KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES

[trofimus]

What's the straw grasping? Can God inspire translators to write whatever he wants written - of course he can. I don't understand how I'm grasping at straws.

You say that God´s inspiration is changing historical credibility. That God can lie.

 

[trofimus]

God can change whatever he wants to change. Hopefully you realize the whole new testament is contained in the old testament through types and foreshadows. All God did in the New Testament was bring those same thoughts and ideas into more clarity.

If that king said "son of gods", God cannot change that. It would be a lie.

If God needed such sentence to be in the Bible, He could inspire the king to say it. But your position "God can say whatever He wants, no matter if it really happened" is not good.

 

[Joseppi]

How can the message of the KJV be inspired when it mistranslates the Greek?

When the Greek text is corrupt. Like when 1 John 5:7 is missing then the Holy Ghost will fix the error.

(Mat 24:3 KJV) And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Correct translation:

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

(Heb 9:26 KJV) For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Correct translation:

Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

There is no basis for claiming the end of the age is accurate, or even has any meaning whatsoever in the verses given.

Christ was slain from the foundation of the world and on the cross the world was judged.
That ages exist is true but they aren’t defined.
The end of the world is the obvious context since Jesus defined it as synonymous with his return in glory as judge of it.
It seems to me that a corrupt text reading end of the age, is a modern spin in line with pagan notions of a coming new age.

The phrase, at the consummation of the ages is a blatant lie, obviated by noting that there are ages to come. Which fact proves no consummation of ages ever occurs.

Ephesians 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

I suspect that if you check your modern perversion that reads, consummation of the ages, you’ll find the perverse bible contradicts itself on this point.

Such examples are difficult for modern bible version lovers to deal with, because of the casual, and complacent, reading of scripture the easy pleasy modern bibles require for the acceptance of them as bibles.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I'm not flying solo, I have a pastor about 4 hours away and most of the time I attend church online but I do attend in person every so often. Point taken though and I appreciate the advise.

But we’re not commanded to attend every so often. Granted, none of us can be at church 100% of the time, but we can also do better than every so often. Also, you don’t attend church by logging into a computer.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Are you kidding me, the KJV made all kinds of changes for better clarity.

Then God did a very shoddy job of inspiring the 1611, no?

 

[KJV1611]

You say that God´s inspiration is changing historical credibility. That God can lie.

I like the question, it's a good one. And no I don't think God will lie nor change historical record. Now you're going make me go back into manuscript junk which I absolutely hate.

So let's get intio it, where did the KJV translators get The Son of God from?

 

[KJV1611]

If that king said "son of gods", God cannot change that. It would be a lie.

If God needed such sentence to be in the Bible, He could inspire the king to say it. But your position "God can say whatever He wants, no matter if it really happened" is not good.

I agree with you and I addressed it in your first post about this.

 

[trofimus]

I like the question, it's a good one. And no I don't think God will lie nor change historical record. Now you're going make me go back into manuscript junk which I absolutely hate.

So let's get intio it, where did the KJV translators get The Son of God from?

I do not know. I did not ask them Its in Septuagint, but I do not know if the KJV translators consulted Septuagint. I never heard such thing.

Is it in Latin Vulgate?

 

[KJV1611]

But we’re not commanded to attend every so often. Granted, none of us can be at church 100% of the time, but we can also do better than every so often. Also, you don’t attend church by logging into a computer.

What do you base this on that someone has to attend church every week?

 

[KJV1611]

Then God did a very shoddy job of inspiring the 1611, no?

I don't know but I hope to get to watch you tell him that lol.

 

[SovereignGrace]

What's the straw grasping? Can God inspire translators to write whatever he wants written - of course he can. I don't understand how I'm grasping at straws.

Its not about what God can do, but what He has done. We’ve got zero proof God inspired translators of ANY language when they translated from Greek, Hebrew & Aramaic.

 

[KJV1611]

I do not know. I did not ask them Its in Septuagint, but I do not know if the KJV translators consulted Septuagint. I never heard such thing.

Is it in Latin Vulgate?

I don't know, this is all I have to go on.

אֱלָהּ ʼĕlâhh, el-aw'; (Aramaic) corresponding to H433; God:—God, god.

 

[SovereignGrace]

God can change whatever he wants to change. Hopefully you realize the whole new testament is contained in the old testament through types and foreshadows. All God did in the New Testament was bring those same thoughts and ideas into more clarity.

God is immutable. So, He won’t change His word at all.

 

[Joseppi]

Why? Because you do not have them in your modern print?

It was in the infallible KJV 1611, it was in the infallible KJV 1769.

Thats your standard. You must read them.

The title page of the Authorized proves the apocrypha was not included in the Holy Bible.

 

[KJV1611]

Its not about what God can do, but what He has done. We’ve got zero proof God inspired translators of ANY language when they translated from Greek, Hebrew & Aramaic.

What would prove inspiration of a translation in your opinion? How would God authenticate it?

 

[SovereignGrace]

You pretty much have understood correctly. I have no idea what the original writings had but it doesn't matter because if it was son of the gods in the original then we gained more clarity in the KJV.

And here is your Ruckmanism shining through. Both of you think/thought the KJV improved upon the originals.

 

[KJV1611]

God is immutable. So, He won’t change His word at all.

I'm not saying he changes his word I'm saying he changes the wording to bring more clarity. The "word" is the same but the wording can be different.

 

[KJV1611]

And here is your Ruckmanism shining through. Both of you think/thought the KJV improved upon the originals.

Please don't tie me in with that moron.

 

[trofimus]

The title page of the Authorized proves the apocrypha was not included in the Holy Bible.

It was. Find any old print.

 

[trofimus]

I don't know, this is all I have to go on.

אֱלָהּ ʼĕlâhh, el-aw'; (Aramaic) corresponding to H433; God:—God, god.

I do not understand Hebrew or Aramaic, so its probably a question to MarcR or somebody like that...

But what is more important to me is not what should be in the text there, but your view of the inspiration like "God can do everything".

Yes, He can technically but He cannot morally.