The Purpose of Inspired originals?

I have seen more error wrought by people's misunderstanding of the archaic and outdated words of the KJV than I have seen caused by ANYTHING else. Not only error, but the KJV is the favorite of almost every cult out there because of the very same thing. That's not the fault of the KJV as it was at one time a MV (and would have been as soundly condemned as such by many here had they been on the scene at the time )... but even then it was not written in the common vernacular of the day but rather in the language of the high and noble (who didn't even use it very much).

Yes, some do come to some form of understanding... but only as much as someone explains the archaic meanings and nuances to them. Otherwise the people go off on what they THINK it means and thereby create all kinds of foolishness and damage to the cause of Christ.

And then there are those who basically worship the KJV as if it were God's oracle of Delphi. That is what I mean by Nehushtan, where as the people worshiped the bronze serpent instead of the One whose power enacted their salvation there are those who would rather cling to a work of man's hands than to the Author of the original work.

While a knowledge of Greek and Hebrew is not required to understand the bible, it does help matters a great deal. Without it people can still use various study helps that explain the words of the Greek and Hebrew. Even without these man can compare translations to get a better sense of the nuances of a passage. Failing that some stand with a 400 year old translation and try to make heads or tails of it for few actually have or use a Webster's dictionary (or even know they need it because a bible SHOULD be readily understood on its own... shouldn't it???).

Sorry, Walter, but you have waltzed in here and seem to expect that everyone would agree with you and not call you on your ambiguities and wishy-washiness. Everyone is expected to be able to back up their claims around here and there has yet to be anyone who is able to back up the claim that the KJV should be the one and only. Perhaps you know of the verse(s) that declare the KJV as God's only word?

 

:applause: :applause: :laugh::laugh:

 

Um...there are evangelical Anglicans. Were there just none on the translation committee?

 

I completely agree with this assessment. Even if you don't believe there are any translation errors in the King James, the very changes in language usage and the resulting inaccessibility have spurned more doctrinal error in recent times than anything else.

Of course, these are the folks who believe that all you have to do is read the Bible and do what it says; that there's nothing to be gained from historical/grammatical exegesis and interpretation, and that sola scriptura means that we should take the King James Bible at face value.

Of course, that is very, very hard to do.

 

Just ask Matt Black. Anglicans aren't evangelicals in the way we think about them. They are sacramentalist much like the Catholics.

 

Not historically, at least, but there are many, many evangelical Anglicans who believe in sola fide. While being sacramental, these folks do not believe in them as purely ex opere operato.

 

That made me go.........hmmmmmmm?

 

I suppose you could be right. I'm just curious as to how long they've professed to be "born again" and are still in the RCC. If it's over a year or so, I'd have to question them some more.

 

Well.........thank you for your service to our country! Seriously!

 

Hello Dr. Walter and welcome.

I have been away for a while, and came back to find this thread, and have thoroughly enjoyed it.
Thank you very much, for explaining these simple truths so clearly.

I can also wholeheartedly agree with 99% of all that you have said;
But the other day you stated........

I would say, go ahead and “degrade” it.

In my book, if it is something that “God doesn’t need”, to accomplish His work, than why allow it to gum up the works.