Jump to content
Online Baptist

John Young

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content Count

    650
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

John Young last won the day on November 9 2020

John Young had the most liked content!

6 Followers

About John Young

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

Recent Profile Visitors

11,071 profile views
  1. You could always do what the kings did and write your own updated copy.... That way it can be in your very own version of the English language. Deuteronomy 17:18-20 And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: 19 and it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: 20 that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he t
  2. What would be your alternative solution to update these while retaining their accuracy?
  3. It must be because it also still uses the word besom.....
  4. A good translation from english speaking breathern can come from the KJV into a any native language but a refined accurate and precise translation most likely will have to come from the work of the native breathern themselves. Unless the native Christian equips themselves for the task, they will not have a perfect translation in their own language.
  5. I appreciate your comments and I think they show the right spirit in which most faithful King James Bible users approach the scriptures.
  6. And that's the issue with updating based on archaism. Words and grammar fall in and out of common use. The fact that the King James has been the common bible for over 400 years and has been attributed to being one of the major influence in stabilizing English, means that even if a section of the population feels that portions are out of date, that is only their subjective opinion. Because of its common status and continued influance and role in English psych, everything contained in it, other than spelling changed from 1611, is not archaic. Rather, as part of popular english christian li
  7. It not endless debate. Rather it points to the disconnect with our translation philosophies, as to the primary purpose for the scripters we use.
  8. Okay then....Do you believe they can understand the Spiritual aspects of scripture without the Spirit of Christ?
  9. Romans 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. John 1:6-7 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. The Book of John was written to explain the Spiritual aspects of the gospel to the believer and in the first chapter it explains a witness from God was needed for the lost to comprehend. Before one can believe the scriptures they must first repent unto God and the B
  10. So do you want to update the bible for unbelievers to be able to understand it on their own? I don't think such a thing is truly possible. They need a Spirit filled preacher to speak the Words of Life. I would rather have a written bible that equips the believer, so that the believer can do what they were commissioned to do. John 7:38-39 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not
  11. Its a basic bible concept. God committed the oracles* first to the church in the wilderness and then to us, his NT church with the commission to preach and teach it. The believer has the Spirit of Christ within them which convicts the lost through preaching. The lost cannot believe without the Chrisitian preaching it to them. *4. Among christians, oracles, in the plural, denotes the communications, revelations or messages delivered by God to prophets. In this sense it is rarely used in the singular; but we say, the oracles of God, divine oracles, meaning the Scriptures. ~Webster's 1828
  12. God tasked the church with converting the lost and edifying the saints through the geat commission but scripture was written to equip the church in that task. However, It was not written for the unbeliever /lost to read and understand on their own. 1 Corinthians 2:13-14 KJV Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. [14] But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually disc
  13. The bible wasn't written for unbelievers. It was written for the church to use.
  14. I just ordered this digital notebook to help with writing my notes to text. So far from my research (at $200) it seems to be the best compromise to the ReMarkable 2 ($500+). Anything over $200 I would just go with the Lenovo Duet (At $250 with keyboard and cover included and pens for a small extra cost, it is the best value/quality alternative to the Surface Pro $600+). I'll try to do a review of the "ORIGIN" after I get it for those interested. I got my wife the Lenovo Duet and she loves it. It has replaced her laptop and it is practically a do it all device. It doesn't have a lot of bui
  15. That's fine. I' haven't attacked you. I simply shared my concerns with your terminology and my views on the subject matter. You and anyone else can share your "Thoughts about an update to the KJV" in this thread if you want as well. In my opinion "archaisms" is a fundamentally is flawed concept. Much less one that should be a primary consideration in updating scripture. As an example, the material of Mark Ward in particular shows the extent to which this concept takes over in one's mind to turn much of the words one is not familiar with into "archaisms". So no, I personally to not
×
×
  • Create New...