Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

God preserving his word


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Looks like too much dieting on emergent church writings has caused him to think we can't even get the Bible meaning today. Therefore a preference for other writings other than the Bible. But if you cannot study the Bible and get what God is trying to teach us from His Word - through all available sound Bible study materials - then someone has to wonder if there is something wrong.

But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: 1 Corinthians 1:30

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 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 discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Corinthians 2:7-16

Edited by Jerry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The issue with Bible versions is not the changing of words over time and finding the current appropriate word with the same meaning - the issue is modern versions:

1) use different underlying manuscripts, which do NOT say the same thing

2) change the MEANING of the passages, by adding to God's Word, removing from God's Word, or outright changing God's Word, which the Bible forbids us from doing. In fact, God curses those who do so.

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.

3) Change the language and wording a minimum of 10% in order to copyright their work. It is not just an issue of updating the language - or else, for example, the NKJV would not remove the word "matrix" from the five verses they are found in the KJV THEN GO AHEAD AND PUT THE SAME SUPPOSEDLY ARCHAIC WORD IN AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PASSAGE IN ISAIAH. That is deception and double speak, pure and simple.

Funny how the world and yea, even some in Christendom, have no problem with translating Plato, Aristotle, or any other ancient text - religious or secular - into another language, including English - but somehow no one can do the exact same when it comes to the Bible. I guess it is the only book on the planet that no one can ever translate accurately. Oh wait, is that the sound of hissing I hear?

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

Edited by Jerry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jerry said:

The issue with Bible versions is not the changing of words over time and finding the current appropriate word with the same meaning - the issue is modern versions:

1) use different underlying manuscripts, which do NOT say the same thing

2) change the MEANING of the passages, by adding to God's Word, removing from God's Word, or outright changing God's Word, which the Bible forbids us from doing. In fact, God curses those who do so.

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.

3) Change the language and wording a minimum of 10% in order to copyright their work. It is not just an issue of updating the language - or else, for example, the NKJV would not remove the word "matrix" from the five verses they are found in the KJV THEN GO AHEAD AND PUT THE SAME SUPPOSEDLY ARCHAIC WORD IN AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PASSAGE IN ISAIAH. That is deception and double speak, pure and simple.

Funny how the world and yea, even some in Christendom, have no problem with translating Plato, Aristotle, or any other ancient text - religious or secular - into another language, including English - but somehow no one can do the exact same when it comes to the Bible. I guess it is the only book on the planet that no one can ever translate accurately. Oh wait, is that the sound of hissing I hear?

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

Every translation, Socrates, the Bible or any other translation looses meaning. There are no exceptions to this. 

Are there advances in scholarship?

Are there advances in understanding ancient languages?

13 hours ago, BrotherTony said:

There are usually equivalent that come along to replace the word that don't change the meaning. You're the one who taught/worked in a seminary or Bible college...right? You should be aware of this if you were involved in any way in this kind of ministry. 

I worked in the seminary library updating their data base. I never taught and have no qualifications to teach in a seminary ... other than perhaps about the library and its collection, helping students and professors find information. 

 

13 hours ago, BrotherTony said:

There are usually equivalent that come along to replace the word that don't change the meaning. You're the one who taught/worked in a seminary or Bible college...right? You should be aware of this if you were involved in any way in this kind of ministry. 

I worked in the seminary library updating their data base. I never taught and have no qualifications to teach in a seminary ... other than perhaps about the library and its collection, helping students and professors find information. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
53 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Every translation, Socrates, the Bible or any other translation looses meaning. There are no exceptions to this. 

Are there advances in scholarship?

Are there advances in understanding ancient languages?

I worked in the seminary library updating their data base. I never taught and have no qualifications to teach in a seminary ... other than perhaps about the library and its collection, helping students and professors find information. 

 

I worked in the seminary library updating their data base. I never taught and have no qualifications to teach in a seminary ... other than perhaps about the library and its collection, helping students and professors find information. 

