WHICH Bible "version" Is Authorized By God?
- Thread starter GRACE_ambassador
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
How you understand "unique" is irrelevant to the fact that it is the sense intended by the biblical author.
Kenneth Copeland has endorsed Bill Johnson.
Isn't Copeland the main "guardian" of the WOF movement now?
If you hold the axiom that Paul and Peter preached the exact same gospel, you will naturally prefer NKJV of Galatians 2:7, compared to the KJV
exactly so, iff a translation is word for word it reads the same to everybody. But if it is dynamic thought it becomes a commentary.
Translating from Greek to English requires some degree of interpretation, because the word order is different. Here is a sample from one interlinear version:
Paul a slave of Christ Jesus called an apostle having been separated to (the) gospel of God which he promised beforehand through the prophets of him in writings holy concerning the Son of him come of (the) seed of David according to (the) flesh designated Son of God in power according to (the) spirit of holiness by a resurrection of dead persons Jesus Christ the Lord of us through whom we received grace and apostleship for obedience of faith among all the nations on behalf of the name of him....
You can get the gist, but it's difficult to grasp the whole.
It's your right to use the translation/s you like.
Where does this leave us though?
Should staunch KJVO believers be given a free hand (or mouth) to keep branding those of us who prefer other Bibles as "CORRUPT"?
Do we sit back and allow them to call our Bibles "Satanic"?
We can allow them their KJV exclusive churches were some like myself will never set foot.
If they consider every pastor who reads from an NIV as preaching from a "Satanic" bible they aren't likely to venture into a freer environment.
Where can all this lead other than another sect?
It's not healthy for the church.
That was in the denomination statement of beliefs, maybe 10 years ago. However I googled it and they produced a new statement of faith in 2014, and they left out the heretic part. Apparently they are writing a whole new statement, eschatology is finished, but they will release it all together.
Glad to see they had the flexibility to change that. I was always taught that there were 4 different end times scenarios, and they were all Biblical. In other words, don't put down another viewpoint, it could also end up being the truth. I know what I believe, and I will discuss it. But in the end, I have to accept the other 3 end times views, as valid, even if I don't agree with them.
I find less and less discussion about WOF. Maybe many have abandoned it because it doesn't work? I don't much like Bethel, either. And they are very dogmatic about healing, if you have enough faith, including raising the dead, which has caused them real issues in the past. A 2 year old in the church died. The whole church was praying she would be resurrected, and the elders would not let the family bury her. In the end, they did give up. That smacks of WOF to me.
This is total nonsense. If you spoke any other language, you would know that you cannot translate word for word, ever! My Greek teacher, Bill Mounce, who has been on most of the modern Translation committees, and written many commentaries, used to scoff and people who say this.
Even translating modern languages m, you cant do word fir word. For example, in French (which I am fluent in!) la maison Blanche translates directly into English:
La maison blanche.
The house white.
That is bad English, because we say:
The white house. That is proper English. Further, the fact that maison is feminine in French is untranslatable to English. Same with genders in both Hebrew and Greek!
Hebrew has issues with verbs, plus it doesn't just have singular and plural, but dual verbs. There is no way dual verbs can ever be directly translated, without adding words. Plus their verb system is very different than in English. They start with a 3 letter root word, made of three consonants. The basic form is Qual, then Piel and a bunch of other forms we do not have. You can't directly translate a Hebrew verb to English.
Greek is much worse. They have noun and adjective cases.
Nominative
Genitive
Dative
Accusative
Vocative (rare, found 9 times in the NT.)
Plus, Greek nouns have three genders, masculine, feminine and neuter. Plus singular and plural. So, most words have 4 cases x 3 genders x 2 numbers. So that is 24 different spelling differences, which vary at the end of the word, and sometimes the consonant, although some words are repeated! The genitive plural for "the" uses " tone" for each plural gender. I believe there are 17 different forms of "the" in Greek, as some are used twice, too.
The position of the word in English in the sentence determines whether it is the nominative -subject, or predicate, (unless it is a predicate nominative). The direct object in English is the accusative in Greek, the Dative the indirect object, and Genitive is used for possession. Greek would translate "the friend of his". We would likely say, "his friend." Or "the boy's father", with the apostrophe showing possession
In Greek, the most important thing in the sentence is thrown forward. So, the direct object could be the first part of the sentence, with article and descriptive adjectives agreeing in gender, case and number. The subject might end the sentence in Greek, and it is determined by the endings on the words, like other cases. If a Greek sentence is in some kind of reversed or different word order, in English, you would have a sentence that made no sense in English if you didn't reorder the sentence, plus move around the adjectives adverbs etc. It simply is not possible to keep the same order from Greek to English. German is much better, because it has cases and 3 genders, too. But it is a bit watered down and less forms than Greek.
Anyway, don't make stupid statements about things you have never studied and know nothing about. Anyone who says the KJV is "word for word" has never studied Greek! And I didn't get into the huge differences in verbs. Verbs are about time in English, the are about aspect in Greek. And so much more!
And every time a product is changed to say "NEW AND IMPROVED" it is guaranteed to be of a lesser quality, lesser quantity, and greater price. But the public is so easily fooled (it seems) that the hucksters continue with their shenanigans. The Great Bible Version Hoax took Christendom by storm, and there were very few who saw through the smoke and mirrors.
A other dumb thing to say! Tyndall and the KJV committee all knew that you can't translate word for word from Greek to English. In some places, King James required a direct word for word, and you end up with things like "heap coals of burning fire," instead of "heap burning coals." Romans 12:20
Not if you view the Bible as the unchanging Word of God.