KJV Only?

[DeaconDean]

"spoudason seauton dokimon parasthsai tw qew, ergathn anepaison, orqotomounta ton logon thV alhqeiaV." -2 Tim. 2:15 (GNT)

"spoudason":

spoudazw,v \{spoo-dad'-zo}
[SIZE=-1]1) to hasten, make haste 2) to exert one's self, endeavour, give diligence[/SIZE]

Source

According to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament:

This special admonition is part of the general theme of exhortation: "axiwV pepipathsai thV klhsewV hV eklhqhte" 4:1. Cf. also the admonition in 2 Tim. 2:15: "spoudason seauton dokimon parasthsai" moral concern to be approved. Hb. 4:11 anticipates the concluding admonitions of the epistle, summoning the readers to strive zealously for the rest which God has prepared...Any attempt to construe "spoudh" as "study" or "teaching" is to be resisted. (1) There is too little support for this in the Greek (and especially contemporary) usage.

TDNT, Gerhard Kittle, Editor, Geoffrey W. Bromily, Translator, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids, Mi. Copyright 1971, Volume VII, p. 565-66, n.17

The KJV is wrong. It does not say "Study to show thyself approved" it says "be zealous to show yourself approved".

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[kiwimac]

"spoudason seauton dokimon parasthsai tw qew, ergathn anepaison, orqotomounta ton logon thV alhqeiaV." -2 Tim. 2:15 (GNT)

"spoudason":



Source

According to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament:



TDNT, Gerhard Kittle, Editor, Geoffrey W. Bromily, Translator, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids, Mi. Copyright 1971, Volume VII, p. 565-66, n.17

The KJV is wrong. It does not say "Study to show thyself approved" it says "be zealous to show yourself approved".

God Bless

Till all are one.

Indeed.

 

[Jack Koons]

But, I have heard the usual KJVO arguments.

The problem DeaconDean, is that rather than actually checking the evidence given by KJVOnly advocates, you simply dismiss the evidence as being without merit. I know this, because I have given evidence that was presented from non KJVOnly sites, which you simply rejected, rather than checking it out for yourself.

By the way, there hasn't been any new arguments against the KJV in the past 15 or so years.

But how many people today say "ye", "thee", "thou"?

Here, for example, is one of the old arguments. If one actually does just a little bit of research, one will find that this never was the speech of the 17th century. Then why were they in the Bible? If you take the time to examine their usage, you would find the following simple reason, which in some cases, supports or denies proper theology. The reason? Thee and thou are singular, while ye and you, are plural.

I've seen pastors sitting in the Sunday school class, preparing their sermon that was to be given in 30 minutes.

I've seen pastors sitting in deacon's meetings, preparing their sermon for Sunday night.

So yes, theuy are supposed to pray and let the Holy Spirit guide then what to preach, but more times than not, that is not the case.

Unfortunately DeaconDean, I must agree completely. This is in fact the practice of many today. ... But not all.

I never discounted them. I just don't believe that with only a possible 40-50 Greek MSS at their disposal, they got it completely correct for all time.

I'm sure you have heard of the saying, (and song), When grace is all your given, grace is all you need. By the same token; has it ever crossed your mind, that it was by the provision of God, that those MSS were in fact what was necessary to make the Bible? And, that the accumulative work that was done in order to get what we now call the 1769 KJV was directed by the hand of the Holy Spirt?


In the original foreword to the 1611 , the translators themselves said:

"The originall thereof being from heaven, not from earth; the authour being God, not man; the enditer, the holy spirit, not the wit of the Apostles"

By their own words, the KJ translators believed all authority was in the originals.

The KJV translators were simply affirming the fact that when the scriptures were given, "the originall" was authored by God, not man. If this is NOT what was meant we have a major problem to reconcile: if the KJV translators were LIMITING ""all authority was in the originals", (as stated by you), this would mean that "all authority" perished with the perishing of the "originals". By the way, that is the actual meaning of "We believe all scriptures were inspired "in the originals". The only way the the Bible we hold in our hands today can be "authoritative", is 1) if it was the "words" that were inspired, (not the writers); and 2) by God's providential preservation, keeping His Word pure throughout the ages. Again, this is referred to as derivative inspiration, not double inspiration. (There is a difference. This also covers the next quote. The individual translations were not each individually "inspired", they were each a step in the providential preservation by God, having men (through His power), refine the accumulative work of words already given by inspiration.

