Things to Consider Before Attempting to Correct the King James Bible

[Dino246]

"Immersion" is being submerged into water, - glug, glug, glug; whereas baptism is going under the water and coming back up again. This is the picture of our identification with the crucified and risen Christ.

Where did you get this? What is your source? Which dictionary? Or, as I strongly suspect, did you just pull it out of thin air to support your position?

 

[Dino246]

Can someone explain to john what a “word for word” translation of the bible is, and what makes it different from other types of bibles? And what are the inherent flaws from going from one language to another?

I tried, but he still does not get it. Maybe someone else can help

I did so, a few pages back. If he read it, it didn't get past his KJV-only blinders. His comments demonstrate that his mind is closed to anything else.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I did so, a few pages back. If he read it, it didn't get past his KJV-only blinders. His comments demonstrate that his mind is closed to anything else.

Sadly it is not just his.. I know MANY people who believe as he does.

 

[John146]

Can someone explain to john what a “word for word” translation of the bible is, and what makes it different from other types of bibles? And what are the inherent flaws from going from one language to another?

I tried, but he still does not get it. Maybe someone else can help

See, You did exactly what I said. your using an ENGLISH defenition, and NOT A GREEK defeniton, and have totally mistranslated what Paul was trying to say.

Water is not used in romans 6. And should not be even inffered at all.

( it would be like saying, therefore we who were “baptized into water” in christ, were “baptzed into water “ In his death, therefore we were buried with him by “baptism into water) into his death

See how rediculous this sounds, yet thats the way youwish to translate it by adding the word WATER into the defentions. Where it is not FOUND.

The interpretors should have just interpreted the word. And written it as it was origionally stated.

If nothing else. It should say something like this,

4 as many of us as were immersed/placed into into jesus christ, where immersed or placed into vital union with his death, therefor we were buried with him by being united with his death, that just as he was raised from the dead, so we should also (or somethign like this)

Sorry, The english translators got this wrong, ALL of them, not just the KJV people

Yes, I know there is no water in Romans 6. I was using it to make the point that baptism is not merely immersion, but coming up from the immersion into a new life. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

 

[Endoscopy]

I'm glad you brought up Romans 6. Let's take a look.

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

"Immersion" is being submerged into water, - glug, glug, glug; whereas baptism is going under the water and coming back up again. This is the picture of our identification with the crucified and risen Christ.

This is in response to the request about word for word translation. Read the following about ancient Greek verbs. There are no English equivalent for some of them. Keep in mind there are also differences between the other parts of speech.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_verbs

 

[Dino246]

Yes, I know there is no water in Romans 6. I was using it to make the point that baptism is not merely immersion, but coming up from the immersion into a new life. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

And you're assuming the meanings of the words are different based on nothing but your a priori opinion.

 

[John146]

This is in response to the request about word for word translation. Read the following about ancient Greek verbs. Keep in mind there are also differences between the other parts of speech.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_verbs

Why are ya'll stuck on word for word, from Hebrew and Greek to English? You guys still do not believe that God can give us His words in English, and those words would be the words of God. I could care less if a Greek word can't be translated word for word in English. Why does that matter? There's example after example within the word itself were this is true.

 

[Endoscopy]

Why are ya'll stuck on word for word, from Hebrew and Greek to English? You guys still do not believe that God can give us His words in English, and those words would be the words of God. I could care less if a Greek word can't be translated word for word in English. Why does that matter? There's example after example within the word itself were this is true.

You and others obviously fail to understand the problem with word for word translation. Below is site explaining the ancient Greek verbs. Reading it you will see how different English verbs are to the ancient Greek ones. This is just the verbs. Other parts of speech have similar issues. This is the nightmare translators have in creating an English translation for the New Testament. Then there is the Hebrew and Aramaic languages of the Old Testament.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_verbs

 

[Dino246]

Why are ya'll stuck on word for word, from Hebrew and Greek to English? You guys still do not believe that God can give us His words in English, and those words would be the words of God. I could care less if a Greek word can't be translated word for word in English. Why does that matter? There's example after example within the word itself were this is true.

And you are stuck on the fantasy that God did the translation of the KJV. He didn’t, so your premise is irrelevant.

Next?

 

[KJV1611]

And you are stuck on the fantasy that God did the translation of the KJV. He didn’t, so your premise is irrelevant.

Next?

