KJV class at Bible college

[prophet]

Then I vote for the Vulgate. It's got the KJV beaten hands down with the given criteria.

And the English people got a good start with the Tyndale translation of it.

Why does any of that take away from the English?

 

[cast.sheep]

Maybe all the people that fight over it should just read it.  If someone wants to read the ESV...so what????  At least they aren't reading 50 Shades of Gray.  I use the good ol' KJV, but I don't give a rat's patootie what anyone else uses.  I'm just happy if they read something of spiritual value. But that's just me.  I wear pants, so I'm not too spiritual anyway. 

 

[ExFundy]

Does God know English? The Bible also declares copies to be scripture. Example Ethiopian Eunice. Example 2 Timothy was taught scripture as a child. Did they have originals? or does the Bible declare certain languages of scripture to be inspired?

 

[bgwilkinson]

Then I vote for the Vulgate. It's got the KJV beaten hands down with the given criteria.

And the English people got a good start with the Tyndale translation of it.

Why does any of that take away from the English?

Are you thinking Tyndale used the Vulgate as his source text?

Well I guess he did get the last 6 verses of Revelation from the Vulgate, as Erasmus did not have a manuscript Bible of Revelation, he only had a commentary that had the Greek text only as secondary to the commentary.

He was close to the Catholic priest Erasmus and used one of his Greek-Latin New Testaments.

Probably his third attempt the 1521 as Tyndale had the Comma in his English version both 1516 and 1519 of Erasmus did not have the comma.

Wycliff used the Vulgate as Greek was virtually unknown in the Western world before the Fall of Constantinople and the resulting spread of Eastern Orthodox Greek manuscript Bibles.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Isaiah 50:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand forever.

Psalm 12:6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
   
  If you don't believe kjv is inspired word for word, then which bible is inspired?
  If you believe only the originals are inspired, you are calling God a liar!!!!

  The lords church has continued for over 2000 years. The Jewish people have survived. But I guess God can't preserve His Inspired Words.

Context. Neither verse was mentioning any particular version. Besides, English wasn't around at that point in time so to use these Scriptures as proof texts, one would have to really stretch the intended context.

(I'm hoping the post was meant as sarcasm.)

Several hundred years of its effects on the English-speaking world has proven the KJV to be God's Word, as much as Jesus' 3 1/2 year ministry proved that He is God's Word, so your version comment is just an attempt at distraction.

You may add other, to what you think is "inspired", but no reasonably intelligent person would discount the KJV for any reason other than self-serving bias.

quote
"Several hundred years of its effects on the English-speaking world has proven the KJV to be God's Word, as much as Jesus' 3 1/2 year ministry proved that He is God's Word, so your version comment is just an attempt at distraction."


I'm going to vote for the LXX as the most important translation of all time. I have the KJV translators backing me on this.

Here is what Miles Smith the translator's spokesman wrote about the LXX.


"But, when the fulness of time drew near, that the Sun of righteousness, the Son of God should come into the world, whom God ordained to be a reconciliation through faith in his blood, not of the Jew only, but also of the Greek, yea, of all them that were scattered abroad; then lo, it pleased the Lord to stir up the spirit of a Greek Prince (Greek for descent and language) even of Ptolemy Philadelphus King of Egypt, to procure the translating of the Book of God out of Hebrew into Greek. This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, commonly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John Baptist did among the Jews by vocal."


"It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men? Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather than making a new, in that new world and green age of the Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translations to serve their own turn, and therefore bearing a witness to themselves, their witness not to be regarded."


"The translation of the Seventy dissenteth from the Original in many places, neither doeth it come near it, for perspicuity, gravity, majesty; yet which of the Apostles did comdemn it? Condemn it? Nay, they used it...which they would not have done, nor by their example of using it, so grace and comment it to the Church, if it had been unworthy the appellation and name of the word of God."


Quote
"You may add other, to what you think is "inspired", but no reasonably intelligent person would discount the KJV for any reason other than self-serving bias."



As to those that are inspired I believe any translation that is made by competent translators from accurate copies of the original languages are indeed inspired. They have the intrinsic character of the original God-Breathed words written in Hebrew and Greek.
Some call this derivative inspiration, they are no less the Word of God than the original language copies.  All copies have mistakes and errors as anything that is touched by sinful man will be marred, sinful man cannot produce anything that is without errors.

