The King James Bible

[Dino246]

All right you King James hater (tongue in cheek), I didn't want to have to do this to you - but you've forced me to pull out the BIG GUNS now; you're playing with the BIG BOYS now. Since this is my last ditch effort to save face!

When was the last time you used the word "porphyry" in Esther 1:6? As in "The garden had hangings of white and blue linen, fastened with cords of white linen and purple material to silver rings on marble pillars. There were couches of gold and silver on a mosaic pavement of porphyry, marble, mother-of-pearl and other costly stones."

Since this is an open an obvious attempt at humour, I'll let you down gently. Porphyry is related to marble and is reddish in coloration. Though I don't recall the exact last time I used it, it would be no more than about 27 years ago, when I was studying Art History.

 

[PeterJames]

Drat, foiled again! Well, if at least it got a smile on your face - it was worth it ... try to liven it up around here.

For the record, I'm KJV preferred and I always attempt my best to defend my preference on the KJV. But, I don't begrudge others if they are using other translations. Blessings.

Since this is an open an obvious attempt at humour, I'll let you down gently. Porphyry is related to marble and is reddish in coloration. Though I don't recall the exact last time I used it, it would be no more than about 27 years ago, when I was studying Art History.

 

[Studyman]

All right you King James hater (tongue in cheek), I didn't want to have to do this to you - but you've forced me to pull out the BIG GUNS now; you're playing with the BIG BOYS now. Since this is my last ditch effort to save face!

When was the last time you used the word "porphyry" in Esther 1:6? As in "The garden had hangings of white and blue linen, fastened with cords of white linen and purple material to silver rings on marble pillars. There were couches of gold and silver on a mosaic pavement of porphyry, marble, mother-of-pearl and other costly stones."

Well that settles that

Very interesting thread.

From my perspective, and that is a perspective of a nobody who studied outside the influence of any religious franchise claiming Jesus as their Savior, I would say the truth is found in most if not all translations. I have found that most (I haven't read them all) translations teach that God is a Spirit, and the understanding of His Word is a Spiritual understanding given to some and withheld from others. I would be glad to show scriptures which support this but the thread isn't really about teaching, rather, translations.

I believe The Great God of Abraham, who came to earth as a man in the form of Jesus, can guide those who are truly seeking Him into all truth. If a person is seeking to "know Him" Jesus will let Himself be known. There are "many" who come in His Name, who use His Word as a tool for justification of their lifestyle, or religious traditions. In todays world we can "translation hunt" to find a Bible that we can more easily bend towards this religious tradition or that. But those who are from the heart, seeking to know Him, and not just confirm the religion we were born into, we have a promise given in most all translations that He will "manifest Himself" to us.

That is the important part in my experience and opinion.

 

[Joseppi]

But he DID leave it to you to tell us which particular translation we MUST read?

I tell you to compare what you read in modern bibles with what the Holy Bible says.

Do you think God confounded the hearers on the day of Pentecost? or did God confuse them on the day of Pentecost?

Do you think God confused the language at Babel? or did God confound the languages at Babel?

Do you think God is a confuse? or is God a confounder?

 

[trofimus]

I tell you to compare what you read in modern bibles with what the Holy Bible says.

Do you think God confounded the hearers on the day of Pentecost? or did God confuse them on the day of Pentecost?

Do you think God confused the language at Babel? or did God confound the languages at Babel?

Do you think God is a confuse? or is God a confounder?

Yeah, never compare things, you might find they differ in some words and your faith would be done. Done!

 

[Joseppi]

"God breathed" is simply a different way of saying, "inspired". Where do you think the "spir" comes from in "inspired"? Where do you think the "spir" in "respiration" comes from?

I proved that when "God breathed" the result wasn't scripture.
Do you know the difference between soul and spirit.
Soul can't produce scripture.
The Spirit can produce scripture.
And only the spiritual man can understand scripture.

Furthermore, by saying "God breathed" people end up not understanding that the inspiration of God results in spiritual words and understanding, indeed, spirit and spiritual life.

It is because men read bibles that were soulishly produced that they continue receiving no spiritual comprehension whatsoever.

Now you're inventing things.

As to your accusation that I invented my understanding of the conversation between the serpent and Eve that resulted in her death, it may appear that way to you, but, I remind you that the first thing the serpent did when he confronted Eve was to ask her...Hath God said?
You imply it doesn't matter if modern bibles are accurate in what God said. But, I see that the serpent knew it does matter.
And when Eve's response revealed she didn't call for her husband, and that she added the words "nor touch it"; the wisest among beasts, knew he could boldly lie.