 

That all depends...your defintion of "advances," "scholarship," "and what you consider ancient languages. I don't believe that any of these loses it's meaning if one can compare to books of the same time period, actually has access to the meaning of the words from that time through the people, the context in which things were written, etc. It still comes down to context and content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There is nothing in the KJV that a modern English speaker cannot understand. I'm a high school dropout with a GED who never attended college and who never read a book prior to my salvation yet I could understand. 

The bottomline is do you believe that God is powerful enough to give us his words without error in a language we can read and understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BrotherTony said:

That all depends...your defintion of "advances," "scholarship," "and what you consider ancient languages. I don't believe that any of these loses it's meaning if one can compare to books of the same time period, actually has access to the meaning of the words from that time through the people, the context in which things were written, etc. It still comes down to context and content.

Books of the same era, yes. But books from different eras, there are differences as people in the later era could not without great difficulty understand what in written in the oldest text. Chaucer's Canterbury tales is an example. Shakespeare's writing is easier to understand as it is in Early Modern English. Yes, some of his sentences and words are hard for many moderns to understand. For instance Shakespeare has  Macbeth say,  "Lay on McDuff." Most people today misunderstand this phrase. It is not an invitation to attack, but "after you," or I'll follow you. 

Time change, words change, meaning changes, and some words disappear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SureWord said:

There is nothing in the KJV that a modern English speaker cannot understand. I'm a high school dropout with a GED who never attended college and who never read a book prior to my salvation yet I could understand. 

The bottomline is do you believe that God is powerful enough to give us his words without error in a language we can read and understand.

Are you sure?

Do you know the meaning of:

Haply

Minish

Sottish

Withal

Abjects

Barked

Besom

There are many words in the KJ that are not understood by the average person today. 

Do you really understand Job 15:26-27?

26 He runneth upon him, even on his neck, upon the thick bosses of his bucklers:

27 Because he covereth his face with his fatness, and maketh collops of fat on his flanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
6 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Are you sure?

Do you know the meaning of:

Haply

Minish

Sottish

Withal

Abjects

Barked

Besom

There are many words in the KJ that are not understood by the average person today. 

Do you really understand Job 15:26-27?

26 He runneth upon him, even on his neck, upon the thick bosses of his bucklers:

27 Because he covereth his face with his fatness, and maketh collops of fat on his flanks.

BB, though this question is not directed to me, as I stated before, anyone worth their salt could find these words in supplemental books, dictionaries, or even in today's society, google them and get the meanings. It's not that hard. You seem to have a knack of trying to make things difficult when they shouldn't be. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

BB, though this question is not directed to me, as I stated before, anyone worth their salt could find these words in supplemental books, dictionaries, or even in today's society, google them and get the meanings. It's not that hard. You seem to have a knack of trying to make things difficult when they shouldn't be. ?

You give a good argument as to why modern translations should be used. Thanks for supporting my belief. 

I do not understand Job 15:26-27 as stated in King James. But, if I check a modern translation I can gain an understanding of the passage. I would quote one here, but it seems I am not allowed to quote anything except King James. No comparisons, I guess. 

Edited by Bouncing Bill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
33 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

You give a good argument as to why modern translations should be used. Thanks for supporting my belief. 

I do not understand Job 15:26-27 as stated in King James. But, if I check a modern translation I can gain an understanding of the passage. I would quote one here, but it seems I am not allowed to quote anything except King James. No comparisons, I guess. 

