Is YOUR church doctrinal statement ONE with SATAN?
- Thread starter ChosenbyHim
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
That might be sound good to the newer English versions and many of today's study bibles with explanatory notes, footnotes but not with KJV. The Rule no. 6 prevails and the Explanatory Notes were recorded separately by John Bois in his notes.
No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which cannot, without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed in the text.
No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which cannot, without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed in the text.
Fred the KJV translators didn't know which way to go with many of the things they translated but the words that ended up in scripture are ones God intended on being there. The translators were just earthly vessels used by God to pen the translations, they weren't the authors. They were the penman, just like the original writers were only penman and not authors.
God's will gets done no matter who does the writing.
God's will gets done no matter who does the writing.
It would probably be a good idea for you to do some research before you take a few words to prove -- actually nothing.
FYI, here is the translator's description of the phrase: The phrase like that of a god is in Aramaic “like that of a son of the gods.” Many patristic writers understood this phrase in a christological sense (i.e., “the Son of God”). But it should be remembered that these are words spoken by a pagan who is seeking to explain things from his own polytheistic frame of reference; for him the phrase “like a son of the gods” is equivalent to “like a divine being.”
Oh I forgot, you don't pay attention to what professional 21st Century translators say; you would rather go with the opinions of long-dead translators of the 17th Century.
FYI, here is the translator's description of the phrase: The phrase like that of a god is in Aramaic “like that of a son of the gods.” Many patristic writers understood this phrase in a christological sense (i.e., “the Son of God”). But it should be remembered that these are words spoken by a pagan who is seeking to explain things from his own polytheistic frame of reference; for him the phrase “like a son of the gods” is equivalent to “like a divine being.”
Oh I forgot, you don't pay attention to what professional 21st Century translators say; you would rather go with the opinions of long-dead translators of the 17th Century.
No, they're not inspired by "a different spirit", they're highly-regarded professional translators who use the best sources and techniques available to render the ancient languages in the most accurate, most meaningful modern English.
The KJV translators weren't inspired by some special spirit, they were ordered to produce a translation that reinforced what King James wanted the Bible to say.
The KJV translators weren't inspired by some special spirit, they were ordered to produce a translation that reinforced what King James wanted the Bible to say.
This sure sounds like an argument not to be dogmatic about the KJV being uniquely superior to all other translations... 
I do believe that each word of scripture is significant and important. And that they are not English words.
To me all these discussions about translations are pointing to the tower of Babel and the judgement God carried out there. I think from that, we should expect some imperfections in our language; I don't think we'll be speaking English in glory - probably not Hebrew either ((tho I know many people consider it to be the 'real' speech alone untouched by what happened at the tower, not sure I agree))
I do believe that each word of scripture is significant and important. And that they are not English words.
To me all these discussions about translations are pointing to the tower of Babel and the judgement God carried out there. I think from that, we should expect some imperfections in our language; I don't think we'll be speaking English in glory - probably not Hebrew either ((tho I know many people consider it to be the 'real' speech alone untouched by what happened at the tower, not sure I agree))
-
2
- Show all
Yeah like the highly regarded professionals that say taxes have to increase exponentially to stop MAN-MADE global warming. Or the experts that shut down the United States and put businesses out of business over a pandemic that counted motor cycle accidents deaths as a CV19 deaths to INFLATE THE NUMBERS so people like you would think we're in a pandemic. You are beyond gullible!
This is a meaningless question. Translators are not and were not workers of voodoo, they strive to translate the ancient languages into English.
I have no idea what you're talking about when you say, "the pure vine or the vine of Sodom?" Translations aren't grapes, they're the result of a lot of study and work.
I have no idea what you're talking about when you say, "the pure vine or the vine of Sodom?" Translations aren't grapes, they're the result of a lot of study and work.
This sure sounds like an argument not to be dogmatic about the KJV being uniquely superior to all other translations...
I do believe that each word of scripture is significant and important. And that they are not English words.
To me all these discussions about translations are pointing to the tower of Babel and the judgement God carried out there. I think from that, we should expect some imperfections in our language; I don't think we'll be speaking English in glory - probably not Hebrew either ((tho I know many people consider it to be the 'real' speech alone untouched by what happened at the tower, not sure I agree))
I do believe that each word of scripture is significant and important. And that they are not English words.
To me all these discussions about translations are pointing to the tower of Babel and the judgement God carried out there. I think from that, we should expect some imperfections in our language; I don't think we'll be speaking English in glory - probably not Hebrew either ((tho I know many people consider it to be the 'real' speech alone untouched by what happened at the tower, not sure I agree))
-
1
- Show all
There are two manuscript lines that DIFFER greatly in what they say. One of them came from the Vatican's anus and the other is uncorrupted version.
I can't believe you said translations aren't grapes. SMH The two vines in the bible are the vine of Christ and the vine of Sodom. Remember Jesus said I am the VINE and ye are the branches? Well the vine of Sodom IS NOT the vine of Christ. The vine NOURISHES the branches.... do you see what I mean? The bible nourishes OUR SPIRIT. I can't make it any clearer.
I can't believe you said translations aren't grapes. SMH The two vines in the bible are the vine of Christ and the vine of Sodom. Remember Jesus said I am the VINE and ye are the branches? Well the vine of Sodom IS NOT the vine of Christ. The vine NOURISHES the branches.... do you see what I mean? The bible nourishes OUR SPIRIT. I can't make it any clearer.