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.
Posthuman, I still do not see a problem with the usage and translation of Farthing.
According to the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia,
The assarion was the tenth part of the denarius, and hence in value about one penny
Other dictionaries define Farthing as a Copper coin, in one of their definitions. And one which is of very little value. And so I still do not see any error with the usage of “Farthing” in the KJV.
Then according to an article on Quadrans:
“The Greek word for the quadrans was kodrantes, which is translated as “Farthing”
A Quadrans (meaning a fourth part), considered the smallest Roman copper coin, was said to be a quarter of an as (assarion).
which was a Roman coin equal to a tenth of a denarius or drachma, nearly equal to a halfpenny of our money.
Posthuman, yes, an assarion is a roman coin. But as I already showed, Farthing can be defined as a copper coin. And obviously from the context of those passages, A farthing, must have been a copper coin that they would use to purchase goods during that time. Now instead of attacking the word and rendering of Farthing In the KJV, why don’t you just by faith believe that that wording is the correct one, Posthuman?
There has to be a reason why God allowed the KJV Translators to translate assarion as Farthing in Matthew 5:26 and 10:29 in the KJB. Plus, God also allowed the rendering of Farthing in the other English Bibles which came before the King James Bible. If God wanted Assarion to be in place in those very passages, then it would have been there. But we see that assarion is not there, but farthing is. Hence, I believe that God wanted Farthing and not Assarion. And for what reason? I am not sure, posthuman. Concerning this example, I am just going to have to believe it by faith.
Posthuman, your problem is that you approach the Bible from the incorrect view, that it is not 100% pure and perfect. Whereas I approach the Bible from the Scriptural view that it is 100% pure and perfect.
There are traps which God has laid down all throughout His word, since He knew that there would be people who would approach His word with the ulterior motive of trying to find fault and error in it. And so God allows them to stumble at His word. And once again, why I am not exactly sure why God allowed the wording of Farthing in his finished Bible, I do though tend to think that He chose to allow it in there just for people such as you Posthuman who would try to find error in His word.
Also, the usage of "Farthing" and "Mite" in the King James Bible and also earlier English Bibles, has also confounded the numismatists, as they probably also believe that the English Bibles should have used ancient coin denominations such as assarion and lepton.
An interesting article which I found can be read at the link below:
http://numismatics.org/pocketchange/the-poor-widows-mite/
Again though, I believe that the usage of "Farthing" in the KJV is not an error at all. Since I know that God would not allow any error to come into His finished Bible.
Well then why do you think they translated it as Farthing then?
All words in Scripture matter. After all Every word of God is pure. Man doth not live by bread alone but by every word of God (Prov. 30:5, Lk. 4:4)
And as I mentioned in my last post, there has to be a reason why God allowed the Translators to translate the Greek word ἀσσάριον as Farthing, in Matthew 10:29. And I am not exactly sure what that reason is. But since I know that there can be no error in God’s word, I can trust that Farthing is the right rendering for those passages in Scripture that you made reference to.
[QUOTE="posthuman, post: 4305063, member: 170505"and that's why i bring it up -- because your KJV-ism is a self-defeating argument in this case. [/QUOTE]
You mean my stand that there is a perfect and infallible Bible on this earth that we can hold in our hands and read and obey?
Posthuman, any Christian with the Alexandrian philosophy can try to prove example after example of what they perceive to be errors In the word of God (King James Bible), but the truth is, the only error is that of your mind and thinking. The problem and error is in your mind and lack of understanding, posthuman. The problem is not the King James Bible, but the problem is with you, sir.
Where did the KJV Translators say that their translation was imperfect?
The King James Translators simply wanted the reader to see that they had seen the alternative readings (which were placed in the Marginal notes) and that they had chosen what they had put in the text of the Authorized Bible.
And so, If what you claim about the KJV translators is true, Posthuman, then they would have contradicted themselves when they wrote the following:
"Truly, good Christian Reader, we never thought from the beginning that we should need to make a new translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one; (for then the imputation of Sixtus had been true in some sort, that our people had been fed with gall of dragons instead of wine, with whey instead of milk; but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones one PRINCIPAL good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavour, that our mark."