I can't say that I don't use other translations as supplements, but I DEPEND on the KJV. It's my preferred version. I grew up with it, and I'm more familiar with it than other translations. I don't try to discourage others from reading the other translaions if they wish, because God has already stated that his Word would not come back void. But, I also emphasize that the KJ was written in the same era as Shakespeare, and that it's written on an 8th grade level...at least that's what they said it was when I was younger. Now, they're saying it's written on an 11th or 12th grade level. I guess that's from the dumbing down of the students through the new teaching methods. UGH! Still...I believe the KJV/TR is the better of the translations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

I can't say that I don't use other translations as supplements, but I DEPEND on the KJV. It's my preferred version. I grew up with it, and I'm more familiar with it than other translations. I don't try to discourage others from reading the other translaions if they wish, because God has already stated that his Word would not come back void. But, I also emphasize that the KJ was written in the same era as Shakespeare, and that it's written on an 8th grade level...at least that's what they said it was when I was younger. Now, they're saying it's written on an 11th or 12th grade level. I guess that's from the dumbing down of the students through the new teaching methods. UGH! Still...I believe the KJV/TR is the better of the translations.

The King James Bible is certainly the most poetic translation. This makes it easier to memorize. It is a beautiful read.

Yes, Shakespeare died in 1616, five years after the King James translation was published. 

Yes, the reports of reading level currently says 12th grade. I found the following online:

  • King James Version (KJV): 12th grade
  • Revised Standard Version (RSV): 12th grade
  • New American Standard Bible (NASB): 11th grade
  • New Revised Standard Version (RNSV): 11th grade
  • English Standard Version (ESV): 10th grade
  • New International Version (NIV): 8th grade
  • Holman Christian Standard Version (HCSV): 8th grade
  • New King James Version (NKJV): 7th grade
  • New Living Translation (NLT): 6th grade
  • God’s Word (GW): 5th grade
  • The Message (MSG): 5th grade
  • New Century Version (NCV): 3rd grade

Do you ever use a parallel Bible where passages from two or three translation are printed side-by-side? 

Have you used the Amplified Bible?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Are you sure?

Do you know the meaning of:

Haply

Minish

Sottish

Withal

Abjects

Barked

Besom

There are many words in the KJ that are not understood by the average person today. 

Do you really understand Job 15:26-27?

26 He runneth upon him, even on his neck, upon the thick bosses of his bucklers:

27 Because he covereth his face with his fatness, and maketh collops of fat on his flanks.

Yes, except "sottish" which I can't recall off hand.

You know how I learned what they meant? I got off my backside and grabbed a dictionary and looked them up. In a few cases I could grasp the gist of the word by the context it was used in.

There's no excuse for not knowing what a word means especially with the internet. And to hear a college educated person who spent $200,000 on their education cry they can't understand a word is really an embarrassment to our education system. I have an app on my phone that shows the definition of the word and also the root word(s) it is derived from.

Nothing but pure laziness or an excuse to not read the Bible is the reason for these excuses. 

PS: Looking at my app the word "sottish" means a foolish or stupid person and comes from a root word that was used for "drunkard, stupefy". It's where the word "besot" comes from. In England it is still used to refer to a "chronic drinker". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
9 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

The King James Bible is certainly the most poetic translation. This makes it easier to memorize. It is a beautiful read.

Yes, Shakespeare died in 1616, five years after the King James translation was published. 

Yes, the reports of reading level currently says 12th grade. I found the following online:

  • King James Version (KJV? 12th grade
  • Revised Standard Version (RSV): 12th grade
  • New American Standard Bible (NASB): 11th grade
  • New Revised Standard Version (RNSV): 11th grade
  • English Standard Version (ESV): 10th grade
  • New International Version (NIV): 8th grade
  • Holman Christian Standard Version (HCSV): 8th grade
  • New King James Version (NKJV): 7th grade
  • New Living Translation (NLT): 6th grade
  • God’s Word (GW): 5th grade
  • The Message (MSG): 5th grade
  • New Century Version (NCV): 3rd grade

Do you ever use a parallel Bible where passages from two or three translation are printed side-by-side? 

Have you used the Amplified Bible?

Yes, I've used both the parallel and the Amplified Bibles. I don't own copies of them, though my mother does. 

