The World's Fastest Bible Memory Plan

Yes.
But you can only be sure the editiions with
Translator's Footnotes are correct.

Which of the following is correct, the scripture or
the footnote? This example is from the first page
of the New Testament:

Mat 1:11 (KJV1611 Edition):
And ||Iosias begate Iechonias and his brethren,
about the time they were caried away to Babylon.

Sidenote: ||Some read, Iosias begate Iakim,
and Iakim begat Iechonias

What does that mean?
according to the logical process
started by some IMHOs -- it means that
the KJV1611 Edition has an error, is NOT inerrant
so can't be a REAL Bible.

Which of the above was correct, the scripture or
the footnote?

 

Allow me to restate the question more simply.

In Matthew 17:21, did Jesus Christ say "But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting." or in Matthew 17:21 did Jesus Christ say nothing? It's an either or proposition. One of the two options is truth, He either spoke these words or He didn't. Which do you believe it to be?

 

It is misleading to make the choice "scripture or footnote". Neither is authoritative. Both are the opinions of the translators. The opinions that made it to "scripture" were the ones in which the translators had the most confidence, but they clearly weren't 100% sure. If only one or the other was absolutely authoritative, there wouldn't be a reason to add the footnote.

 

I will let Ed answer for himself, but I find it ironic that KJVO's demand that it is 'an either or proposition' in this case but in the case of which KJV is correct when it comes to 1 John 5:12, they are 'both sufficient'.

As my grampa used to say, "Horsefeathers!"

 

Bro. Williams, I didn't see that any one had responded to you inquiry (other than the mentioned idiom "God forbid" which wasn't really what you were asking for), which I thought deserved an answer.

And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: [it is] hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord [said] unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. (Acts 9:5-6, KJV)​

It seems that Erasmus admitted in the notes accompanying his Greek NT that he took the words from the parallel accounts found elsewhere in book of Acts and included them his text because they were in the Vulgate (and are NOT found in any extant Greek manuscripts) --

And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do. (Acts 22:10)

And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? [it is] hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.(Acts 26:14,15)​

There are other examples of terms or phrases in the TR that are not supported by actual Greek MSS (in Colossians 1:14 the phrase "through his blood" seems to be 'borrowed' from Ephesians 1:7, and several in Revelation) but I won't go into further detail here since this is a little off the current topic.

 

If the scripture is not authoritative and the footnote is not authoritative, then what is your authority? When you have the NIV Bible in your hands do you have the inspired words of God or merely the opinions of translators?

 

When it comes right down to it ALL Bible versions are 'the opinions of translators'... unless of course you believe in secondary inspiration.

 

I'd be encouraged brother if you felt up to answering the questions.

 

"Yea, and hath God said..."

 

Copied from Squire from another thread...

Whether or not these are the best representations, "best represented" and "authoritative down to the last letter" aren't the same thing. The best representation of a verse depends on the opinions of the translators and their degree of confidence. That is why - when they aren't 100% sure - one thing makes it into scripture and another gets relegated to a footnote. I'm perfectly comfortable with that, and I appreciate the footnotes.

Once again, if the translators were 100% sure the scripture in question was authoritative, they wouldn't have added the footnote. So even they are admitting they don't know. Why do KJVOs think they know better than the KJV translators?
.

 

Actually, it's not an either or proposition. Jesus did give them what seems to be a reasonably complete answer --

And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you. (Matthew 17:20)​

 

...and then He said what? Did He speak further or was He silent?

 

According to what seems to be strong MSS evidence, the Matthew account ends there. The parallel event as described in Mark also indicates that Jesus replied, but does not record His words found in Matthew 17:20 about their "unbelief". May one Gospel not record something Jesus said and still be true and accurate, or it always necessary that each passage be exactly the same?

 

Really? Here is an example, Acts 5:30 --

The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.​

The Greek of the TR does not have the word kai (Strong's #2532, translated "and" in the KJV over 8,000 times) in it at all. Yet this word is NOT italicized in the English text of the KJV.

Here is another, Mark 2:15 --

And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.​

The Greek word Iesous (Strong's #2424, the proper name "Jesus/Joshua") does not occur at this phrase (although it does at the later "Jesus" in this verse). Here the Textus Receptus has the pronoun autos (Strong's #846, meaning "he/she/it" or "his/her"). Formal equivalence demands "He" as the proper rendering. But the KJV revisors have placed an English word here, without the proper corresponding Greek word, and have NOT so indicated this to the reader. (Reminiscent of an exchanging "God" for "He", perhaps?)

Are these God's words or are they men's words? When translators "place other words in them to make complete sentences" are those word inspired? Which are more likely to be God's words: the words "in italic" that have no underlying ancient language text behind them, or footnoted words that do have MSS support?

