Can you tell me the truth of Luke 10:1?
You should find out yourself. You're not going to drag me into one of your boring debates that have been repeated over and over and over again. They go NOWHERE.
Can you tell me the truth of Luke 10:1?
What‘s the reconciliation of 2 Samuel 21:19 in the modern versions? And as always, thank you for the kind words.![]()
It's you who refuses to see truth! Get some integrity and there will be far less disagreement!Brother, you refuse to see the truth. I gave the reconciliation. You didn’t like what I gave. You have given nothing in return but insults. I have no animosity for those who disagree. This is a discussion forum. Learn how to disagree without attacks. God bless.
And after reading all those different versions, how do you figure out which to go with? You decide? You become the final authority?
![]()
Psalm 19:14
![]()
I really respect your self-restraint.
I have always read the KJV, but I am well read on all the English classics and the amazing English poets so to me other versions sound flat.
I like the exalted language and if someone wants to put in the effort it is still very understandable/readable.
But I also do appreciate the fidelity to the correct pronouns, this is far more important over and above the archaic words found in post #74
Someday I may research all this further, I think it is good to be informed of all sides.
If a translation was not "entirely accurate" would it have had the place of preeminence for over 400 years? Examine the commentaries of conservative Christian theologians and you will note that not one of them questioned the accuracy or the reliability of the King James Bible. God had His hand over this Bible as the Gospel went out into all the world. And had it not been for two deceivers (primarily) i.e. Westcott and Hort, the English-speaking world would have continued with an updated KJV from the 19th century.Also the "KJV isn't entirely accurate" thing has already been covered in this thread and so many other KJV only threads.
And after reading all those different versions, how do you figure out which to go with? You decide? You become the final authority?
I've been a fan of English Literature since I was 16. It doesn't present any problems. That's just a personal interest though.
I don't expect everyone to share it.
The works of Shakespeare and the collection of books we call The Bible don't serve the same purpose.
Shakespeare is not needed to support doctrine or explain the method of eternal salvation.
The Biblical record is better served when translated directly from the original languages to the target language we use now.
I don't see why the entire English-speaking world should do specialist studies of archaic forms of English in order to read what is
readily available in clear language. People aren't lacking comprehension or reading skills because they don't know how differently
"bowels" was used 400 years ago.![]()
As a lit. major, I just love the KJV because it brings me back to classical poetry from Donne and Shakespeare. King James English is so poetic and lyrical.
However, more modern translations are better suited to current cultural/language usages, and modern language translations like the NKJV, NIV, and RSV have translation integrity while expressing the literary modern expressions of the texts.
One of the more marginal modern translations that gets overlooked is the Moffatt. He is a highly credentialed scholar/translator, and his version has the best flow for reading smoothness and depth. I highly recommend this translation as a worthy addition to our personal Christian libraries!
![]()
I've never heard of it. I'll see if I can find a copy of it....
[/B][/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] 15
On what authority did Moffat insert this nonsense which is probably from one of the Gnostic "gospels"?
Something went haywire with my post. See Mark 16:14 in Moffat for the GNOSTIC NONSENSE.
Acts 12:4 has the inaccurate word "Easter" which should be rendered "Passover."There is an ongoing debate over the KJV only issue. One issue that always comes up is, "There are no major doctrinal changes from one version to the next, so what does it matter?" First of all, truth matters no matter how small of a truth you may think. Truth matters to God. He never wants his people to be persuaded out of the whole truth. See Adam and Eve. I'll post some passages found in the KJV and how those same passages differ in the new versions.
1. The doctrine of condemnation to those who walk after the flesh. There is condemnation to those believers who walk after the flesh and not after the Spirit. The bible speaks of temporal condemnation. Romans 8:1 says, "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Modern Translations leave out the part that says, "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." The KJV says, as a part of having no condemnation, two things are required: We have to be in Christ Jesus, and walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. The enemy wants Christians today to justify sin instead of battling against it. So the enemy will do everything he can to give a person a water down version on His holy Word to promote the idea that there is no condemnation for not following the word of God.
Here is an example of temporal condemnation from not walking after the Spirit. The one who is condemned in the following has sinned against God.
Romans 14
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men.
19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
Okay! Found it at Archive.org!
The Old Testament: a new translation by James Moffatt
The New Testament: a new translation by James Moffatt
They're both downloadable in different formats!
❧