Now out of the versions you've listed, of course, I use the KJV. Our church used the Holman. One of the churches I helped start in Augusta, GA back in 1984 used to KJVO, then when the new pastor was called from Bob Jones University, he brought the NIV. I wasn't impressed. In fact, it got to be such a sticking point that my wife and I left. Of course, the debate over KJV and other versions hadn't really reached a fevered pitch yet, but it was starting to get there in some IFB churches. We left what was Garden City Baptist Church and went to Providence Baptist Church of Augusta at that point. 

My father had a NKJV in 1984 or 85, I believe..I may be incorrect on the year. He got it from being in contact with Jerry Falwell. I have it packed up, or I could tell you the exact year. My father left that one and went back to the regular KJV, though. The NLT is what our men's Bible study/recovery group in the Cowpunchers Cowboy Church uses. I have a copy of the "hippie Bible," Good News for Modern Man, the RSV and the ESV. I like the ESV to some extent, I NEVER use "The Message" except for reference material/commentary. It's far too much of a paraphrase for me. I've only seen the NSV once...there are several more translations out there, and I've used several of them for research/comparison. I still rely on the KJV, though. 

I believe, as I've stated here, and in other threads, that anyone worth their salt, could get off their backsides and research and find what the meanings are if they'd just follow 2 Tim 2:15. The Bible tells us to study, not just here, but, when it is speaking of how the Bereans studied what was said to see if the things being preached were so. It's our job as Christians to do this...not a translations job!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, SureWord said:

Yes, except "sottish" which I can't recall off hand.

You know how I learned what they meant? I got off my backside and grabbed a dictionary and looked them up. In a few cases I could grasp the gist of the word by the context it was used in.

There's no excuse for not knowing what a word means especially with the internet. And to hear a college educated person who spent $200,000 on their education cry they can't understand a word is really an embarrassment to our education system. I have an app on my phone that shows the definition of the word and also the root word(s) it is derived from.

Nothing but pure laziness or an excuse to not read the Bible is the reason for these excuses. 

PS: Looking at my app the word "sottish" means a foolish or stupid person and comes from a root word that was used for "drunkard, stupefy". It's where the word "besot" comes from. In England it is still used to refer to a "chronic drinker". 

Good for you. Researching is important. 

21 minutes ago, SureWord said:

Yes, except "sottish" which I can't recall off hand.

You know how I learned what they meant? I got off my backside and grabbed a dictionary and looked them up. In a few cases I could grasp the gist of the word by the context it was used in.

There's no excuse for not knowing what a word means especially with the internet. And to hear a college educated person who spent $200,000 on their education cry they can't understand a word is really an embarrassment to our education system. I have an app on my phone that shows the definition of the word and also the root word(s) it is derived from.

Nothing but pure laziness or an excuse to not read the Bible is the reason for these excuses. 

PS: Looking at my app the word "sottish" means a foolish or stupid person and comes from a root word that was used for "drunkard, stupefy". It's where the word "besot" comes from. In England it is still used to refer to a "chronic drinker". 

Good for you. Researching is important. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It comes down to this: Bouncing Bill does not believe in the God of the Bible - God who knows all things, and knows that languages change and adapt over time - He knew all this, and yet chose to write His Word in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, knowing it would need to be translated into other languages. God wasn't caught off guard with no pure Word to give the world.

Also, it is simply wrong to define the Bible rather than translate it. It is up to the faithful translators and copyists to render the Word of God exactly as it is given, translate exactly what it says - then let the people of God throughout history study it, learn it, define the words as they study and teach it to others. If you expect a Bible translation to come along that magically defines every word and makes it so no child of God has to study it, then you don't know the Book itself which commands us to study it, compare passages, lean upon the Holy Spirit for understanding. Lost people want a Bible they can understand without putting the effort into it - YET God's Word itself states that the natural (ie. unsaved) man CANNOT understand it; therefore, translating and changing the Bible in such a way that the LOST can receive it as is, is going totally counter to God's purposes.

Sounds a bit like what happened with the world at Babel:

Genesis 11:1-7 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...