What translation has the exact words of God preserved for English speakers?

[Dino246]

It is reasonable to conclude that interpretations period belong to God because the verse says that, it doesn’t say interpretations of dreams belong to God and that’s why JW’s and Mormons and denominational Christians have contradictory interpretations.

That's the wackiest non sequitur I've seen all day. There's no connection whatsoever between thte absence of the words "of dreams" and the misinterpretations of the cults. Your "and that's why..." makes no sense.

Regardless as to how much you want those words to pertain only to dreams, the words themselves, don’t.

That's just not a valid hermeneutical method. That's the way Garee has determined that everything Jesus ever said was a parable... wrongly, of course.

 

[Dino246]

Yes, a translation can be the inspired words of God. There are many examples within Scripture itself.

Irrelevant, and debunked repeatedly. What God can do is not the point; what He has done is the point. He has not inspired a translation of the entire Bible.

 

[KJV1611]

That's the wackiest non sequitur I've seen all day. There's no connection whatsoever between thte absence of the words "of dreams" and the misinterpretations of the cults. Your "and that's why..." makes no sense.


That's just not a valid hermeneutical method. That's the way Garee has determined that everything Jesus ever said was a parable... wrongly, of course.

I’m not going to argue the point, you and I both know how to read.

 

[fredoheaven]

Yes, a translation can be the inspired words of God. There are many examples within Scripture itself.

Relative to this, that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God.." meaning faithful copies and translations at present are useful since they are given words (inspired). What has been wrote by the apostles and the prophets(originals) were now remove and placed into a higher more glorious translated words of God so that more people can understand it. The preservation through translation preserves the inspiration for if not we don't have one true, inerrant Bible and everything is false by our own standards. Opinion prevails, wordily standard prevails which worldly mindset is enmity of God.

 

[John146]

Relative to this, that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God.." meaning faithful copies and translations at present are useful since they are given words (inspired). What has been wrote by the apostles and the prophets(originals) were now remove and placed into a higher more glorious translated words of God so that more people can understand it. The preservation through translation preserves the inspiration for if not we don't have one true, inerrant Bible and everything is false by our own standards. Opinion prevails, wordily standard prevails which worldly mindset is enmity of God.

Yes, I believe a translation can be, and in this case, is better than the original.

 

[fredoheaven]

Yes, I believe a translation can be, and in this case, is better than the original.

We need also to learned from Wyciffe as it said (his opinion) in other words according to him, inspiration is not lost

You say it is heresy to speak of the Holy Scriptures in English. You call me a heretic because I have translated the Bible into the common tongue of the people. Do you know whom you blaspheme? Did not the Holy Ghost give the Word of God at first in the mother-tongue of the nations to whom it was addressed?’

https://www.wycliffe.org.uk/stories/john-wycliffe/

 

[fredoheaven]

On the other hand, the KJ translators believe in their Epistles Dedicatory said speaking of the finality of English translation but that is their opinion but the Final authority rest from God's words itself.

There are infinite arguments of this right Christian and religious affection in Your Majesty; but none is more forcible to declare it to others than the vehement and perpetuated desire of accomplishing and publishing of this work, which now with all humility we present unto Your Majesty. For when Your Highness had once out of deep judgment apprehended how convenient it was, that out of the Original Sacred Tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in our own, and other foreign Languages, of many worthy men who went before us, there should be one more exact Translation of the holy Scriptures into the English Tongue;

https://www.pitt.edu/~hunter3/KJVbible/EpistleDedicatory.html

 

[Dino246]

The exact opposite is true. If God doesn’t inspire the translation then it isn’t the word of God.

That's nothing but an opinion and has no basis in Scripture.

 

[Dino246]

Yes, I believe a translation can be, and in this case, is better than the original.

It's only better because you don't need to learn an entire new language in order to understand it (just half a language... the parts that have changed since 1611). If you think the KJV is better than the original-language texts for any other reason, your thinking is cultic.

 

[Dino246]

Relative to this, that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God.." meaning faithful copies and translations at present are useful since they are given words (inspired). What has been wrote by the apostles and the prophets(originals) were now remove and placed into a higher more glorious translated words of God so that more people can understand it. The preservation through translation preserves the inspiration for if not we don't have one true, inerrant Bible and everything is false by our own standards. Opinion prevails, wordily standard prevails which worldly mindset is enmity of God.

How do you get "higher and more glorious translated words"? Are you still holding on to the wacky idea that the translation of Scripture from one language to another is the same as the translation of Enoch from life to eternity?

The word of God is still inspired, in the KJV and the NIV and the NASB and the RSV etc. The translation carries the inspired word of God, but the words in the destination language are not inspired.

We clearly aren't going to get past this when you and the other KJV-only adherents hold to completely untenable beliefs.

 

[Truth7t7]

I do not believe that the KJV is the only English translation that can be called the Inspired Word of God. What does that make me in your view?

(N)ot (I)nspired (V)ersion

 

[fredoheaven]

The translation carries the inspired word of God, but the words in the destination language are not inspired.

