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

Bingo! I wish people would just be truthful and admit they do not have access to the word of God. I wish preachers would be honest to their congregation.

I trust the copy in hand that was masterfully translated.

It leads one to be their own final authority on what God has said.

I trust the copy in hand that was masterfully translated.

Same here!

Bingo! I wish people would just be truthful and admit they do not have access to the word of God. I wish preachers would be honest to their congregation.

This is utter nonsense. Paul did not write in Hebrew. Hebrew was a dead language in the first century, it was only read in the synagogue. Yes, Paul studied Hebrew, but Greek and Aramaic were the common languages. In fact, the Septuagint was translated in the 3rd century BC, because once Alexander conquered the world, he replaced all languages with Greek. People could no longer understand Hebrew, so it was translated into Greek, so it was accessible again. That's 300 years BEFORE Christ.

There are NO extant manuscripts of the NT books in Hebrew found anywhere. There are 4 schools of Greek manuscripts, and we have over 6000 parts or whole texts dating from the 2nd century to about the 15th century. Luke was a Greek physician. He wrote to another Greek - Theophilus for Acts and Luke. Why on earth would he have used Hebrew? The only possible book in the NT that could possibly have been written in Hebrew was Matthew, who wrote to the Jews. Yet, no copies have ever been found in Hebrew, because they didn't exist. As I said earlier, the Hellenization of the world worked - and everyone spoke Greek.

A single language spoken in the world, was also a sign of the coming of the time of Christ. It made the spread of the gospel much easier. Everyone spoke Greek, including the Romans. It was the best time in history for the gospel to be shared in the known world!

So your whole theory that translations are inspired is also nonsense. Certainly, the KJV, with all its mistakes and additions could never be considered as inspired in the way the original autographs in their languages were.

So, no, Luke did not write in Hebrew, and it is doubtful any of the NT writers did, or surely there would be copies? Even the Jews were losing their Hebrew totally later on. So, the Masoretic OT was not written until the 8th-10th century AD. Because the Hebrew pronunciations were getting lost, they figured out the Nicky dot vowels to put above, below and beside the consonants, so the sounds and the various verb forms would not be lost.

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.

Agreed, certainly Luke didn’t write in Hebrew. He wrote the spoken Hebrew language of Paul into koine Greek.

This is utter nonsense. Paul did not write in Hebrew. Hebrew was a dead language in the first century, it was only read in the synagogue. Yes, Paul studied Hebrew, but Greek and Aramaic were the common languages. In fact, the Septuagint was translated in the 3rd century BC, because once Alexander conquered the world, he replaced all languages with Greek. People could no longer understand Hebrew, so it was translated into Greek, so it was accessible again. That's 300 years BEFORE Christ.

There are NO extant manuscripts of the NT books in Hebrew found anywhere. There are 4 schools of Greek manuscripts, and we have over 6000 parts or whole texts dating from the 2nd century to about the 15th century. Luke was a Greek physician. He wrote to another Greek - Theophilus for Acts and Luke. Why on earth would he have used Hebrew? The only possible book in the NT that could possibly have been written in Hebrew was Matthew, who wrote to the Jews. Yet, no copies have ever been found in Hebrew, because they didn't exist. As I said earlier, the Hellenization of the world worked - and everyone spoke Greek.

A single language spoken in the world, was also a sign of the coming of the time of Christ. It made the spread of the gospel much easier. Everyone spoke Greek, including the Romans. It was the best time in history for the gospel to be shared in the known world!

So, no, Luke did not write in Hebrew, and it is doubtful any of the NT writers did, or surely there would be copies? Even the Jews were losing their Hebrew totally later on. So, the Masoretic OT was not written until the 8th-10th century AD. Because the Hebrew pronunciations were getting lost, they figured out the Nicky dot vowels to put above, below and beside the consonants, so the sounds and the various verb forms would not be lost.

So your whole theory that translations are inspired is also nonsense. Certainly, the KJV, with all its mistakes and additions could never be considered as inspired in the way the original autographs in their languages were.

Agreed, certainly Luke didn’t write in Hebrew. He wrote the spoken Hebrew language of Paul into koine Greek.

I dont speak greek or hebrew. Odds are neither do you.

This is utter nonsense. Paul did not write in Hebrew. Hebrew was a dead language

Proof that 'there ain't no mountain high enough, ain't no river wide enough', that can stop a KJ onlyist from or dissuade them from, their error

I trust the copy in hand that was masterfully translated.