Bible worship, what is that exactly? Is it someone who recognizes the spirit of Christ in the book and elevates that book above the other versions?My diagnosis would be: Bible worship.
Or a fancy official title like bibleatry
Bible worship, what is that exactly? Is it someone who recognizes the spirit of Christ in the book and elevates that book above the other versions?My diagnosis would be: Bible worship.
Or a fancy official title like bibleatry
Do you think a group of men have the ability to recognize the signified language in the original language and then accurately translate that symbolic language into another language?I would say His translation or interpretation alone is inspired in its original autographs. The mysteries as to the spiritual understanding are made know according to the signified language using parables. Hiding the spiritual unseen. Many of the differences in translations has to do on how we divide or how we hear God. .
Bible worship, what is that exactly? Is it someone who recognizes the spirit of Christ in the book and elevates that book above the other versions?
The only infallible word of God is the original language versions in Hebrew, Aramaic, and and koine Judeo Greek. Judeo Greek is like German Yiddish. Jewish concepts are forced into the language modifying it. Only the convoluted way English was created allows Jewish concepts be brought in without modifying the language. Where in the Bible does it state that translations are inspired by God???What do you base that on how do you KNOW for a fact that God didn’t inspire the translators?
It is obvious to the casual observer that you are ignorant of the fact that in the UN and other places people translate on the fly when people of several languages are meeting. You see people wearing headphones listening to their language. So what then is so hard for a group of translators taking more time to make sure they are getting it correct..Do you think a group of men have the ability to recognize the signified language in the original language and then accurately translate that symbolic language into another language?
The errors of translation tip it off quite clearly. I'd explain it, but you won't accept it, so I'll save myself the effort.What do you base that on how do you KNOW for a fact that God didn’t inspire the translators?
I'd agree with you, but that would mean agreeing with your view on "private interpretation" which is demonstrably unbiblical, as I have shown several times.Because then that would be considered a private interpretation . Not the original autograph. His interpretation is the interpretation that we can know Him after as the perfect all other are private interpretations or personal commentaries.
If your view were true, then the patterns would be evident in other languages and not just English. To be valid and not mere happenstance, they would have to be evident in the original-language manuscripts (which, by the way, are not uniform in wording).Do you think a group of men have the ability to recognize the signified language in the original language and then accurately translate that symbolic language into another language?
Correction, it is you who ignore the problems of the KJV. I will list them again. Refute them if you can. Somehow I think you will run from it.Sorry it’s just frustrating to hear people bad mouth the KJV when there’s so much about it that you guys don’t understand.
Ya know whats funny about this?When all else fails...Bible worship! Idolatry!
I don't know if God put number patterns in other bibles, what does it matter if he did? I'm not saying it's a requirement to prove inspiration, I'm saying that if it is there it's proof of inspiration. The patterns are there an it's not possible that those translators made it happen on their own.If your view were true, then the patterns would be evident in other languages and not just English. To be valid and not mere happenstance, they would have to be evident in the original-language manuscripts (which, by the way, are not uniform in wording).
Merely finding patterns in the KJV is NOT sufficient evidence to prove that its translation was inspired. You are free, of course, to believe whatever you like, but asserting things without good evidence only reflects badly on you. So... do your homework, demonstrate that ALL the patterns you find in the KJV are present in Greek or Hebrew as appropriate, and find them ALL in other language translations... a minimum of three in different languages would be appropriate.
Then, demonstrate that they are NOT present in the English versions that preceded the KJV. Good luck, since the KJV borrowed heavily from earlier English versions. Finally, demonstrate that they are not present AT ALL in ANY modern translation.
You will find your quest futile, and your view unsupportable. Even if you did find the patterns in the sources and in other languages, it STILL wouldn't prove inspiration. It might support the idea, but not PROVE it.
And frankly, it's irrelevant to our salvation, sanctification and eternal reward. We aren't saved by a translation, or even a pattern in it, but by the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
I am still waiting for someone to show me where Judah ruled with Christ..
I have 3 books on codes in the Bible. They are found in the original language only. A code starts with a specific letter and a sequence of letters seperate by a fixed number going forwards or backwards will spell out a message. They were discovered by some rabbis looking at the begining of the Torah books. 4 had the same word and the fourth a different word. Some people found other ones then the MIT equivalent in Israel had some students create a program to search out them. They found the names with birth and death dates of recently deceased people. Also listed was the current Prime Minister and the Israel equivalent of our Secret Service stepped up their protection detail on that date and caught a person in the act of attempted assassination.I don't know if God put number patterns in other bibles, what does it matter if he did? I'm not saying it's a requirement to prove inspiration, I'm saying that if it is there it's proof of inspiration. The patterns are there an it's not possible that those translators made it happen on their own.
I mean come on, why they spell Nebuchadnezzar this way some of the time and this way Nebuchadrezzar at other times. Why translate Holy Ghost sometimes and Holy Spirit other times? And why the heck call Isiah Esias?
Something or someone drove them to pick the words they used.
Y'all still blathering on about who's Bible is best?
Mine is best!
I have seen some fairly alarming claims in this thread.
Calling the work of the Holy Spirit evil is a serious offence. I would be very careful not to cross that line.
The reason English has all of the contradictory rules with exceptions, exceptions to the exceptions, etc. is in Britain there were the Celts. Along came Rome and Latin was added to the Celtish language. The Saxons then invaded with German added to mix. Last the Angles invaded bringing French. Thus the mixture ended up becoming present day English over the centuries. Liturature from Choucer through Shakespeare down to today you can see this transition. Try reading Choucer in its original form. Almost indecipherable.
Tackle what? The fact that you don’t like some of the words? Get something specific if you want to discuss it.KJV1611
Where is your refutation of the issues with KJV?
Angles today are the French. The Saxons are from Germany. Place names of today not back then.yes I know
English (well maybe not quite every single detail you have listed there but the gist of it)
talk about a mashup..who are the angles though?
![]()
All this proves is that there are patterns (maybe). It doesn't prove inspiration. You assume that it proves inspiration, but you have nothing more than your low view of human intellect supporting that view.I don't know if God put number patterns in other bibles, what does it matter if he did? I'm not saying it's a requirement to prove inspiration, I'm saying that if it is there it's proof of inspiration. The patterns are there an it's not possible that those translators made it happen on their own.
I mean come on, why they spell Nebuchadnezzar this way some of the time and this way Nebuchadrezzar at other times. Why translate Holy Ghost sometimes and Holy Spirit other times? And why the heck call Isiah Esias?
Something or someone drove them to pick the words they used.