Umm, this is again to be noted as your assumption and you could not produce evidence to assert your claim. Merely an educated guess, just giving your own opinion with no scriptural basis.

Proverbs 14:12 King James Version (KJV)

12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

 

[fredoheaven]

We clearly aren't going to get past this when you and the other KJV-only adherents hold to completely untenable beliefs.

Here is another difference, I hold to an argument of certainty, yours is an ‘argument of uncertainty’ and what do one think that pleases the Lord? In my bible it speaks of itself on the certainty. Opinions of men are but uncertainty. You made a choice and I made it too.

Proverbs 22:20-21

King James Version

20 Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge,
21 That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?

 

[fredoheaven]

The value of translation according to Wycliffe:

“Christ and his Apostles taught the people in the language best known to them. It is certain that the truth of the Christian faith becomes more evident the more the faith itself is known. Therefore, the doctrine should not only be in Latin but in the common tongue, and as the faith of the Church is contained in the Scriptures, the more these are known in a true sense the better. The laity ought to understand the faith, and as the doctrines of our faith are in the Scriptures, believers should have the Scriptures in a language familiar to the people, and to this end indeed did the Holy Spirit endue them with knowledge of all tongues. “If it is heresy to read the Bible, the Holy Ghost himself is condemned who gave in tongues to the Apostles of Christ to speak the Word of God in all languages that were ordained of God under heaven. If Christ was so merciful as to send the Holy Ghost to the heathen men to make them partakers of his blessed word, why should it be taken from us in this land that be Christian men? If you deny Christ’s words as heresy, then you condemn God for a heretic that spake the word, for he and his sword are all one: and if his word is the life of the world how may any Anti-Christ take it away from us that are Christian men, and allow the people to die for hunger in heresy.” John Wycliffe

 

[Dino246]

Umm, this is again to be noted as your assumption and you could not produce evidence to assert your claim. Merely an educated guess, just giving your own opinion with no scriptural basis.

Just as there is no scriptural support for your position.

 

[Dino246]

Here is another difference, I hold to an argument of certainty, yours is an ‘argument of uncertainty’ and what do one think that pleases the Lord? In my bible it speaks of itself on the certainty. Opinions of men are but uncertainty. You made a choice and I made it too.

Proverbs 22:20-21

King James Version

20 Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge,
21 That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?

As your position is also an opinion, you have no more certainty than I do. Your belief that you do is an illusion.

 

[Chester]

So you do agree that God has to lead the translators to the correct interpretation of the original language text?

The Word of God is not interpreted by flesh, but by the Spirit, so it the translators are going to understand the meaning of the original writings, it is going to have to be by the Spirit. Tragedy is done with educated but unredeemed men endeavor to translate the Word.

 

[Chester]

What translation has the exact words of God preserved for English speakers?

Answer: None

No English translation is "inspired". Many English translations are reputable and do an excellent job at conveying well the original meaning of the original inspired manuscripts. There is no perfect English translation. I think we need ongoing and open discussion about what are the best English translations; and in my opinion the KJV still ranks as one of the best English translations. Other good ones are the NASB and the ESV. But there are other good ones also.

Giving the KJV of 1611 the title of "inspired," in my opinion, is violating Revelation 22:18,19: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

"Preservation" is not the equivalent of "inspiration." The original manuscripts in Greek and Hebrew are inspired, and God's Word is preserved in many good translations in many different languages.

Where are the "exact English words preserved for English speakers"? I can't answer that because I am not looking for "exact" words in English. God already gave his "exact" words in the original manuscripts in Greek and Hebrew. The job of translators is to do the very best job possible to make the meaning of those exact words clear, concise, and natural in the words of the language they are translating into. The job of the translators is not to try to duplicate original inspiration.

In reality, the person who knowingly "elevates" the KJV to a "KJV-only" status as a later revelation of "inspired words" given by God in English 1500 plus years after the New Testament was completed - well such a person is actually not respecting the hard work and the good work done by the KJV translators.

To elevate the masterful and good work done by the KJV translators to an equality with the original manuscripts denigrates their work.

 

[KJV1611]

In reality, the person who knowingly "elevates" the KJV to a "KJV-only" status as a later revelation of "inspired words" given by God in English 1500 plus years after the New Testament was completed - well such a person is actually not respecting the hard work and the good work done by the KJV translators.

To elevate the masterful and good work done by the KJV translators to an equality with the original manuscripts denigrates their work.

How does the KJV giving better understanding of the bible to English speakers denigrate the work of the KJV translators?

 

[Chester]

How does the KJV giving better understanding of the bible to English speakers denigrate the work of the KJV translators?

The KJV definitely did give English speakers in 1611 and following an excellent understanding of the meaning of the original texts.

But the KJV only emphasis that makes the actual English words of the KJV "inspired" like the originals denigrates the work of the translators of the KJV. Why? Because even they never claimed divine inspiration for their translation - they did a masterful job and work, but they did not get a new revelation of new words that replaced or was equivalent to the original words revealed by Jesus to the apostles and writers of the New Testament. (Read the preface to the 1611 KJV - no such claim is ever made)