Advanced Revelation

[kevinmiller]

That goes both ways. We have some people who arrogantly believe (see what I mean, haha) that the English KJV is the only perfect Bible in the world and others who scratch their head in confusion because they are accused of not being KJVO when that is the only Bible they will ever choose to read.

:amen:

[Psalms18_28]

The only good thing it's done for me is that it's motivated me to study more to defend what I believe, just in case anyone directly challenges me.

Is that the same thing as getting on the internet? I think it would been better if you study it for yourself instead of studying it to defend your position.

People do learn things from the internet, even though they rather have the "last word". Sometime they do change their position and sometime they don't. They just need time to think about it.

[Samer]

By the way, regarding the Gipp articles...
I've enjoyed some of Gipp's stuff, so I don't hate the guy or anything...

The "translation is better" one has already been refuted here over and over, since what Kathie said in Katy-Anne's article was just a compressed version of it. The Bible never uses the word "translate" to refer to moving from language to another. The more accurate term would be "interpretation." The whole argument takes the word out of context and tries to force in something that isn't there. Go figure.

Italicized words are generally implied, but not explictly stated, in the Greek. This is absolutely a part of language translation. When we translated from Greek to English in Greek class, we usually added a few things to make it more readable in English. However, no real meaning is added from the originals. A lot of it comes from the Greek tenses and things like that. A lot of times the word "is" or "are" are not explicitly in the Greek, but the meaning is clearly there, and obvious to anybody who knows Greek.

Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: (Romans 3:13-16)

These things are particular to any language, and make perfect sense in that language, but need to be changed when translated out. A couple quick examples in English, stolen from Katy-Anne's favorite website:

Jessica had five dollars; Monica, three. (The verb "had" was omitted at the comma.)
What if I miss the deadline? (The verb phrase "will happen" was omitted, as in "What will happen if I miss the deadline.")

The "Can a translation be inspired?" article shows again that the biblical word for what we're talking about as translating languages is actually "interpret," thereby implicitly refuting his other article.

It is, of course, an accepted fact that no translation can be "word perfect". Therefore we know that the Hebrew translation of Joseph's Egyptian statements as found in the Old Testament manuscripts cannot be an exact word for word copy. We are left with quite a dilemma. WHOM did God inspire? Did He inspire Joseph's Egyptian statements, the Egyptian interpreter's verbal translation, or Moses' written translation as found in the Hebrew of the Old Testament?

Some translations are indeed word perfect--faulty premise. God inspired Joseph's words, and the interpretation was accurate, and thereby retained all inspiration via preservation. Moses's written translation preserved that same inspiration. What Moses wrote down was given by inspiration of God, even if it was done through Joseph and then an interpreter. That is how the King James Bible is the inspired word of God in the English language, despite being a translation of the word of God in the original languages.

[joyfulpraise93]

:goodpost:

[Will]

Hey Will! My view is that there is stuff in the KJB that wasn't clear in the TR. The italics in the KJB prove this. Many copies of the TR disagree with each other, and God inspired the KJB translators when they put all those copies together of which words to write. He also inspired them to put in the italics, which shows up things that weren't in the TR also. There are also some verses with some advanced revelation in them, one of them is in Exodus I think that tells us to be careful of movies and magazines etc but I don't know exactly where the verse is, I know that Kathie or Vince knows though.



Katy-Anne

Hi again Katy-Anne,

I don't think that the case of the italics can really be pointed to as advanced revelation at this point in the discussion. The first thing we need to do is talk about why the italics are there. The translators placed those italics there in order for the verses to make sense. The problem is, when you attempt to do a formal translation, you can end up missing words that are relevant to make the verse clear. Or, the verse could be backwards. One thing we need to understand is that English is backwards from almost every other language in the world. Another thing, is that when we attempt to translate from one language to another, there may be words that need to be added or taken out in order to make sense. Allow me to demonstrate. In French, if I say "C'est la vie," in order to literally render it in English, it would read "it is the life," or "that is the life." But in English, we would say "That's life." So that's one example. Another would be translating English into ASL(American Sign Language). Have you ever tried to read a note by a deaf person who speaks only ASL and doesn't regularly write in English? It's very difficult to read. It may come out something like this "My class stupid. Teacher boring." Although it's comprehensible in English, those of us who are hearing would render it "My class is stupid. The teacher is boring." So there is considerable difficulty in translating from one language to another. And on some occasions, the KJV translators had to add some words to make the text flow more smoothly, and make it easier to read.

Now that we've discussed translational issues, and why the translators would place the italics in the text, we have another issue to discuss. Where the KJV translators inspired? Upon what basis do you claim that the KJV translators were inspired Katy-Anne? How do you think inspiration happens?

[Guest Guest]

I'm not sure how the inspiration happened, I just know that it did. :lol I have heard your arguments before for the reason the italics are there, but it just doesn't hold water to me. The italics make things clearer...which is advanced revelation...

I know the translators were inspired because of deduction I guess you'd call it. I know the KJB is perfect, man can't do something that is perfect, therefore God inspired it. Also there is a verse that says that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God. The KJB is Scripture, therefore it's inspired.