"For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe over that which hee had done, and to amend it where he saw cause?"

They themselves never saw them as "inspired". They thought the translations before them were good, but they only wished to make "good ones better".

The above quotes were given by DeaconDean, as taken directly out of the "Original Preface to the 1611 King James Version".

Their own work wasn't "inspired", by their own words.

Again, covered above.

And in light of the noe more than 5600 Greek manuscripts that been discovered, we are to endevor to do the same thing they did?

No, we just need to study the pure text we have, lest we begin to include for consideration long ago rejected works like the Gospel of Judas, any many others.

Come on dude.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Even Dr. James White is of the opinion that there are enough English translations. He states that very thing in an interview with Steve Anderson. (The link to which has been provided in an earlier post.)

Folks, this matter is very simple. Can we believe that an all powerful God gave the MSS needed to Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and the KJV translators to provide for us His Word, perfectly, in the English language? Well, I for one, not only can, but do.

Think about it.

Jack

 

[Jack Koons]

"spoudason seauton dokimon parasthsai tw qew, ergathn anepaison, orqotomounta ton logon thV alhqeiaV." -2 Tim. 2:15 (GNT)

"spoudason":



Source

According to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament:



TDNT, Gerhard Kittle, Editor, Geoffrey W. Bromily, Translator, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, Grand Rapids, Mi. Copyright 1971, Volume VII, p. 565-66, n.17

The KJV is wrong. It does not say "Study to show thyself approved" it says "be zealous to show yourself approved".

God Bless

Till all are one.

I think this is when the proponents of modern bibles want me to do the same thing the atheists, evolutionists, and all the other "ists" want me to do ... Join the ecumenical, intellectual, herd mentality of modern scholarship. Well, please, DO NOT hold your breath! The problem is, I do my homework. Then, I ask God the Holy Spirit to guide me.

Textual critics have not only butchered the words of God; they have so infiltrated bible colleges, that even the textbooks used by them have been compromised. When I was in Bible school (back in the 80's) Dr. Wesley Clark (60 years old then), a graduate of Louisville Baptist Theological Seminary, told us that he argued with his professors over these same issues back in the 50's. That is why he went from being a Southern Baptist, to being an Independent Fundamentalist, (which then took a KJVOnly position).

After doing many years of research, (which I still do), I find overwhelming evidence for the KJV. One of the most overlooked, as well as hypocritical evidences for the KJV, are the ties to the Roman Catholic Church via the UBS 3/4 and its unity with the N/A 26/27/28. Just research who the president and other high offices of the UBS are, and what their church 'affiliation' is; and the connection is clear.

The same people that govern the text of the Catholic Bible, govern the text of modern versions. And yes, they ALL come from the same GNT (shown in DeaconDean's post).

And they want to claim the Catholic Church had influence over the KJV. At least the KJV is not only based upon an entirely different set Greek MSS, but that set of MSS are from an entirely different family of MSS.

Jack

 

[PrincetonGuy]

One of the most overlooked, as well as hypocritical evidences for the KJV, are the ties to the Roman Catholic Church via the UBS 3/4 and its unity with the N/A 26/27/28. Just research who the president and other high offices of the UBS are, and what their church 'affiliation' is; and the connection is clear.

The claim found in KJO propaganda that the theology of the Roman Catholic Church significantly influenced the third and fourth editions of the USB’s Greek text and the 26th - 28th editions of the Nestle-Aland Greek text has no factual support. Of the senior editors, only one was a Roman Catholic (Carlo M. Martini), and there is not even one instance in either Greek text in which distinctly Roman Catholic theology influenced the Greek texts. Therefore, there is not even one translation of the New Testament, in any language, in which the theological perspective was influenced by a Roman Catholic through the use of the third and fourth editions of the USB’s Greek text or the 26th - 28th editions of the Nestle-Aland Greek text.

 

[DeaconDean]

I think this is when the proponents of modern bibles want me to do the same thing the atheists, evolutionists, and all the other "ists" want me to do ... Join the ecumenical, intellectual, herd mentality of modern scholarship. Well, please, DO NOT hold your breath! The problem is, I do my homework. Then, I ask God the Holy Spirit to guide me.

Textual critics have not only butchered the words of God; they have so infiltrated bible colleges, that even the textbooks used by them have been compromised. When I was in Bible school (back in the 80's) Dr. Wesley Clark (60 years old then), a graduate of Louisville Baptist Theological Seminary, told us that he argued with his professors over these same issues back in the 50's. That is why he went from being a Southern Baptist, to being an Independent Fundamentalist, (which then took a KJVOnly position).