What do you base that on how do you KNOW for a fact that God didn’t inspire the translators?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Yes, I know there is no water in Romans 6. I was using it to make the point that baptism is not merely immersion, but coming up from the immersion into a new life. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

Baptize is an action word. A verb. It means to immerse, to PLUNGE into or to place into union. In the ancient greek. The word also a well known term signified a person who was dying a garment as-he immersed (baptizo) a garment into a dye. And there are many used of the verb are not exposed or seen in the english transliteration.

Baptize is the action word. The subjects are jesus christ and his death and burial. (Not water as many insist)


Baptize into Jesus christ is a troubling interpretation. Because Jesus is the subject one is being baptized into. If they had INTERPRETED the VERB baptize correctly. There owuld have never been an issue.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Why are ya'll stuck on word for word, from Hebrew and Greek to English? You guys still do not believe that God can give us His words in English, and those words would be the words of God. I could care less if a Greek word can't be translated word for word in English. Why does that matter? There's example after example within the word itself were this is true.

Your the one stuck with a word PROBLEM

I am not stuck on a word. I am stuck on an INTERPRETATION issue.

Why does it matter?

Well lets see hw many christiona believe Romans 6 seaks of water baptism. And so many many others more understand it is not water baptism at all. Why would we have to have this issue if it oculd have been PREVENTED by proper interpretation.

Its not Gods problem. God did not inspire the english text. And if he did, he has a major probllem now does he not?

 

[John146]

Your the one stuck with a word PROBLEM

I am not stuck on a word. I am stuck on an INTERPRETATION issue.

Why does it matter?

Well lets see hw many christiona believe Romans 6 seaks of water baptism. And so many many others more understand it is not water baptism at all. Why would we have to have this issue if it oculd have been PREVENTED by proper interpretation.

Its not Gods problem. God did not inspire the english text. And if he did, he has a major probllem now does he not?

If people believe Romans 6 involves water, that's a doctrinal issue, not a word issue.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

If people believe Romans 6 involves water, that's a doctrinal issue, not a word issue.

No its a word issue. That could have been taken care of by PROPERLY rendering the word the way it shoudl be rendered

Thats the issue with a word for word interpretation. There was not a “word” which could properly interpret Baptizo” so they transliterated it.

I gave you 1 example. There are many hundreds of other examples where this is an issue

 

[7seasrekeyed]

What do you base that on how do you KNOW for a fact that God didn’t inspire the translators?

how do you know that He did?

for one thing, unless they were all spirit filled believers, it would just not fly

in fact, I'm thinking 'Hindenburg"

since God anoints or inspires by His Spirit, do we know these men were anointed of God for Jimmy's mission?

no one but KJ onlyists claim inspiration, so please do not bother coming back with how other translations are not all Christians

yeah

we know

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Why are ya'll stuck on word for word, from Hebrew and Greek to English? You guys still do not believe that God can give us His words in English, and those words would be the words of God. I could care less if a Greek word can't be translated word for word in English. Why does that matter? There's example after example within the word itself were this is true.

didn't you have at least one lesson on grammar at school?

it is painful the way you simply choose to ignore all grammatical rules of language and continue spinning the yarn about inspiration regarding the KJ

even a 3 year old who can speak English and say French or Spanish and many others similar, would know what is being referred to

you do not have to be an expert or even vaguely familiar with ancient languages to understand this

 

[7seasrekeyed]

never gonna get an answer on true science from John the answer man it seems

 

[KJV1611]

how do you know that He did?

for one thing, unless they were all spirit filled believers, it would just not fly

in fact, I'm thinking 'Hindenburg"

since God anoints or inspires by His Spirit, do we know these men were anointed of God for Jimmy's mission?

no one but KJ onlyists claim inspiration, so please do not bother coming back with how other translations are not all Christians

yeah

we know

The KJV is obliviously inspired, there are too many evidences for it to not be inspired. I guess the only question is who do we think inspired them.

There’s too many patterns and word changes to make those patterns work to say that men themselves were responsible for it. It’s not possible.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

The KJV is obliviously inspired, there are too many evidences for it to not be inspired. I guess the only question is who do we think inspired them.

There’s too many patterns and word changes to make those patterns work to say that men themselves were responsible for it. It’s not possible.

right

thanks

got it...sorry. not sorry. set yourself up there

 

[7seasrekeyed]

I wonder why he thinks science proved one verion over another. Would not science prove all scripture right?

I'm thinking not the flat earth dome version of it haha

which he has not indicated he believes as far as I know, but......

then again....