I do not believe that any translator is inspired as the original writers were inspired.

Double inspiration is just a myth.

Miles said about other translations, "Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God."

This is what Miles had to say about the Rheims NT.

So the following are the very Word of God.  KJV, RSV, NASB, NKJV, ASV, LXX, Latin Vulgate, NIV, ESV, HCSB, Tyndale, Great, Matthew, Geneva, Rheims, bishops and many many others too numerous to name.

The Vulgate beats the KJV and the LXX beats the Vulgate.

The LXX beats the Vulgate and the KJV combined.

Neither KJV or the Vulgate is quoted as OT scripture in the NT as the LXX is quoted.

The LXX version of the Hebrew is the greatest and most used translation of all time. It has been used by God's people for over 2,000 years, it is still in everyday use by the Greek Orthodox. The LXX has no peers.

 

[IFB X-Files]

The LXX version of the Hebrew is the greatest and most used translation of all time. It has been used by God's people for over 2,000 years, it is still in everyday use by the Greek Orthodox. The LXX has no peers.

This has to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever made on this forum!  Of course, we all recognize that the "Greek Orthodox" church is a bastion of biblical doctrine and has a history of church building, missions work and soul winning around the world (cough!).  Plus the fact that Greek is the language of the world.

Bible critics are always quick to promote the LXX.  Of course facts mean little to them.  There is no evidence whatsoever of any BC existence of any "LXX".  There are no extant manuscripts of any BC LXX.

I will refer anyone who cares to know more to the outstanding work done by Floyd Nolan Jones entitled, "The Septuagint".  It's not lengthy as it doesn't take many words to talk about something that doesn't exist.  Those who "know", know that the "LXX" is the fifth column of Origen's Hexapla and the foundational document for all corrupted translations.

I'm beginning to wonder if Mr. BGW is a Jesuit plant.  But of course he's not.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Wow this has taken a disappointing turn. I'll try to be as kind as possible,...

If someone from FBC says nothing then they are a kool aid drinker, brain washed or "should have stood up and said something".

This is a discussion forum isn't it? A guy opines on a thread, regretfully reflects back on the years gone by and tries to be honest and now gets slammed for it?

I'll say this,... If you weren't/aren't here it's hard to understand what a good number of good people are going through. For some there is a real struggle to look back objectively now and look forward objectively.

I was a defender of Schaap back when, and tried to be fair and honest in my defense of him. But it came to a point where I couldn't defend what was going on anymore. That's a TOUGH crossroads to find yourself at. It's an internal struggle, but I think an honest one.

I don't know BG but I will give him the benefit of the doubt. If this makes me a bad guy in your eyes then okay.

With all due respect to you, Mr Wilkinson's posts here are self flagellating...to him and his church.
He posted the following link upstairs as an accusation against such.
However, it seems to be a perfect description of the church he has called home for decades.
Curious to say the least.

http://www.stevehackman.net/9-warning-signs-your-pastor-may-be-building-his-own-kingdom/?cb=04207357815466821

 

[Bruh]

Wow this has taken a disappointing turn. I'll try to be as kind as possible,...

If someone from FBC says nothing then they are a kool aid drinker, brain washed or "should have stood up and said something".

This is a discussion forum isn't it? A guy opines on a thread, regretfully reflects back on the years gone by and tries to be honest and now gets slammed for it?

I'll say this,... If you weren't/aren't here it's hard to understand what a good number of good people are going through. For some there is a real struggle to look back objectively now and look forward objectively.

I was a defender of Schaap back when, and tried to be fair and honest in my defense of him. But it came to a point where I couldn't defend what was going on anymore. That's a TOUGH crossroads to find yourself at. It's an internal struggle, but I think an honest one.

I don't know BG but I will give him the benefit of the doubt. If this makes me a bad guy in your eyes then okay.

With all due respect to you, Mr Wilkinson's posts here are self flagellating...to him and his church.
He posted the following link upstairs as an accusation against such.
However, it seems to be a perfect description of the church he has called home for decades.
Curious to say the least.

http://www.stevehackman.net/9-warning-signs-your-pastor-may-be-building-his-own-kingdom/?cb=04207357815466821

BGW, current pastor is KJVO, for the English speaking people. His current pastor also believes that, women should not wear pants.