After doing many years of research, (which I still do), I find overwhelming evidence for the KJV. One of the most overlooked, as well as hypocritical evidences for the KJV, are the ties to the Roman Catholic Church via the UBS 3/4 and its unity with the N/A 26/27/28. Just research who the president and other high offices of the UBS are, and what their church 'affiliation' is; and the connection is clear.

The same people that govern the text of the Catholic Bible, govern the text of modern versions. And yes, they ALL come from the same GNT (shown in DeaconDean's post).

And they want to claim the Catholic Church had influence over the KJV. At least the KJV is not only based upon an entirely different set Greek MSS, but that set of MSS are from an entirely different family of MSS.

Jack

Bottom line Jack...

No lexicon of any kind says "spoudason" means "study.

σπουδάζω , S.OC1143, Ar.Pax471 (lyr.), etc.: Att.fut.
A.“-άσομαι” Pl. Euthphr.3e, D.21.213, later “-άσω” Plb.3.5.8, D.S.1.58, etc.: aor. “ἐσπούδασα” E.HF507, Pl.Phd.114e: pf. “ἐσπούδακα” Ar.V.694, Pl.Phdr. 236b, etc.:—Med., fut. v. supr.:—Pass., fut. “σπουδασθήσομαι” Ael. NA4.13: aor. “ἐσπουδάσθην” Str.17.3.15, Plu.Per.24: pf. “ἐσπούδασμαι” Pl.Ly.219e (v. infr.):
I. intr.,

I. to be busy, eager to do a thing, c. inf., S.OC1143, E.Hec.817, Pl.Euthd.293a, etc.; σπούδασον ἐλθεῖν . . ταχέως make haste . . , 2 Ep.Ti.4.9; ὅτ᾽ ἐσπούδαζες ἄρχειν wast eager to rule, E.IA337 (troch.): c. part., “ἐσπ. διδάσκων” X.Oec.9.1: freq. ς. περί τινος or τι, Id.Mem.1.3.8, Pl.R.330c, etc.; “ὑπέρ τινος” D.59.77; “εἰς τὰ σά” Id.21.195; “πρός τι” Id.22.76; “ἐπί τισι” X.Mem.1.3.11, cf. D.21.2: c. dat., “ς. γάμῳ” Aristaenet.2.3; ς. ὅπως . . endeavour that . . , D.43.12, SIG312.10 (Samos, iv B.C.): abs., ἐσπουδακυῖα in haste, hurriedly, Ar.Th.572; ἐσπουδακώς eagerly, Men.562.

b. c. acc. et inf., “σπουδάσαντες τοῦτ᾽ αὐτοῖς παραγενέσθαι” Pl.Alc.2.141d, cf. 2 Ep.Pet.1.15, BGU1080.14 (iii A.D.), etc.
2. of persons, ς. πρός τινα pay him serious attention, Pl.Grg.510c, etc.; “εἴς τινα” AP9.422 (Apollonid.); ς. περί τινα to be anxious for his success, Isoc.1.10, X.Cyr.5.4.13, etc. (distd. fr. πρός τινα by Luc.Sol.10); “περί τινος” X.Lac.4.1; “ὑπὲρ τῶν οἰκετῶν” Aeschin.1.17; “ὑπέρ τινος” D.21.213, etc.; ς. τινί be a partisan or backer of, Plu.Art.21, Arr.Epict.1.11.27, PGiss.71.6 (ii A.D.); “ἀπό τινος” Philostr.VS2.27.6.
3. to be serious or earnest, Ar.Ra.813; opp. σκώπτειν καὶ κωμῳδεῖν, Id.Pl.557; freq. in Pl., σπουδάζει ταῦτα ἢ παίζει; Grg.481b, etc.; ἐσπούδακας, ὅτι ἐπελαβόμην ἐρεσχηλῶν σε; did you take it seriously, that I . .? Phdr. 236b; “σπουδάζοντα τοῖς πράγμασι τοῖς ὀνόμασι παίζειν” D.H.Lys.14; ἐσπουδάκατον they have worked hard, Ar.V.694; μάλα ἐσπουδακότι τῷ προσώπῳ with a very grave face, X.Smp.2.17.
4. study, Philostr. VS1.7.2; lecture, teach, ib.1.21.5.

