Which Bible?

[KJV1611]

I do not know why. But I can see that you do try to reconcile contradictions in KJV but not in NIV.

But the style of your explanations you do for KJV would have the same value for NIV too.

I do try to reconcile "contradictions" in the KJV because the KJV has earned my trust. I've seen many "contradictions" disappear when the matter is looked into. Just like the "contradiction" of 75 or 70, it didn't pan out to be a contradiction after all.

 

[Dan_473]

How would I know lol... I don't have an more info than you do. I would think any time in the the 7th year would suffice. Next question is - 365 day calendar or 360 day lol. I don't know.

right, and I was thinking more of January 2004 to December 2011... which would be around eight years.





but I think you've said seven years isn't really the issue

'I believe in the KJV because of what I read in the KJV.'

you've probably said what you read already, but how about once more for me...

 

[Dan_473]

This is a question for some native English speakers I am not good in definition of English words.
I can give you only reference to Strong´s lexicon: Strong's Greek: 3346. μετατίθημι

But I can clearly see that the author of Hebrews says "before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God".

Your KJV does not give such testimony.

I'd summarize that greek word as'to move from one place to another'

 

[Dan_473]

KJV1611, we all have our motivations... usually we're blind to them... sometimes others can see them, which is the great value of Christian fellowship


if someone really wants to find a hidden meaning in 'one and only', they will. It's just how our minds work.

if you prefer the kjv, that's great! If you want to convince others it's perfect, it won't happen most of the time... because others don't have the same motivations.

 

[trofimus]

The LXX doesn't match Galatians 3:10 either, why are you not concerned with the LXX not matching perfectly?

Because I am not a LXX Only Guy
I know and admit that there are translation errors, copy errors in LXX and probably also errors in the Hebrew sources LXX used to translate from.
Still, I think that the LXX is the closest to the originals.

But you should be worried when KJV NT says "it is written" and your KJV OT says it is not written in this way.

Because you say KJV is perfect and consistent.

 

[trofimus]

I do try to reconcile "contradictions" in the KJV because the KJV has earned my trust. I've seen many "contradictions" disappear when the matter is looked into. Just like the "contradiction" of 75 or 70, it didn't pan out to be a contradiction after all.

70 vs 75 contradiction dissappeared only for you and for John146 Because you want it to be so.

The real explanation must be more plausible than to say Stephen is talking about something else but not knowing where he got the number 75 which is precisely in the same verse in a better source

Lets summarize the consistency of KJV:

Jesus says in KJV NT that something is written, but KJV OT says it is not written this way.
Paul says in KJV NT that something is written, but KJV OT says it is not written this way.
Christian martyr in KJV NT is using number when describing events from OT which is nonexistent in KJV OT.
Even the long quotations from the prophets (like Jeremiah) in KJV NT differs significantly from their texts in KJV OT.

KJV is a very good translation of not so good sources.
Perfect? Well, its only your belief.

 

[trofimus]

KJV1611, we all have our motivations... usually we're blind to them... sometimes others can see them, which is the great value of Christian fellowship


if someone really wants to find a hidden meaning in 'one and only', they will. It's just how our minds work.

if you prefer the kjv, that's great! If you want to convince others it's perfect, it won't happen most of the time... because others don't have the same motivations.

Exactly. If someone wants his NIV to be without error, he will also find some explanations to every verse. Same with KJV.

We should try to look at everything in a testing way. Not in an advocating way.

"Test everything."

 

[KJV1611]

KJV1611, we all have our motivations... usually we're blind to them... sometimes others can see them, which is the great value of Christian fellowship


if someone really wants to find a hidden meaning in 'one and only', they will. It's just how our minds work.

if you prefer the kjv, that's great! If you want to convince others it's perfect, it won't happen most of the time... because others don't have the same motivations.

What do you think of the number patterns in the KJV, patterns like Holy Ghost is found exactly 90 times and Holy Spirit is found exactly 7 times. That same type of patterning is found over and over in the KJV.

Do you think the KJV translators were smart enough to translate certain words slightly different to produce these number patterns?

 

[KJV1611]

Because I am not a LXX Only Guy
I know and admit that there are translation errors, copy errors in LXX and probably also errors in the Hebrew sources LXX used to translate from.
Still, I think that the LXX is the closest to the originals.

But you should be worried when KJV NT says "it is written" and your KJV OT says it is not written in this way.

Because you say KJV is perfect and consistent.

You have nothing solid to base your beliefs on, what keeps you in check with your doctrines?

 

[KJV1611]

70 vs 75 contradiction dissappeared only for you and for John146 Because you want it to be so.

The real explanation must be more plausible than to say Stephen is talking about something else but not knowing where he got the number 75 which is precisely in the same verse in a better source

Lets summarize the consistency of KJV:

Jesus says in KJV NT that something is written, but KJV OT says it is not written this way.
Paul says in KJV NT that something is written, but KJV OT says it is not written this way.
Christian martyr in KJV NT is using number when describing events from OT which is nonexistent in KJV OT.
Even the long quotations from the prophets (like Jeremiah) in KJV NT differs significantly from their texts in KJV OT.

KJV is a very good translation of not so good sources.
Perfect? Well, its only your belief.

