. Rippon! I got the chained part right though. :laugh:

    I was agreeing with Frankin by the way. :thumbs:
     
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Personally, I got three questions I would like to see answered on this surely doomed thread:

    1.) Question # 1: Why is it that most who claim to be so committed to the 1611 KJV, usually seem to quote from the 1769 edition KJV (when that quoting of Scripture is actually done, as opposed to merely speaking "ex-cathedra")?

    2.) Question # 2: Why is it that more than one poster, including Salamander, who have said that their preferred stance and position is not actually a "KJVO" position, still seems to be, nevertheless, a 'KJVA' or a 'KJVET'? That's KJV 'Always', or KJV 'Every Time', for the readers.

    3.) Question # 3: If the 1611 KJV was deemed necessary for revision (due to the changes in the English language) a century and a half (that's 150 years for us Baptist types) ;) after it was first issued (Parris 1762 - Cambridge; Blaney 1769 - Oxford), why would there not be an even greater need now, after almost another two and a half centuries or almost 250 years, for those who happen to be "MENSA" math 'whizzes'?

    Ed
     
  8. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Good questions Ed.
     
  9. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi Gold Dragon

    First of all I apologize, for not placing this post on the right forum.
    (Weather that’s the “translations” forum, or not I don’t know:)
    ?Is there a “defending God’s Word” forum?
    --------------------------------------------------
    You said.........
    I would agree;

    Although, you continued in saying, that God has preserved His Word.....
    The “languages and manuscripts” part, I accept, but the “multiple translations” part, doesn’t make any sense.

    Because who gets to decide, which parts of which translations is correct?
     
  10. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    It doesn't make sense to you because you have decided which parts of which translations you think are correct.

    God does.
     
    #30 Gold Dragon, Oct 3, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 4, 2008
  11. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Personally, I dunno', but will ask why should it be the Church of England, which would allow no Baptists to take any part in this translation of the KJV, and was composed almost entirely of Anglicans, a few of which had some really 'screwy' ideas??

    I do note, from the profile, you are a Baptist. Since you are, why would you not 'support' the most 'Baptist' of all translations, the NKJV, or #2, in that category, the HCSB, and which is, in fact, 'owned' by the SBC?

    Ed
     
  12. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi Dr. Bob

    You have nothing to apologize for.
    If this tread must be moved, that’s fine with me.

    Sometimes it’s hard to determine, exactly which forum a post might belong in.

    All I ask, is for those in charge, to let this discussion go on for a while, until each of us, has a chance to get to the bottom of our part of this discussion.
    --------------------------------------------------
    You also said.......
    I don’t know what BTW stands for, but I agree about how when “man” starts messing with something, that He messes it up.

    But I must personally stop short of condemning “every” translation as having errors.
    --------------------------------------------------
    No don’t get me wrong, I flatly reject “double inspiration”, but I do believe that God providentially protected the foundational translation of the KJV.

    As I said before, this is my personal belief and stand.
    --------------------------------------------------
    But the purpose of this post, was to point out the terrible results, of a person, not believing, that they have a Bible(one Bible), that they can place, 100% trust in.
     
  13. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    FTR, BTW stands for "By the way."

    BTW, FTR, is the abbreviation I use for "For the record." :)

    Ed
     
  14. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi franklinmonroe

    Nice to hear from you.

    You first pointed out.....
    Well you are right. There is no way to get past this.
    As we all know, the original autographs no longer exist.
    Therefore we must trust men, to have accurately copied them, in the first place.

    This trust that I have in the copies, isn’t really in men, but in God. Trusting that He made sure, that I would have an accurate copy of His word, today.
    --------------------------------------------------
    Your next statement was very interesting......
    You are right.
    So what does it always mean, if God’s Word is silent on any subject?

    I submit, that it means, that this is something that we shouldn’t worry ourselves about.
    (I will probably have more to say on this later.)
    --------------------------------------------------
    Next you said.......
    I can’t agree with that.
    And the reason that I can’t, is because I am saved, and I am God’s child, and I can’t read GK or HB:
    Therefore I “need” an accurate translation in English, for “me” to have access to God’s Word.

    No, I am not saying that God waited for English to come around, in order to preserve His Word, but I do believe that “God has preserved His Word in English”.
     
  15. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    IOW = In other words.

    IMO = In my opinion.

    NWH = No way Hosea ( I just thought of it.)

    LOL = Laughing out loud.

    Does anyone want to contribute more?
     
  16. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi ajg1959

    I think that you have understood the point of my post.

    You said........
     
  17. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi franklinmonroe

    Please allow me to respond, to you response to ajg1959

    You said.......
    No.
    Man’s sin, will not prevent the LORD, from Perfectly preserving His Word for us.
     
  18. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello tinytim

    It is nice to talk to you agian.

    You make a good point.

    You said.......
    I agree(as Dr.Bob’s example demonstrates).

    In the same way, that the translators of the KJV, fully understood this, and realized that they were going to have to “add” some words here and there, throughout the Bible, in order to make it more understandable to us.

    But the wise thing that they did, was to forever identify each word that they added, by italicizing it.
    --------------------------------------------------
    But Just because, this is the case, doesn’t give any of us the license, to cast doubt on God’s Word.

    I think, that this is the first time, that I have brought up this subject;
    But that is exactly what is being done here. (Casting doubt!)

    If we accept the premise, that we can’t have God’s Word, preserved in our language, than what are we left with?!?!
    --------------------------------------------------
    This reminds me, of a stand that we are told to take in Scripture.......

    There are some things, that I(personally), have learned, and am sure of.

    And one of those things, is that I can trust the Bible, that I hold in my hand.
    --------------------------------------------------
    This confidence, that I have in the Bible, has made the difference in my life.

    Psalms 119:11
    “Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.”


    Hope to here from you again, tinytim.
     
  19. stilllearning

    stilllearning Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi tinytim

    Your question to ajg1959, hit the point.

    You asked........
    My trust is in “the God of the Bible”.
    So therefore, my trust is in “the Bible”!

    If it wasn’t for “God’s preserved Word”, none of us would know the truth about God!

    Therefore, our trust MUST BE IN THE BIBLE!
    --------------------------------------------------
    As for your statement........
    This argument is flawed, because these documents aren’t exactly alike.


    ===================================================================
    And just a word to Salamander.

    Although I truly appreciate your zeal, about God’s preserved Word:
    Please try to be more courteous in your responses.
    --------------------------------------------------
    So far in this thread(and I am at the top of page 2), everyone has been very courteous to me, and I truly appreciate it.
     
  20. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not franklinmonroe, however, I hoppen I fully agree that the Word is indeed 'preserved'. Apparently however, unlike some, I just don't believe that it has been 'pickled.'
    Just FTR, the above are all 'English' translations of three verses, two from the NT, and one from the OT and the OT verse is classified as "Modern English'.

    And a few more, but this time, it is the same verse in all translations:
    Um- notice anything unusual or particularly different about this verse in the KJV 1611?

    Ed
     
    #40 EdSutton, Oct 4, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 4, 2008
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...