But I trust that they did not at all contradict themselves and since their mark and endeavor was to make One Principal Good One (Principal Good Translation), which was not to be objected against.
This view of yours, Jaybo, is not Scriptural.
There were perfect inspired translations all throughout the original autographs. Hence, there also must be an inspired perfect translation for us today.
When Almighty God is in it, Not only can the translation be equivalent to the source documents, but it can even be superior to the source documents. And that is what I believe regarding the blessed King James Holy Bible. I believe that the King James Bible is superior to the Hebrew and Greek Original Autographs.
Now whether I believed this or not, it would still be true. Because the King James Holy Bible is God’s finished Bible.
Well then you ought to believe that God kept His perfect and infallible word intact and complete. For even our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ said that the Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35).
You either believe that or you do not, Jaybo. I choose to believe it.
And again, whether one believes it or not, it is still true.
There were perfect inspired translations all throughout the original autographs. Hence, there also must be an inspired perfect translation for us today.
When Almighty God is in it, Not only can the translation be equivalent to the source documents, but it can even be superior to the source documents. And that is what I believe regarding the blessed King James Holy Bible. I believe that the King James Bible is superior to the Hebrew and Greek Original Autographs.
Now whether I believed this or not, it would still be true. Because the King James Holy Bible is God’s finished Bible.
Well then you ought to believe that God kept His perfect and infallible word intact and complete. For even our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ said that the Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35).
You either believe that or you do not, Jaybo. I choose to believe it.
And again, whether one believes it or not, it is still true.
-
1
- Show all
Psalm 138:2KJV
2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
Psalm 12:6-7KJV
6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
Psalm 12:6-7KJV
6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
-
1
- Show all
The only justification is an attempt to make God's word accessible to then-contemporary English readers. It's hopelessly incomprehensible to modern readers unless they search the term outside of Scripture.
Your reasoning is circular and your conclusion is wrong.
"Farthing" is a laughably incorrect translation. The term is as foreign to modern readers as 'assarion' was to readers in 1611. The translators should have simply transliterated it with a note as to its relative value.
You haven't demonstrated either what "the Alexandrian philosophy" is or that Posthuman holds to it. There are plenty of errors in the KJV; your inability to perceive them as errors is your problem to resolve.
This comment only demonstrates the depth of your brainwashing. Insulting a respected member of this site is uncalled for.
Your reasoning is circular and your conclusion is wrong.
"Farthing" is a laughably incorrect translation. The term is as foreign to modern readers as 'assarion' was to readers in 1611. The translators should have simply transliterated it with a note as to its relative value.
You haven't demonstrated either what "the Alexandrian philosophy" is or that Posthuman holds to it. There are plenty of errors in the KJV; your inability to perceive them as errors is your problem to resolve.
This comment only demonstrates the depth of your brainwashing. Insulting a respected member of this site is uncalled for.
-
1
- Show all
So you're valuing a flawed, 400+-year-old translation over a human bring? Where in your beloved KJV does it say to do that?[/QUOTE]
I value the word of God over your opinion, Jaybo. And the King James Bible is the infallible word of God. There are no flaws in it.
Now Jaybo, if you do not think the King James Bible is the Final Authority, then which Translation do you hold as the Final Authority that you submit to?
I value the word of God over your opinion, Jaybo. And the King James Bible is the infallible word of God. There are no flaws in it.
Now Jaybo, if you do not think the King James Bible is the Final Authority, then which Translation do you hold as the Final Authority that you submit to?
That is your opinion, Dino.
The KJV Translators may have chosen to use ‘Farthing’ for a number of reasons. In any case, I trust the accuracy of the rendering of ‘Farthing’ since I trust in God’s promise to keep and preserve His pure words.
God has a Finished Bible, and it is the King James Bible.
Dino, the Alexandrian philosophy is that there is no Perfect Bible for us today. And that all bibles and translations have errors in it, and that only the original autographs were inspired and perfect. That is basically what the Alexandrian philosophy is. And it is very dangerous.
There cannot be one error in the King James Bible since it is God’s finished Bible.
The errors are in your own mind, Dino. As well as Posthuman’s mind.
Insulting the blessed word of God by saying it has plenty of errors in it, is very uncalled for!