II. trans.,

1. c. acc. rei, do anything hastily or earnestly, be earnest about, “τὸ αὑτοῦ” E.HF 507; “τὰς περὶ τὸ μανθάνειν ἡδονάς” Pl.Phd.114e, etc.; opp. παρέργοις χρῆσθαι, Id.Euthd.273d, cf. Ti.21c; “τὰ ἑαυτοῦ ἡδέα” X.Smp.8.17; “ς. τοῦτο, ὅπως . . ” Id.Eq.11.10:—Pass., σπουδάζεταί τι is zealously pursued, πᾶν ὅ τι ς. E.Supp.761; “ς. ἀγών” X.Lac.10.3; χρήματα μετὰ πολλῆς δαπάνης ς. Pl.R.485e; ἡ κωμῳδία διὰ τὸ μὴ σπουδάζεσθαι . . ἔλαθεν because it was not taken up seriously, Arist.Po.1449b1; οὐ πάνυ σπουδάζεται ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν is not much valued, Luc.Cont.11: esp. freq. in pf. part., “πᾶσα ἡ τοιαύτη σπουδὴ οὐκ ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐστὶν ἐσπουδασμένη” Pl.Ly.219e; προοίμια θαυμαστῶς ἐσπουδασμένα elaborately worked up, Id.Lg.722e, cf. 659e; so τὰ μάλιστα ἐσπ. σῖτα καὶ ποτά the choicest, X.Cyr.4.2.38; τὰ ἐσπ., of writing tablets, the best quality, Thphr.HP 3.9.7 (also κλίνας καὶ δίφρους καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ σπουδαζόμενα ib.5.3.2); εἰ ταῦτ᾽ ἐσπουδασμένα ἐν γράμμασιν ἐτέθη if those pains were seriously bestowed on letters, Pl.Ep.344c; “αἱ ἐσπουδασμέναι παιδιαί” Arist.Rh. 1371a3, cf. Pol.1336a34.

2. Pass., of persons, to be treated with respect, opp. καταφρονεῖσθαι, Id.Rh.1380a26; to be courted, Str.17.3.15, Plu.Them.5, D.L.5.75; of women, Plu.Cim.4, Art.26.
b. in LXX, trouble, disturb any one, Jb.22.10, 23.16.

Henry George Liddell. Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. revised and augmented throughout by. Sir Henry Stuart Jones. with the assistance of. Roderick McKenzie. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1940.

Source

A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament:

Give diligence (spoudason). First aorist active imperative of spoudazw, old word, as in 1 Thessalonians 2:17 ; Galatians 2:10 .

Source

You can cry foul, complain, whine all you want, but I am right. And so are my sources.

The KJV translators dropped the ball here.

To quoke Alan Alda in M*A*S*H*:

And there ain't thing one you can do about it.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[James Is Back]

Um Jack you do realize that the KJV was translated by a Catholic priest by the name of Erasmus.

 

[kiwimac]

KJV-Onlyism is a pernicious heresy.

 

[DeaconDean]

I have to say, PrincetonGuy and I have had our share of runins in the past. We're about as opposite as two people here can get. But, that does not negate the fact that I have learned a few things from him.

When PrincetonGuy argues with me in any argument, its a miracle!

And he has shown Jack's arguments is faulty.

Thank you PG.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Jack Koons]

Bottom line Jack...

No lexicon of any kind says "spoudason" means "study.



Henry George Liddell. Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. revised and augmented throughout by. Sir Henry Stuart Jones. with the assistance of. Roderick McKenzie. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1940.

Source

A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament:



Source

You can cry foul, complain, whine all you want, but I am right. And so are my sources.

The KJV translators dropped the ball here.

To quoke Alan Alda in M*A*S*H*:



God Bless

Till all are one.

I am obligated to ask, why do these state the following?

The following excerpt was taken from:

2 Timothy 2:15 <a href="http://www.godrules.net/store/Study-Guides.htm">Study</a> to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

"King James Bible - 2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

World English Bible
Give diligence to present yourself approved by God, a workman who doesn't need to be ashamed, properly handling the Word of Truth.

