Things to Consider Before Attempting to Correct the King James Bible

-

Since I cant PM i want to ask you here: Do you believe in "chance" or "random events"? Do you know of any bible verses that teach that some things arent "meant to be" but are "random" or "chance"?

I have cancer. Did God give me cancer or did the natural causes of living in a sin cursed world in a body that has not been redeemed yet happen upon cancer? I don't think God ordained for me to have cancer. I think God can use the circumstances of me having cancer to bring Him glory.

Okay. So you would say diseases are random.

Do you have any verses that mention "random" or "chance" being in the universe? I dotn mean those specific words have to appear, but the concept, you know. Im not asking to argue or refute you or trick you or anything.

Just genuinely asking if you know of such verses that teach something being by "chance" or "random". I sometimes feel like things like, stubbing your toe is just so meaningless that it must be random lol

A quick search:

Ecclesiastes 9:11 I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

1 Samuel 6:9 And see, if it goeth up by the way of his own coast to Bethshemesh, then he hath done us this great evil: but if not, then we shall know that it is not his hand that smote us: it was a chance that happened to us.

2 Samuel 1:6 And the young man that told him said, As I happened by chance upon mount Gilboa, behold, Saul leaned upon his spear; and, lo, the chariots and horsemen followed hard after him.

That settles that.

I had a feeling that somethings are just random events. now i see its also scriptural

Here is another one, although its in a parable, but still!

Luke 10:31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.

I think that anybody who thinks man is capable of translating the word of God without inspiration has no clue as to what the Bible even is. It really sickens me to see the foolish comments on these threads.

The main weakness of any translation is that languages don't translate perfectly. No language has a perfect representation in any other language of three key parameters: word meaning, sentence structure, and sentence meaning. Typically, the word order must change to fit the destination language, even if there are close-to-parallel words.

Consider the phrase, "the big red dog". If I am translating that phrase into French, the word-for-word translation is "le grand rouge chien". However, that is not correct French. Correct French would be "le grand chien rouge". So which is the correct translation? It depends on what the translator is trying to accomplish! Both convey the meaning adequately, and both could be called "incorrect" by some standard.

Less frequently the translator will have to deal with an idiom in the source language that simply doesn't translate. Consider the saying, "It's raining cats and dogs". In English, it has a particular meaning: It's raining heavily. If you translate the idiom, the meaning doesn't go with it. If you translate the meaning, the words don't go with it.

Translation is both art and science. To be competent, the translator must be very familiar with both languages. He or she must find the closest approximation in the destination language for the text in the source language. Some strive for word-perfect translation, while others strive for idea-perfect translation. Some use a blend, and some only attempt to get across the gist of the idea (paraphrases). Each has a different result, and all those results have their place, as long as the translators are doing honest work.

This is why most knowledgeable readers of the Bible don't fuss over exact wording; they are comfortable with an idea being presented in any of several ways. It's the KJV-only types who get stuck on particular words and disallow ANY variation. Essentially what they do is deify the translators, or in your case, deify the process of translation by claiming that inspiration is required.

I have cancer. Did God give me cancer or did the natural causes of living in a sin cursed world in a body that has not been redeemed yet happen upon cancer? I don't think God ordained for me to have cancer. I think God can use the circumstances of me having cancer to bring Him glory.

I have cancer.

This sounds like to me you don't think it's possible for God to have His "originals" translated into another language, and that translation contain the exact wording that particular language needs. Is this your view?

The main weakness of any translation is that languages don't translate perfectly. No language has a perfect representation in any other language of three key parameters: word meaning, sentence structure, and sentence meaning. Typically, the word order must change to fit the destination language, even if there are close-to-parallel words.

Consider the phrase, "the big red dog". If I am translating that phrase into French, the word-for-word translation is "le grand rouge chien". However, that is not correct French. Correct French would be "le grand chien rouge". So which is the correct translation? It depends on what the translator is trying to accomplish! Both convey the meaning adequately, and both could be called "incorrect" by some standard.

Less frequently the translator will have to deal with an idiom in the source language that simply doesn't translate. Consider the saying, "It's raining cats and dogs". In English, it has a particular meaning: It's raining heavily. If you translate the idiom, the meaning doesn't go with it. If you translate the meaning, the words don't go with it.

Translation is both art and science. To be competent, the translator must be very familiar with both languages. He or she must find the closest approximation in the destination language for the text in the source language. Some strive for word-perfect translation, while others strive for idea-perfect translation. Some use a blend, and some only attempt to get across the gist of the idea (paraphrases). Each has a different result, and all those results have their place, as long as the translators are doing honest work.

This is why most knowledgeable readers of the Bible don't fuss over exact wording; they are comfortable with an idea being presented in any of several ways. It's the KJV-only types who get stuck on particular words and disallow ANY variation. Essentially what they do is deify the translators, or in your case, deify the process of translation by claiming that inspiration is required.

Not as sick as......

a. Devaluing the word of God by denying that the Spirit indwells all believers and will lead and guide into the truth by your idiotic comment

b. By elevating a translation/transliteration to a status of worship over the God of the version

The two above is what should make you sick!!!

That settles that.

Heb 4:12 (KJV) For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Oh wait a minute you don’t believe that verse do you? It’s poetry or something right. Right lol!

When you don’t know something about a subject it’s best to remain silent.

I'm not sure to whom you are directing your comment... myself or DCon. However, it probably doesn't matter, as it is a red herring anyway.

More hypotheticals. Again, what God ‘could’ do is irrelevant in light of what He HAS done. Scripture makes no statement on your hypothetical scenario.

Not quite brother. Let's study it out before we knee jerk react:

but time and chance happeneth to them all; to the swift and strong, the wise, understanding, and skilful; or to the swift and slow, to the strong and weak, to the wise and unwise; everything befalls them just as it is ordered by divine Providence; for there is a certain "time" fixed by the Lord for every event; and whatever seems casual and contingent to man, and which he is ready to call "chance", is noticing but "decree" with God, firm and unalterable; Plato (e) has the same expression. The word signifies "occurrence" (f), or event, which is under the wise direction and order of the providence of God, with respect to whom nothing comes by chance; and it is rendered "occurrent", 1Ki_5:4; and so it is here, by the Septuagint version, "occurrence" or "event"; and in the Targum, event by their star, which is fate: and Aben Ezra interprets it המערכה עליונה, the "superior ordination"; it is something we meet, or meets us, by divine appointment. Aben Ezra and Kimchi, who are followed by others, think that, from Ecc_10:4; to this, Solomon is speaking in the person of epicures and atheists; which is not likely, since it is not in character for such persons to talk of God's acceptance of men's works; of living joyfully with a wife; of this life being a life of vanity; and of death and the grave; and of diligence in working while the present life lasts. - John Gill

Time and chance happeneth to them all; there are some times or seasons unknown and casual to men, but certain and determined by God, in which alone he will give men success. - Matthew Poole

And this, Proverbs 18:17; "The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him."

I think that anybody who thinks man is capable of translating the word of God without inspiration has no clue as to what the Bible even is. It really sickens me to see the foolish comments on these threads.

Not so when dealing with the adversary. It took Satan how long to corrupt God's words in the garden?

And that’s exactly why I say that if God isn’t behind the translation then it’s mans opinion of the word of God and not even close to the word of God.