 

Rufus_1611: //In Matthew 17:21, did Jesus Christ
say "But this kind does not go out except by prayer
and fasting." or in Matthew 17:21 did Jesus Christ
say nothing? It's an either or proposition.
One of the two options is truth, He either spoke
these words or He didn't. Which do you believe it to be?//

I'll answer again, because you asked again.
Obviously you are having a hard time RECEIVING
what I'm saying.

//It's an either or proposition.
One of the two options is truth,
He either spoke these words or He didn't//

Respectfully Brother Rufus_1611 - These statements
are NOT true.
I believe that both of them help shed truth upon
God's Holy Written Word. God has Divinely
Preserved in His Inerrant Written Word and both
choices sheding more light on the Wonderful
Bounty of God's Mercy upon us.

The only alternative to believing that
"God has Divinely
Preserved in His Inerrant Written Word and both
choices sheding more light on the Wonderful
Bounty of God's Mercy upon us"
is to assume that
"God goofed" -- I decline to assume that.

I believe as an axiom: all valid
English Versions individually and collectively
contain and are the inerrant, Divinely Preserved,
Written Word of God, the Holy Bible.

From that I can prove: It is wise to use multiple
Versions/translation to help understand (under the guidance of
the Holy Spirit) the inerrant Written Word of God:
the Holy Bible.

What axiom do those start with who conclude
that "God Goofed"?

 

Brother Ed,

When Jesus Christ was on earth, He did stuff and said stuff. The Bible records what He did or didn't do and did or didn't say.

According to the NIV, In Matthew 17:21, Jesus Christ either said "But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting." or Jesus Christ said nothing. Now I understand that He was a miracle worker but are you saying that He said both nothing and He said, "But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting" and if so how do you feel this reconciles with reality? All I want to know is according to your understanding of the NIV, what did Jesus Christ say in Matthew 17:21? Did He say something or nothing? I don't desire to have "truth shed upon God's Holy written word" I want the whole deal, just the truth. What happened and how do you know? Do you know because of what scripture tells you, do you know because of what a footnote tells you or do actually not really know because you have two confusing contradictory statements / non-statements, one in a footnote and one omitted scripture?

Also, sidenote...in post 85 I asked you where you got that quote from and I do not believe you have responded. I wouldn't make a big deal out of this but I believe this is yet another of your misquotes of me for I do not recognize those words. Could you please show me where I said these things and if they aren't my words will you please begin to use the little "Quote" button in the lower right corner so you don't lose track of who you are quoting?

 

Joh 21:25 (Geneva Bible, 1587 Edition):
Nowe there are also many other things which
Iesus did, the which if they should be written
euery one, I suppose the world coulde not
conteine the bookes that shoulde be written, Amen.

Rufus_1611: //When Jesus Christ was on earth, He did stuff
and said stuff. The Bible records what He did
or didn't do and did or didn't say.//

The two above statements contradict each other.
I'll go with the Bible: God's Holy Written Word
that says clearly that not all the Christ did
was written down (= recorded in the Bible). Ed notes
that to say somthing is to 'do' a saying.
So not every saying of Christ was written down.

 

//Also, sidenote...in post 85 I asked you where you got that
quote from and I do not believe you have responded.
I wouldn't make a big deal out of this but I believe this
is yet another of your misquotes of me for I do not
recognize those words. Could you please show me
where I said these things and if they aren't my words will
you please begin to use the little "Quote" button
in the lower right corner so you don't lose track
of who you are quoting?//

My bad, they are quoted from post #69 and were said
by Av1611jim. God has had me paid $38.00 per hour in
the past for researching locations. It took me 1/4 and hour
to find that quote -- you owe God $9.50.

I've taken corrective action
(one of the signs of a true repentance).
I'll no longer share who said what,
if somebody wants to know, they can search through
the topic trying to find the quote.

I do note that people who don't tell who they are
quoting last longer on this board than folks who
mention whom they are quoting.
(BTW, the BB doesn't support multiple quotes
in the manner suggested by the poster of the above
request). I also note it is rude to the host of BB
to quote a long post and then just comment to
a part or two. It is kinder to the host of BB to
only quote the parts that might help the reader
figure out what one is talking about.

 

//I don't desire to have "truth shed upon God's Holy written word" ... //

I do. That is why I discuss it. That is why I read it.

P.S. All Valid* English versions individually and
collectivelly are and contain the Inerrant and Divinely
Preserved Written Word of God: the Holy Bible.

* 'Valid' is easily discernable by any competent group
of Bapists (i.e. like a Church). See my poll about this.