Katy-Anne

[HappyChristian]

Well, if it's helping you, that's good. Sometimes I think discussions like this are kinda useless because many people in these discussions won't change, and they just come here to mock at people that disagree with them. Instead of helping me, it just makes me frustrated. I've been reading more books lately and I've learned a lot more out of a book than I could ever learn on the internet.

The only good thing it's done for me is that it's motivated me to study more to defend what I believe, just in case anyone directly challenges me.



Well I still believe internet talk is cheap and I'd rather learn from a book than the internet. I didn't say anyone was insincere because they didn't read the same books I do. I said that if they want to know more about what I believe, they should read those books because that's where I learned a lot about the KJVO issue.

Just wanted to interject this here - when we got married, my husband had almost all of P. Ruckman's books (and he had read many others from the same viewpoint, and we got the BBB for a long time). And we studied this together (didn't know it was called Advanced Revelation). I have to say that my husband was a staunch believer in what you girls are purporting...until he began studying scripture instead of the books! Now, I am not knocking what you believe, nor am I mocking it, okay? I'm simply telling you our experience. The kicker came when he realized that there were several Bible passages where Mr. Ruckman gave "advanced revelation" teachings (teaching that "this is what it's saying between the lines" basically)...and there was one teaching at least that was quite perverted (it was the same teaching that I heard from students at his college when I was in college a few miles down the road). I am not going to go into it, because it isn't necessary, and I am not saying it to denigrate Mr. Ruckman or anyone. I just wanted to post this to let you know there are people who have read (many) books on this subject - and have discarded it as unscriptural.

[Will]

Is the Qu

[UrbanChristian]

Some translations are indeed word perfect--faulty premise. God inspired Joseph's words, and the interpretation was accurate, and thereby retained all inspiration via preservation. Moses's written translation preserved that same inspiration. What Moses wrote down was given by inspiration of God, even if it was done through Joseph and then an interpreter. That is how the King James Bible is the inspired word of God in the English language, despite being a translation of the word of God in the original languages.

I have to agree with Samer on this one. In reference to Will's post, I don't believe that the KJB is inspired, but rather that the original inspiration was preserved in the Translation. It has been proven over and over that God works through Mankind. God used the translators and guided them in the preservation of His Word, thereby preserving the original inspiration, but I don't believe the translators of the KJB were inspired the way the original writers were.

We have to remember, that language is simply the clothing in which the Word of God is clothed. God is fully capable of using men to change that clothing for his purposes. I believe the only time God would need to directly inspire people again, would be if every single copy of every language translation of every version of every Bible on the face of the earth was destroyed. But God has already told us what is going to happen, so we don't even need to worry about that.

[Will]

I'm not sure how the inspiration happened, I just know that it did. :lol I have heard your arguments before for the reason the italics are there, but it just doesn't hold water to me. The italics make things clearer...which is advanced revelation...

I know the translators were inspired because of deduction I guess you'd call it. I know the KJB is perfect, man can't do something that is perfect, therefore God inspired it. Also there is a verse that says that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God. The KJB is Scripture, therefore it's inspired.

Katy-Anne

In Scripture, did those writing Scripture know that they were writing inspired Scripture?

Did the KJV translators ever express that they were under inspiration in translating the Scriptures?

[Will]

Well, if it's helping you, that's good. Sometimes I think discussions like this are kinda useless because many people in these discussions won't change, and they just come here to mock at people that disagree with them. Instead of helping me, it just makes me frustrated. I've been reading more books lately and I've learned a lot more out of a book than I could ever learn on the internet.

The only good thing it's done for me is that it's motivated me to study more to defend what I believe, just in case anyone directly challenges me.



Well I still believe internet talk is cheap and I'd rather learn from a book than the internet. I didn't say anyone was insincere because they didn't read the same books I do. I said that if they want to know more about what I believe, they should read those books because that's where I learned a lot about the KJVO issue.

To be honest, I'm rather disappointed when someone says they only want to learn from books. I find this a bit of a faulty way to learn. When one reads from a book, the book cannot answer questions they may have upon reading the material therein. I like the Socratic method of learning, which is basically asking questions. Keep asking questions, and discussing what you read and learn, so that you learn better.

[Anon]

If the Bible can be re-inspired...then we have to restudy out the entire canonization of the Bible because there are certain rules as to what is inspired and what is not.... and I've never heard any studies on which translators were inspired and which were not...which italics were really inspired and which they should have left out...

The entire study of the canonization of Scripture becomes moot if the translators of the KJV were re-inspired.

[Guest Guest]

Will, the best answer I have on how do I know the Bible is Scripture is that some things must be accepted by faith, and that is one of them. Maybe there is a more "scholarly" answer, but I sure don't know what it is.

Katy-Anne

[kevinmiller]

Faith can encompass a broad spectrum. But that was only a small part of Will's posts. There was a lot that went unanswered.

[Will]

Will, the best answer I have on how do I know the Bible is Scripture is that some things must be accepted by faith, and that is one of them. Maybe there is a more "scholarly" answer, but I sure don't know what it is.

Katy-Anne

Ah, but faith is not merely a belief in something where you lack evidence. Faith is something founded in evidence. When the Apostles preached, they spoke directly of things where there was evidence. We are never asked by God to believe something where there is no evidence. We are always given evidence to found our beliefs.