Maybe you don't think that when Eve added the words "touch it" it made it apparent to the serpent that she wanted to touch it.

And maybe you don't perceive that the addition of a man made law "thou shalt not touch it" was instrumental in persuading Eve to go ahead and eat the fruit, (since you've already touched it) since, her conscience fell when she did touch it.

This entire post is a clear demonstration of your self-righteousness and arrogance.

I suspect that you dismiss anyone that professes knowledge you don't possess.

 

[Joseppi]

Well that settles that

Very interesting thread.

From my perspective, and that is a perspective of a nobody who studied outside the influence of any religious franchise claiming Jesus as their Savior, I would say the truth is found in most if not all translations. I have found that most (I haven't read them all) translations teach that God is a Spirit, and the understanding of His Word is a Spiritual understanding given to some and withheld from others. I would be glad to show scriptures which support this but the thread isn't really about teaching, rather, translations.

I believe The Great God of Abraham, who came to earth as a man in the form of Jesus, can guide those who are truly seeking Him into all truth. If a person is seeking to "know Him" Jesus will let Himself be known. There are "many" who come in His Name, who use His Word as a tool for justification of their lifestyle, or religious traditions. In todays world we can "translation hunt" to find a Bible that we can more easily bend towards this religious tradition or that. But those who are from the heart, seeking to know Him, and not just confirm the religion we were born into, we have a promise given in most all translations that He will "manifest Himself" to us.

That is the important part in my experience and opinion.

Well maybe your synopsis of scripture is "the message" some posters suggest is all one needs to be approved of God.
I think what you have presented above is a dumped down personal message that modern bible readers will find comforting.
However, it doesn't line up with any notion that you have studied much.

 

[hornetguy]

I wonder why all the new versions use the KJV as their standard?

Because of people like YOU, who claim that there is nothing better than the KJV. Not many translations say, "well, we're pretty much almost as good as the KJV.." What they usually say is "we are at least as good as, and actually BETTER than the translation that YOU are holding up"

 

[trofimus]

I wonder why all the new versions use the KJV as their standard?

They do not use the KJV as their standard. You are mistaken. A Greek text of current edition of UBS/NA is the standard.

Some may use the KJV as example of tradition, a kind of help in translating, because people can be used to some names in English and for example "Noe" instead of traditional "Noah" can produce heart attacks between some Christians.

 

[hornetguy]

God didn't publish the Holy Bible based on your judgment and/or discernment.

Is every word important? I believe God has told us that, Yes, every word is important. Can I prove the importance of every nuance of God's written word to your satisfaction? I don't think I can.
Who knows what you think is significant but you?

I understand that replacing "only begotten Son" with "only" or with "one and only" as some bibles do is the result of the spirit of Antichrist that the apostle John so carefully warned the church about. But others don't understand.
I know why adding a "s" in the first verse of bibles is false. But others can't figure it out and don't see any reason to care.
I see that replacing "inspired" with "God breathed" is false. But others think "God breathed" is a revelation of some kind. Even though when God breathed into Adam he became a living soul not a God inspired intellect who later sinned because his intellect failed to understand his predicament.
Did it matter if Eve failed to know what God said to Adam? She said, that God said she couldn't touch the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
When the serpent saw that she added to God's word he struck and killed her for her ignorance and/or presumptiousness.

You suggest that saying "a son of the gods" isnt important to your way of thinking. However it is to mine.
But you don't know what I know.
You apparently think you know "the message" whatever it is you think the message is. And that notion that all one needs is "the message" to be approved of by God is a devil's lie.
Jesus is the Way. But who among you supposes that Jesus is simple.
Do you remember what Jesus' simple message was when he began his preaching and teaching? It was "repent or perish." That simple message doesn't say all that Jesus came to communicate. And I think everyone knows better than to think all one needs to know is "The Message."

If you are as simple and casual concerning scripture as you claim then why do care that others believe differently.
I you want to be dismissive of what I say for example, then follow through and move on to something that does matter to you.

You think I'm "simple and casual" and I think you're "anal and obsessive-compulsive".....

In the end, if you cannot show any evidence that the added "s" or the punctuation, or the "son of the gods" comment actually caused, or even COULD cause any distress or loss of faith in a believer, then you are dead wrong in making this the issue you hang your faith upon.

I don't care how anal you are.... doesn't matter to me in the least. But when you come on this forum and try to teach your anal beliefs as "gospel truth", then I will involve myself in the discussion, simply to show others how silly you are being.... and to try to show them that our God is not a God of jots and tittles... He is a God of love, and will not cast us into Hell for simply reading that He created the heavens, instead of the heaven.