Prove me wrong!

 

[cast.sheep]

Wow this has taken a disappointing turn. I'll try to be as kind as possible,...

If someone from FBC says nothing then they are a kool aid drinker, brain washed or "should have stood up and said something".

This is a discussion forum isn't it? A guy opines on a thread, regretfully reflects back on the years gone by and tries to be honest and now gets slammed for it?

I'll say this,... If you weren't/aren't here it's hard to understand what a good number of good people are going through. For some there is a real struggle to look back objectively now and look forward objectively.

I was a defender of Schaap back when, and tried to be fair and honest in my defense of him. But it came to a point where I couldn't defend what was going on anymore. That's a TOUGH crossroads to find yourself at. It's an internal struggle, but I think an honest one.

I don't know BG but I will give him the benefit of the doubt. If this makes me a bad guy in your eyes then okay.

With all due respect to you, Mr Wilkinson's posts here are self flagellating...to him and his church.
He posted the following link upstairs as an accusation against such.
However, it seems to be a perfect description of the church he has called home for decades.
Curious to say the least.

http://www.stevehackman.net/9-warning-signs-your-pastor-may-be-building-his-own-kingdom/?cb=04207357815466821

BGW, current pastor is KJVO, for the English speaking people. His current pastor also believes that, women should not wear pants.

Prove me wrong!

Wow!  This article hits the nail on the head! 

 

[Walt]

Here are some examples of Bible Correcting by Bro. Hyles. This is the Bro. Hyles I grew to love and respect before he went off the deep end into the swamp of KJVO.

This is what I grew to love about Bro. Hyles' teaching of the Bible. KJVOs will call this Bible correcting but in reality he was just improving upon the translation were it was wrong or unclear.

I don't consider amplifying a word or phrase or mentioning the Greek word to be "Bible correcting".  In today's English language, there are certainly places where the KJV is unclear, and giving people understanding is Biblical.

I don't believe that there are places in which the KJV is wrong.

 

[Walt]

Does God know English? The Bible also declares copies to be scripture. Example Ethiopian Eunice. Example 2 Timothy was taught scripture as a child. Did they have originals? or does the Bible declare certain languages of scripture to be inspired?

You are confusing inspiration and preservation.  Inspiration is the ACTION by which God breathed His words out and the Holy Spirit moved the holy men of old to perfectly write the Scripture.  That is INSPIRATION.  It does NOT mean that the words have sort of glowing magic. It was simply an action.  Thereafter, God PRESERVED the words that He inspired. The languages God used for His act of inspiration were Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Any exact copies of these would still be Scripture; in fact, exact copies of these are the inspired word of God.

Any translation must be judged on what kind of job it does to convey what God is saying in the original languages. A faithful translation would still be the Scripture, but by the very definition of INSPIRATION, no translation can claim that without claiming that God has re-revealed His Word.

Yes, God knew English before it existed.  Irrelevant to the above.

Timothy was taught or "knew" the Scriptures as a child.  We know little of Timothy's rearing -- did he learn from a Hebrew Bible, and learn the Scriptures in Hebrew?  (That would, by the way, be the originals -- the original languages).  Did he have a translation and learn the Septuagint?  Assuming that the Septuagint is a good translation of the Hebrew, it is still Scripture.  Non-issue again.

The language itself isn't inspired; inspiration was the ACT of God giving His word to man, so your last question makes little sense.

 

[bgwilkinson]

The LXX version of the Hebrew is the greatest and most used translation of all time. It has been used by God's people for over 2,000 years, it is still in everyday use by the Greek Orthodox. The LXX has no peers.

This has to be one of the most ridiculous statements ever made on this forum!  Of course, we all recognize that the "Greek Orthodox" church is a bastion of biblical doctrine and has a history of church building, missions work and soul winning around the world (cough!).  Plus the fact that Greek is the language of the world.

X-Files You are a hoot. You can believe anything you want to believe. You'll be happier that way.

Bible critics are always quick to promote the LXX.  Of course facts mean little to them.  There is no evidence whatsoever of any BC existence of any "LXX".  There are no extant manuscripts of any BC LXX.