Douay-Rheims - 2 Timothy 2:15
Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

Webster's Bible Translation
Study to show thyself approved to God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Greek Textus Receptus

&#963;&#960;&#959;&#965;&#948;&#945;&#963;&#959;&#957; 4704 5657 &#963;&#949;&#945;&#965;&#964;&#959;&#957; 4572 &#948;&#959;&#954;&#953;&#956;&#959;&#957; 1384&#960;&#945;&#961;&#945;&#963;&#964;&#951;&#963;&#945;&#953; 3936 5658 &#964;&#969; 3588 &#952;&#949;&#969; 2316 &#949;&#961;&#947;&#945;&#964;&#951;&#957; 2040&#945;&#957;&#949;&#960;&#945;&#953;&#963;&#967;&#965;&#957;&#964;&#959;&#957; 422 &#959;&#961;&#952;&#959;&#964;&#959;&#956;&#959;&#965;&#957;&#964;&#945; 3718 5723 &#964;&#959;&#957; 3588&#955;&#959;&#947;&#959;&#957; 3056 &#964;&#951;&#962; 3588 &#945;&#955;&#951;&#952;&#949;&#953;&#945;&#962; 225

Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge
VERSE (15) - Heb 4:11 2Pe 1:10,15; 3:14 *Gr:

SEV Biblia, Chapter 2:15
Procura con diligencia presentarte a Dios aprobado, como obrero que no tiene de qu avergonzarse, que traza bien la palabra de la verdad.

Clarke's Bible Commentary - 2 Timothy 2:15
Verse 15. Study to show thyself approved unto God] Endeavour so to cultivate and improve thy heart and mind, that thou mayest not be a reproach to him from whom thou professest to receive thy commission.
Rightly dividing the word of truth.] It is generally supposed that the apostle alludes here to the care taken to divide the sacrifices under the law; the priests studied, in dividing the victim down the spine, to do it so scrupulously that one half of the spinal marrow should be found on each side the backbone. Probably nothing was much farther from the apostle's thoughts than this view, which is now commonly taken of the subject.
Indeed this scrupulously dividing does not appear to have been any original ordinanceamong the Jews; much stress was laid upon it in later times, but from the beginning it was not so. The word orqotomein signifies, 1. Simply to cut straight, or to rectify. 2. To walkin the right way; it is thus used by Gregory Nazianzen, who, in Orat. Apol. fugae, opposes orqotomein to kakwv odeuein, walking in a right way to walking in a bad way. Thus, kainotomein signifies to walk in a new way, and kateuqunein to walk in a straight way. See Kypke. Therefore, by rightly dividing the word of truth, we are to understand his continuing in the true doctrine, and teaching that to every person; and, according to our Lord's simile, giving each his portion of meat in due season-milk to babes, strong meat to the full grown, comfort to the disconsolate, reproof to the irregular and careless; in a word, finding out the necessities of his hearers, and preachingso as to meet those necessities.
John Gill's Bible Commentary
Ver. 15. Study to show thyself approved unto God , etc.] The Alexandrian copy reads, to Christ; (see Romans 16:10). Not unto men, as pleasing them; for such who study to please men, are not the servants of Christ; and sometimes those that are approved to and by men, are disapproved of by God and Christ: but unto God, showing all fidelity and uprightness; speaking out the Gospel openly, and freely, with all sincerity, as in the sight of God; commending themselves to him, and to every man's conscience, by manifestation of the truth; and such will hear, Well done, good and faithful servant another day. A workman that needeth not to be ashamed ; the ministry of the word is a work, and it is a good work; and those that perform it aright are worthy of honour and esteem; and it requires industry, diligence, and application, and for which no man is sufficient without the grace of God; and those who are employed in it are workmen, workers together with God, and labourers in his vineyard: and such who are faithful and diligent ones, need not to be ashamed; such do not cause shame, neither in themselves nor in others, as false teachersdo, who foam out their own shame, and as negligent ministers of the word, and such whose lives are not agreeable to the doctrinesthey preach; nor have they any reason to be ashamed, neither of the Gospel, which they preach, nor of their sufferings, which they endure for the sake of it, nor of their uprightministrations of the word; and as they are not afraid to suffer shame for the sake of Christnow, they will not be ashamed before him at his coming. rightly dividing , or cutting the word of truth ; that is, the Scriptures of truth, ( Daniel 10:21) which come from the God of truth, are concerning Christ, who is the truth, and are dictated and led into by the spirit of truth, and contain in them nothing but truth: to divide the word, is not merely to divide the text into its proper parts, though care should be taken that this be done aright; and some think that the allusion is to the verses of the Hebrew Bible, which are called yqwsp , divisions, sections, or cuttings, from the word qsp , to cut or divide, being cutor divided one from another; hence those that were employed in the law, and were conversant with the sacred writings, and exercised therein, were called trwtb yqswp , cutters, or dividers of the law f5 ; and so qwsp l[b is one that is well versed in the Bible, and knows every part of it, and readily uses it, in speaking or writing; and such an one was Timothy, ( 2 Timothy 3:15) though I rather think the apostle refers to a wrong way of dividing the Scriptures by the Jews, to which he opposes the right dividing of them. They had used not only to take away a letter out of one word, and add it to another, and so expound the text, but to remove words in it, and make that which went before to go behind, and that which was behind to go before; and this they call a sharp knife, which bwtkh qyspmw twj , cuts and divides the Scriptures f6 : but this way, which his countrymen used, the apostle would not have Timothy, and other Gospel ministers, make use of; for this is not rightly to divide, but to mangle and tear in pieces the word of truth. Moreover, to divide the word of truth, or to cutit, is to cut it open, and dissect its several parts, and search and look into the inside and bottom of it, for to find out every truthcontained in it, and lay them open to others; and may be, as some have thought, an allusion to the cutting open the sacrifices, and laying the parts of them aright, and in a decent manner: to which may be added, that since ministers of the Gospel are stewards, and who, when wise and faithful, give to everyone of the household their portion of meat in due season; the metaphor may be taken from such, and from masters and governors of families, who cut up the food, and distribute it to each, according to their age and appetite; and so the ministers of the Gospel are to distribute the spiritual food of the word to babes in Christ, and to grown Christians, according to their capacities, and suitable to their cases and circumstances, dividing to everyone what is proper for him: in short, one that divides the word of truth rightly, is, as the Vulgate Latinversion renders it, one that rightly handles; or, as the Syriac version, that rightly preaches the word of truth; who gives the true sense of Scripture, does not pervert and wrest it, and take from it, or add to it; who points out the truth in it, and shows unto men the way of salvation, and plainly and faithfully preaches the Gospel contained in it, without keeping back anything that is profitable, but declares the whole counsel of God. This same Greek word is used by the Septuagint in ( Proverbs 3:6 11:5) where it answers to the Hebrew word ry , which signifies to direct the way, and make it plain; and may here design a plain and open interpretation of the word of God: and to answer these several characters in the text should be the studious concern of every Gospel minister; and study is necessary thereunto; it requires great care that a man take heed to himself, and to his doctrine; and great industry, diligence, and application, and much reading, meditation, and prayer."