Trofimus I would recommend that you read the Genesis 46 and Acts accounts in your native language because I have beat that horse to death. Stephen, in any translation, is not quoting or even referencing Genesis 46.

 

[followjesus]

I have two different bibles at this time. The NIV and a Life Application Study Bible. I like using the study bible because it has all sorts of notes and cross references listed and book overviews. I was wondering does it matter the kind of Bible you use, or is it more of a preference thing?

I believe that God is able to reach us in a manner we are able to understand and grasp. the original scriptures were in ancient samarian, the ancient hebrew, eventually aramaic, then greek eventually, then King James came along, then eventually the niv, and all of the translations we have today. if there was only one language, if all the world spokr old english, i would say the kjv would be proper, if all the world spoke modern english, id say the niv.......

But people understand things in different words all over the world. there are many ohrasings you can use to say the same exact thing. Hello, Hi, howdie, greetings, heya, hi there,...even a nod and smile can send the same message as " hello". " thou shall not kill"...oir " you are not to commit murder" to me, and everyone has thier own view of this subject, but to me a person should use a translation they can understand what is being said, rather than worrying about a word here or there, its hebrew roots, its greek roots ect....I Believe anyone who seeks God in His word will find Him, whether an niv study bible, a kjv bible, a regular niv, or a life application study bible. I certainly cant vouge for every translation, as far as Niv goes, it speaks to me in ways I understand, and then when i check it against kjv, it never fails to send the same message, in words I understand and speak rather than words im not certain what they mean completely.

 

[Grace777x70]

What do you think of the number patterns in the KJV, patterns like Holy Ghost is found exactly 90 times and Holy Spirit is found exactly 7 times. That same type of patterning is found over and over in the KJV.

Do you think the KJV translators were smart enough to translate certain words slightly different to produce these number patterns?

I just counted where the KJV says the Holy and Spirit 13 times in that version in both the Old and New Testaments and many other times where it says Spirit of God which we all know is the Holy Spirit or a "Ghost" to 1611 vernacular.

I think we look at numbers in our version and then "see" things with our minds that are not really there to begin with. Just my thoughts on this.

The fact that the word "Ghost" means something totally different in our modern vernacular would render the word not wise to be using in order to convey a truth to people. People now us the word "ghost" to imply an entity that is not of God. Like Casper or a ghost of someone's mean old grandmother...lol

 

[KJV1611]

Exactly. If someone wants his NIV to be without error, he will also find some explanations to every verse. Same with KJV.

We should try to look at everything in a testing way. Not in an advocating way.

"Test everything."

Good advice! Test everything . Test - Jesus whose origins are from of old, from ancient times. True or False?

 

[trofimus]

You have nothing solid to base your beliefs on, what keeps you in check with your doctrines?

I have the New Testament. When the New Testament says that OT says something, it must be so.

If you are asking about one printed book - no, I do not have a perfect edition/print of all Scriptures in one volume. I use several to correct the mistakes.

 

[trofimus]

Good advice! Test everything . Test - Jesus [FONT=&]whose origins are from of old, [/FONT][FONT=&]from ancient times. True or False?[/FONT]

It depends what is meant by "from of old".... similar to "from eternity"? In that case it is ok.

If not, then it is not a good translation of this specific verse.

 

[trofimus]

Stephen, in any translation, is not quoting or even referencing Genesis 46.

Why, because you dont have the number 75 in your Genesis 46

But ok, we can move to other problems... like continues vs confirms in Gal 3:13 vs Dt 27:26.

Or how do you explain that Jesus or apostles say "it is written" and still your KJV does not have it?

 

[KJV1611]

I just counted where the KJV says the Holy and Spirit 13 times in that version in both the Old and New Testaments and many other times where it says Spirit of God which we all know is the Holy Spirit or a "Ghost" to 1611 vernacular.

I think we look at numbers in our version and then "see" things with our minds that are not really there to begin with. Just my thoughts on this.

The fact that the word "Ghost" means something totally different in our modern vernacular would render the word not wise to be using in order to convey a truth to people. People now us the word "ghost" to imply an entity that is not of God. Like Casper or a ghost of someone's mean old grandmother...lol

I think some peope would do anythng to discount the KJV lol. Below proves that Holy Ghost TRULY is found 90 times. That's basically an insult on my integrity suggesting that I make stuff up and post it.

 

[KJV1611]

Why, because you dont have the number 75 in your Genesis 46

But ok, we can move to other problems... like continues vs confirms in Gal 3:13 vs Dt 27:26.

Or how do you explain that Jesus or apostles say "it is written" and still your KJV does not have it?

Ok, one more attemp here lol. Post the Genesis 46 verse in LXX that gives the total number of people who came with Jacob to Egypt.

 

[KJV1611]

It depends what is meant by "from of old".... similar to "from eternity"? In that case it is ok.

If not, then it is not a good translation of this specific verse.

The NIV is written in English, Origin has a meaning look it up in an English dictionary and see what it means.

 

[KJV1611]

I think some peope would do anythng to discount the KJV lol. Below proves that Holy Ghost TRULY is found 90 times. That's basically an insult on my integrity suggesting that I make stuff up and post it.

View attachment 161986

First one is holy ghost this is holy spirit.