Your position is ludicrous.... stop trying to impose it on others.

 

[hornetguy]

Drat, foiled again! Well, if at least it got a smile on your face - it was worth it ... try to liven it up around here.

For the record, I'm KJV preferred and I always attempt my best to defend my preference on the KJV. But, I don't begrudge others if they are using other translations. Blessings.

You mean, you are a normal reader of the KJV? That is very refreshing for this topic. I occasionally read from the KJV as well, but I prefer others.

 

[Joseppi]

Many of the posts I have read in this thread since I last looked at this thread the other day are focused on avoiding comparison of what the Holy Bible says with the preferred modern bibles.
Broad sweeping proclamations of how wonderful the modern bibles are, such as (someone thinks they're good enough in their own opinion) or other broad judgments are attempts to whitewash the brutal lies and stupid sayings found in the modern bibles.

Do you readers think the Bereans determined God's truth by comparing various versions of what they presumed were flawed copies of extinct originals?
Only modern man is so vain and stupid as to waste their time pretending any man can invent the original written words of God, and then have the gall to call it scholarship.

 

[John146]

They do not use the KJV as their standard. You are mistaken. A Greek text of current edition of UBS/NA is the standard.

Some may use the KJV as example of tradition, a kind of help in translating, because people can be used to some names in English and for example "Noe" instead of traditional "Noah" can produce heart attacks between some Christians.

Oh but they do. Look up the lost verses in the new versions. Why do they skip over the verse and continue to the next without listing the verse? Could it be they are trying to keep the standard set forth by the KJV?

 

[Joseppi]

You think I'm "simple and casual" and I think you're "anal and obsessive-compulsive".....

In the end, if you cannot show any evidence that the added "s" or the punctuation, or the "son of the gods" comment actually caused, or even COULD cause any distress or loss of faith in a believer, then you are dead wrong in making this the issue you hang your faith upon.

I don't care how anal you are.... doesn't matter to me in the least. But when you come on this forum and try to teach your anal beliefs as "gospel truth", then I will involve myself in the discussion, simply to show others how silly you are being.... and to try to show them that our God is not a God of jots and tittles... He is a God of love, and will not cast us into Hell for simply reading that He created the heavens, instead of the heaven.

Your position is ludicrous.... stop trying to impose it on others.

No comment.

 

[trofimus]

Oh but they do. Look up the lost verses in the new versions. Why do they skip over the verse and continue to the next without listing the verse? Could it be they are trying to keep the standard set forth by the KJV?

Not "standard", but "tradition". Backward compatibility. So that we both can have the same verse numbering.

 

[Dino246]

I proved that when "God breathed" the result wasn't scripture.

No, what you did was demonstrate (not "prove") that in one case where the phrase, "God breathed" was used, the result was not Scripture.

It is because men read bibles that were soulishly produced that they continue receiving no spiritual comprehension whatsoever.

Regardless of the translation used, the natural man has no understanding of spiritual things without the Holy Spirit. Your assertion of "soulishly-produced bibles" is groundless, meaningless, and worthless.

As to your accusation that I invented my understanding of the conversation between the serpent and Eve that resulted in her death...

You missed the point... again. I carefully did not quote the whole paragraph.

I suspect that you dismiss anyone that professes knowledge you don't possess.

Another personal attack. Keep showing the true nature of your heart.

 

[MichaelOwen]

I have always admired the King James because historically speaking, it is the closest living translation to the actual scrolls that were discovered.

 

[Dino246]

Oh but they do. Look up the lost verses in the new versions. Why do they skip over the verse and continue to the next without listing the verse? Could it be they are trying to keep the standard set forth by the KJV?

You really need to do your homework. The KJV was not the first to use chapter and verse divisions.

 

[Dino246]

I have always admired the King James because historically speaking, it is the closest living translation to the actual scrolls that were discovered.

On what do you base this bold assertion? Have you done any homework on the subject? Are you competent in ancient Greek and Hebrew, and have you examined the scrolls for yourself?

For that matter, can you explain the difference between a scroll and a codex? Between a manuscript and an edition? Between papyrus and vellum? Between miniscules and uncials?

 

[Joseppi]

Oh but they do. Look up the lost verses in the new versions. Why do they skip over the verse and continue to the next without listing the verse? Could it be they are trying to keep the standard set forth by the KJV?

The modern bible publisher seeking filthy lucre are not only presenting corrupt texts, but are also knowingly trying to deceive readers into thinking that their modern improved bibles have erased scriptures.
They aren't men of God at all.
Their left hand knows precisely what their right hand is doing.