I recognize the merit of using other versions for in depth study but all should be referenced back to the KJV, imo.
Upvote
0
Why the KJV is used by Adventist
- Thread starter reddogs
- Start date
- Jun 18, 2014
- 30,521
- 16,866
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Can you give me chapter and verse that instructs us in such a way?
Upvote
0
I believe that God preserved His Word as it was intended to be generally understood in the KJV for us in this day. Protestantism has been instructed with it for 400 years and have gained great insight into the deeper studies of the Word. I have watched and confirmed many exposé's on the problems with the newer translations and am sufficiently warned from relying on any one except the KJV.
I suppose if I were fluent in ancient Greek and Hebrew, I would use that as my primary source but this is where God is meeting me, as I am, without having to have extra education necessary to understand.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2014
- 30,521
- 16,866
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
That would be wise. Every seminary pastor should be teaching his congregation at least a basic understanding of Hebrew and Greek. (in that order)
=================================
I have seen TOO MANY KJVOs make linguistic arguments based on KJV vs other translations, like the difference in Isa 40.31:
those who wait on the Lord... (NKJV) vs they that wait UPon the Lord... (KJV)
Heard an entire sermon on those 2 letters: up.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Point being is that God does not expect us to learn another language to understand His Word.
As far as the differences between the versions, there's a lot more egregious examples than the one you gave. (never heard of that one and makes me wonder what the difference is?)
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2014
- 30,521
- 16,866
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Well, I could ask you the same.... where does it state we need to?
My understanding comes from the gift of tongues given to instruct someone in their own language.... God provides the translation not the other way around.
My understanding comes from the gift of tongues given to instruct someone in their own language.... God provides the translation not the other way around.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2014
- 30,521
- 16,866
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Clearly it does not. But the fact that the bible was NOT written in English, and the additional fact that there are a good number of really messed up english translations out there (ever read the New World translation?) It would seem prudent to be able to read in as it was given - in the original languages.
Hmmm. That seems to be a stretch of that idea; perhaps stretched to the breaking point.
Remember the use of tongues in known languages is explicitly recorded (in the bible) to have occurred only once.
Are you claiming that all the KJV translators had the gift of interpretation of tongues?
Upvote
0
Nope, what I'm suggesting is that the Hoy Spirit, who gives the gift of tongues, is able to guide us and teach us in our own language and to our ability to understand spiritual things.
Upvote
0
I was thinking about this today in response to another thread... it is not mans wisdom or scholasticism that God values but a relationship. If we can understand and surrender to His Spirits teaching, we will gain that victory.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I believe that the name of this thread should be "Why the KJV bible should be used by Seventh day Adventists."
For every truth in the bible satan has his counterfeit, and the different translations are no different. There certainly is a right version and a wrong version. For anybody to actually believe that God is blessing a translation that has been updated three times since it was written in the 70's is absurd. This shows that we are not relying on God's Holy Spirit to "guide us into all truth" John 16:13; but in fact are relying on our own decision as we choose which version sounds better to us.
I use to attend bible study with no less then ten translations, commentaries, concordances, etc. That did not last long because the Lord, through the Holy Spirit revealed to me the true meaning of John 14:26 and 16:13. The Holy Spirit teaches us all things, and with the new "updated" version of the NIV where 17 verses are completely ripped out, how can the Holy Spirit reveal these important principles if they are not there? God's holy word the KJV bible has been protected by God throughout history even though satan has tried and failed many times. From murdering the reformers who tried to put the bible into the hands of common folk, like Wycliffe, Luther, but most importantly Tyndale where much of the poetry of the KJV came from. To the revised version of 1888, and all the counterfeits that sprung out of that.
When I sit in on a sermon, which has been rare lately because of the fact that very few pulpits are preaching anything worthy of grown up adventists, I cringe when I am told to follow along in my KJV bible and they start to read some other counterfeit translation. This is babylon pure and simple. It is confusion, and anybody who can be blessed by this is not telling the truth. When I start to read along and they go off on some other wording I am lost just long enough to have to back track to where sometimes I get completely lost about what the sermon is about in the first place. When I sit in on a bible study I ask everyone to read a verse all at the same time, and if that is not babylon (confusion) then what is.
This is a great study posted here, and we need to put our foot down and decide what is going to be the bottom line for all doctrinal issues. I have studied on many forums to find them arguing over one verse from different translations (I dare not call them bibles). When it comes to arguing about which translation is correct regarding certain doctrinal issues???? Where should the line be drawn? Are we to support the "new and exciting" when God said that He changes not? Or are we to follow Solomon's advice when he said there is nothing new under the son. I choose the bible that God protected forever, the KJV. ALL others are satanic counterfeits created to separate God's people.
