Jump to content
Online Baptist

Salvation Forum

A forum to discuss Salvation, Eternal Security and other topics that pertain to Salvation.

188 topics in this forum

  1. Scott Lyons
  2. heartstrings
  3. True or False Convert?

    • 6 replies
  4. Condemned Already

    • 1 reply
  5. The Lordship of Christ

    • 3 replies
  6. Led To Repentance

    • 0 replies
  7. Doubting Salvation

    • 0 replies
  8. Soul Sleep

    • 0 replies
  9. Salvation question

    • 7 replies
  10. Good Friday?

    • 5 replies
    • 3 replies
  11. Born Of God

    • 7 replies
  12. The Exchange

    • 1 reply
  13. Would You?

    • 1 reply
    • 12 replies
  14. John81
    • 7 replies
  15. Salvation Confusion 1 2 3

  16. All things are become new

    • 0 replies
  17. Hell Is A Real Place

    • 4 replies
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Recent Topics

  • Recent Posts

    • Scripture has not changed, but language has. Chaucer's Canterbury Tales have not changed, but you do not read them in Chaucer era English. Why? Because English has changed. The same is true with English. Just look at Shakespeare and his language. The English of the King James translators is not the same as the English you speak. Thus, we need scripture in the current language. There are numerous obsolete English words in the KJ that are not understood by everyone, such as 'sottish,' 'bittern,' 'besom,' 'amerce,' 'beeves' just to name a few. And there are words that have changed meaning, such as charity.  The King James translators used the original languages and also leaned heavily on Tyndale's translation. There were major revisions to the 1611 King James Bible, the first in 1629, and the second in 1638. The Thomas Nelson website says: " The aim of these revisions was to restore the proper text by eliminating misprints and correcting minor errors in translation. Cambridge scholars also made changes to the original text by incorporating a more literal interpretation of certain words. (These literal interpretations were not new. They had been included in the original King James Version as margin notes.) Printing errors didn’t end with the Cambridge revisions. For more than 120 years, new mistakes accrued. Eventually, misprinted editions became a problem of scandalous proportions. Two of the leading universities in England—Cambridge (again) and Oxford—began work on updated standard editions. Francis Sawyer Parris oversaw the Cambridge edition, and Benjamin Blayney oversaw the Oxford edition. The Cambridge edition was finished first, in 1760, but the Oxford version, which was finished nine years later, superseded it." https://www.thomasnelsonbibles.com/has-the-king-james-bible-been-revised/ The KJ scholars admitted there were errors. 
    • Has scripture meaning changed since 1611 or since the time it was written for that matter? No. While a good grasp of root language is helpful in some instances, alone, it cannot convey the contextual meaning of authors. For that, the material itself must be studied. A deep study of a word out of context and without cross referencing of an author's whole work, is a foolish errand. In fact, I am quite confidant when I say that the person who only knows rudimentary English and has a good ability to cross-reference scripture, using only a King James bible, is more apt to teach than the greatest Greek and Hebrew scholar. The King James Bible, as translated, is so sufficient in conveying biblical truth that not one Greek or Hebrew word study is necessary to know the scripture's meaning.
    • Has the English language changed since 1611? Has scholars understanding of Greek and Hebrew improved since 1611?
    • Brethren, Maybe if we took the words of John Young in the above quote we may arrive at his intended thoughts. Maybe if you looked at every word that John Young mentioned concerning "cross-referencing" you may understand his intentions better and find less fault or excuses to accept the reasoning for changing the Authorized Version by using the Greek and Hebrew. Quite frankly, Every last translator of these modern versions, starting from the Revised Version of 1881, uses the Greek and Hebrew language (and all language difficulties), as a pretext to justify their changes to the Authorized Version, the King James Version of 1611. Alan
    • Thank you for the link to Brother James Melton. Both of those links re-directed me to a Facebook page. I do not use Facebook so I found a link to a website link. http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/  
  • Create New...