I see the KJV translators were not alone ...


Jack

 

[DeaconDean]

Douay-Rheims - 2 Timothy 2:15
Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

Now that...is extremely funny.

You railed on my post of the TDNT saying:

After doing many years of research, (which I still do), I find overwhelming evidence for the KJV. One of the most overlooked, as well as hypocritical evidences for the KJV, are the ties to the Roman Catholic Church via the UBS 3/4 and its unity with the N/A 26/27/28. Just research who the president and other high offices of the UBS are, and what their church 'affiliation' is; and the connection is clear.

The same people that govern the text of the Catholic Bible, govern the text of modern versions. And yes, they ALL come from the same GNT (shown in DeaconDean's post).

And they want to claim the Catholic Church had influence over the KJV.

And yet, you rail about:

are the ties to the Roman Catholic Church ...The same people that govern the text of the Catholic Bible, govern the text of modern versions. And yes, they ALL come from the same GNT (shown in DeaconDean's post)...And they want to claim the Catholic Church had influence over the KJV.

And yet, you...quote out of the Douay-Rheims bible.

Which only goes to show that what is said of KJVOists, is true.

Interprete facts to suit your own theology.

The TDNT, A.T. Robertson, and Lindell, Scott prove my point.

You have been proven wrong, and yet, you wont admit it.

You rail about catholic influences and sources yet quote it when it might help prove your point.

THat...is extremely funny and sad.

Back to the ignore list with you.

SCriptures tell us what to do when this happens:

"And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet."-Mt. 10:15 (KJV)

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Jack Koons]

Now that...is extremely funny.

You railed on my post of the TDNT saying:



And yet, you rail about:



And yet, you...quote out of the Douay-Rheims bible.

Which only goes to show that what is said of KJVOists, is true.

Interprete facts to suit your own theology.

The TDNT, A.T. Robertson, and Lindell, Scott prove my point.

You have been proven wrong, and yet, you wont admit it.

You rail about catholic influences and sources yet quote it when it might help prove your point.