I am quite surprised that you would put Miles Smith in the same category as Bible Critics.
Does this mean you do not approve of the Authorized Version of 1611 and it's translators?
I guess Miles was one dumb guy as he didn't know the LXX was a fake. How can anyone trust Miles Smith to do any Bible translating if he is so ignorant as to believe the LXX paved the way for the Saviour?

Here again is Miles thoughts on the non existent LXX.

"But, when the fulness of time drew near, that the Sun of righteousness, the Son of God should come into the world, whom God ordained to be a reconciliation through faith in his blood, not of the Jew only, but also of the Greek, yea, of all them that were scattered abroad; then lo, it pleased the Lord to stir up the spirit of a Greek Prince (Greek for descent and language) even of Ptolemy Philadelphus King of Egypt, to procure the translating of the Book of God out of Hebrew into Greek. This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, commonly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John Baptist did among the Jews by vocal."

I wonder how a guy this stupid could have been selected to write the Preface to their version.

"It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men? Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather than making a new, in that new world and green age of the Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translation to serve their own turn, and therefore bearing a witness to themselves, their witness not to be regarded."


Miles thinks the LXX is the Word of God

"The translation of the Seventy dissenteth from the Original in many places, neither doeth it come near it, for perspicuity, gravity, majesty; yet which of the Apostles did comdemn it? Condemn it? Nay, they used it...which they would not have done, nor by their example of using it, so grace and commend it to the Church, if it had been unworthy the appellation and name of the word of God."

I will refer anyone who cares to know more to the outstanding work done by Floyd Nolan Jones entitled, "The Septuagint".  It's not lengthy as it doesn't take many words to talk about something that doesn't exist.  Those who "know", know that the "LXX" is the fifth column of Origen's Hexapla and the foundational document for all corrupted translations.

I'm beginning to wonder if Mr. BGW is a Jesuit plant.  But of course he's not.

Thank-you for the book recommendation, I've never heard of Floyd Nolan.

I think I'll take Miles Smith's word and opinion over that of Mr. Nolan.

By the way, I did recognize the KJVO mythical haze. I withhold comment.

 

[prophet]

Then I vote for the Vulgate. It's got the KJV beaten hands down with the given criteria.

And the English people got a good start with the Tyndale translation of it.

Why does any of that take away from the English?

Are you thinking Tyndale used the Vulgate as his source text?

Well I guess he did get the last 6 verses of Revelation from the Vulgate, as Erasmus did not have a manuscript Bible of Revelation, he only had a commentary that had the Greek text only as secondary to the commentary.

He was close to the Catholic priest Erasmus and used one of his Greek-Latin New Testaments.

Probably his third attempt the 1521 as Tyndale had the Comma in his English version both 1516 and 1519 of Erasmus did not have the comma.

Wycliff used the Vulgate as Greek was virtually unknown in the Western world before the Fall of Constantinople and the resulting spread of Eastern Orthodox Greek manuscript Bibles.

Sorry, I meant Wycliffe.

 

[ExFundy]

I will keep my kjv, and teach everyone this truth. Satan deceived eve by casting doubt on Gods word. Examine yourselves. That's all

 

[rsc2a]

I will keep my kjv, and teach everyone this truth. Satan deceived eve by casting doubt on Gods word. Examine yourselves. That's all

So are you doing the work of Satan or are you cool with the NIV, ESV, etc...?

 

[ExFundy]

Colossians 1:14 niv, takes out the blood.

 

[rsc2a]

Colossians 1:14 niv, takes out the blood.

Is your forum name meant to be ironic?

 

[ExFundy]

Is your forum picture suppose to look like you?

 

[FSSL]

I get it now! EXtraFundy!

 

[IFB X-Files]

Miles thinks the LXX is the Word of God

Am I to throw out my King James Bible because Miles was a Calvinist, when the very Bible he helped translate (and I assume he read) refutes that doctrine of devils?

Or am I to become a Calvinist because he was one since whatever Miles says makes it so?

No.

Neither will I throw it out because he believed in something he had never seen a day in his life.  He never saw a BC LXX because one never existed.  I don't have to answer for what he did or didn't do.

To base an argument on what Miles says about the LXX (or being a Calvinist) is not a weak argument, IMO it's no argument at all.

The one thing we CAN learn from Miles (and the other translators) is that God uses people, even when they're wrong.  That means there's hope for BGW and myself.