For every truth in the bible satan has his counterfeit, and the different translations are no different. There certainly is a right version and a wrong version. For anybody to actually believe that God is blessing a translation that has been updated three times since it was written in the 70's is absurd. This shows that we are not relying on God's Holy Spirit to "guide us into all truth" John 16:13; but in fact are relying on our own decision as we choose which version sounds better to us.
I use to attend bible study with no less then ten translations, commentaries, concordances, etc. That did not last long because the Lord, through the Holy Spirit revealed to me the true meaning of John 14:26 and 16:13. The Holy Spirit teaches us all things, and with the new "updated" version of the NIV where 17 verses are completely ripped out, how can the Holy Spirit reveal these important principles if they are not there? God's holy word the KJV bible has been protected by God throughout history even though satan has tried and failed many times. From murdering the reformers who tried to put the bible into the hands of common folk, like Wycliffe, Luther, but most importantly Tyndale where much of the poetry of the KJV came from. To the revised version of 1888, and all the counterfeits that sprung out of that.
When I sit in on a sermon, which has been rare lately because of the fact that very few pulpits are preaching anything worthy of grown up adventists, I cringe when I am told to follow along in my KJV bible and they start to read some other counterfeit translation. This is babylon pure and simple. It is confusion, and anybody who can be blessed by this is not telling the truth. When I start to read along and they go off on some other wording I am lost just long enough to have to back track to where sometimes I get completely lost about what the sermon is about in the first place. When I sit in on a bible study I ask everyone to read a verse all at the same time, and if that is not babylon (confusion) then what is.
This is a great study posted here, and we need to put our foot down and decide what is going to be the bottom line for all doctrinal issues. I have studied on many forums to find them arguing over one verse from different translations (I dare not call them bibles). When it comes to arguing about which translation is correct regarding certain doctrinal issues???? Where should the line be drawn? Are we to support the "new and exciting" when God said that He changes not? Or are we to follow Solomon's advice when he said there is nothing new under the son. I choose the bible that God protected forever, the KJV. ALL others are satanic counterfeits created to separate God's people.
Upvote
0
Hi,
When I first became a Christian, I used NIV. As I grew in my study, I started to use KJV. I also use Interlinear to see the original words and how they are translated. I will reference other translations from time to time. But the KJV is the best out there because it was static equivalent, where as the modern translations are dynamic equivalent, meaning the translators used their own interpretations.
However the KJV is not perfect. The KJV translators were also not exempt from putting in their own limited understanding into the translation. For example, they made a mess translating all 19 different Hebrew and Greek words into a single English word 'wine' because they didn't know how to pasteurize grape juice while the Jews during Jesus' time already had the technology to pasteurize and make unfermented grape juice.
Also the KJV translators were trinitarians. So certain words, passages could have been translated differently/better if they didn't have that preconceived ideas.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Supposedly Benjamin G. Wilkinson (1872–1968) an Adventist was considered one of the originators of the King James Only movement.
Upvote
0
I agree. Even the bible characters were not without fault. I thank God that He has always used errant man like you and I to do His work. In fact He has, more often than not chosen the weakest of the weak to do His work, like Gideon, David and even Ellen White. I feel among good company as the greatest of all sinners that I am.
If we compare the gospels there are many discrepancies, but all I can do about that is praise God.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I use to use many translations to find which sounds best to my finite understanding. When the Lord revealed John 14:26 & 16:13 I was overjoyed to say the least. I have come to the conclusion that if all who profess the Name of Jesus read studied and understood John 14-17 there would be one denomination and one translation of scriptures.
Upvote
0
Mark:10:14: "But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God."
Upvote
0
I have notice just lately how the different translations are causing disaster when it comes to very important doctrines. Many will pick and choose a translation just because it makes their error more palatable. I have seen people use many translations in one post to prove their point. I believe that all the various translations have proven to be a great hindrance to the work of preaching the gospel for this very reason.
I know some who try to learn hebrew just to learn enough to make them dangerous. "little knowledge is dangerous" when it should be "ignorance is bliss". The Holy Spirit guides us into truth. My understanding has little to do with what the Lord reveals to me. The thing is, the bible has to be complete in order for the Lord to reveal all truth to me. If some is missing, like most "modern" translations, how are we to study to show ourselves approved unto God, like God says to? God gave us His holy word the KJV bible, but He gave it so we can study, not rely on other mere humans to explain it.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Reading a NIV passage in the Sabbath School Quarterly 10 years ago was what started me questioning what the SDA church was teaching. It was about adultery and the KJV made it clear it was decidedly to be turned from while the NIV used the word "should be" turned from, making it an optional thing. We questioned our pastor at the time and he told us we were just being too nit picky....
Upvote
0
Similar threads