THat...is extremely funny and sad.

Back to the ignore list with you.

SCriptures tell us what to do when this happens:

"And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet."-Mt. 10:15 (KJV)

God Bless

Till all are one.

DeaconDean,

Really???

Have you ever seen a counterfeit 'anything' that didn't try to look like the real thing somewhere?

Here is the reality of the matter: with each passing generation of counterfeit 'bibles', each one looks less like the real thing. That may have something to do with the Greek upon which they are based being a counterfeit as well.

As to my being on your ignore list: your negative feelings for me are way to strong to ignore me ... But please, feel free to pretend.

Jack

 

[Hammster]

ADMIN HAT ON






ADMIN HAT OFF

 

[kiwimac]

There are no counterfeit bibles. The KJV is NOT the standard by which other English translations are judged. It is simply a dated English Bible.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

It is very well known that the Greek text from which the New Testament in the KJV was translated is a severely corrupted text. It very much less known that the Hebrew text from which the Old Testament in the KJV was translated is a corrupted text. The KJO camp likes to claim that whole verses are have been &#8220;removed&#8221; from &#8220;modern versions&#8221; of the Bible, but they do not tell their readers that a beautiful verse is missing from Psalm 145 in the standard Masoretic Text, and therefore, is also missing from the KJV.

We know that the verse is missing because:

1. Psalm 145 is an acrostic poem with each line of the poem beginning with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet&#8212;except for verse 14 which begins with the letter &#1505; (samech), the 15th letter of the Hebrew alphabet, rather than with the letter &#1504; (nun) which is the 14th letter of the Hebrew alphabet.

2. The 13th verse, missing from the standard Masoretic text (and hence missing from the KJV) is found in one known Hebrew manuscript, and in the Septuagint, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Syriac Version of the Old Testament.

If you would like to read this Bible verse, you will need a better Bible than the KJV.

 

[now faith]

There are no counterfeit bibles. The KJV is NOT the standard by which other English translations are judged. It is simply a dated English Bible.

God's Word never go's out of style,but people come and go.

 

[now faith]

Below is the King James Version of Isaiah 53:1-3.

[1] Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
[2] For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
[3] He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Below is the same passage from the Great Isaiah Scroll. Differences between the King James Version and the Great Isaiah Scroll are underlined. While these differences are not severe, at least in these few passages, it clearly demonstrates that more than 17 differences exist in Isaiah 53 between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the King James Version.

[1] Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
[2] For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor he hath comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire ourselves.
[3] He is despised and rejected of men and man of sorrows, and he knows grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; and despised him, and we esteemed him not.
source: Ancient Hebrew research center.

Considering the age of the Isaiah Scroll,and grammar the King James is very strong,
unlike modern versions that have many deletions.

This grows old,it's a personal choice actually we do not have to defend the Word,only those who do not like what it says will criticize.

Matthew: 23. 9. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

 

[justhere1]

I voted yes. I am a King James Onlyist.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Below is the King James Version of Isaiah 53:1-3.

[1] Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
[2] For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
[3] He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Below is the same passage from the Great Isaiah Scroll. Differences between the King James Version and the Great Isaiah Scroll are underlined. While these differences are not severe, at least in these few passages, it clearly demonstrates that more than 17 differences exist in Isaiah 53 between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the King James Version.

[1] Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
[2] For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor he hath comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire ourselves.
[3] He is despised and rejected of men and man of sorrows, and he knows grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; and despised him, and we esteemed him not.
source: Ancient Hebrew research center.

Considering the age of the Isaiah Scroll,and grammar the King James is very strong,
unlike modern versions that have many deletions.

This grows old,it's a personal choice actually we do not have to defend the Word,only those who do not like what it says will criticize.

Matthew: 23. 9. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

The KJV is in error in more than 17 places in just three verses? There are 31,102 verses in the KJV. Let’s see—31,102 divided by three is 10,367. 10,367 X 17 = 176,244 errors in the KJV even without the “more than.” Is that not solid proof that the KJV is so full of errors that it has no value for Bible study—or even for devotional reading?

 

[bushinoki]

And, the whole argument about "study" vs. "zealous" is why I'm not KJV only. For those not as familiar with more archaic forms of English, "studious", with "study" being the root, is actually fairly synonymous with "zealous". Paul's exhortation would mean the same thing to an English speaker of the 17th century. Stay with the TR if you want, but it's seriously time to consider updated English.