Many Bible Translations destroys unity.

[justbyfaith]

There are slight differences in meaning from translation to translation in every verse. Won't this turn out to change the meaning of the whole Bible from translation to translation? If I change my course by 1 degree every five miles, I will never reach my destination. So I contend that if you are reading a different translation than me, your breed of Christianity will be different from mine. This may indeed be very dangerous for you, if my breed of Christianity is the one, narrow, and ONLY way to eternal life (see Matthew 7:13-14), that would mean your breed of Christianity will take you off course and not bring you into heaven.

And yes I am of the opinion that the KJV is both inspired and inerrant, though I do not intend this to be a KJV-only post, per se.

 

[Wordkeeper]

There are slight differences in meaning from translation to translation in every verse. Won't this turn out to change the meaning of the whole Bible from translation to translation? If I change my course by 1 degree every five miles, I will never reach my destination. So I contend that if you are reading a different translation than me, your breed of Christianity will be different from mine. This may indeed be very dangerous for you, if my breed of Christianity is the one, narrow, and ONLY way to eternal life (Matthew 7:13-14), that would mean your breed of Christianity will take you off course and not bring you into heaven.

And yes I am of the opinion that the KJV is both inspired and inerrant, though I do not intend this to be a KJV-only post, per se.

By that logic you must have a Model T in your garage.

 

[justbyfaith]

Did we suddenly get it right since we came up with modern translations, so that Christians who lived before we came up with them weren't saved?

 

[justbyfaith]

By that logic you must have a Model T in your garage.

That is simply illogical.

 

[Wordkeeper]

That is simply illogical.

The new translations explain why they use different interpretation based on higher criticism. The Dead Sea Scrolls and other recent manuscript discoveries have improved on the first iterations of the translations.

 

[justbyfaith]

So the KJV will bring us off course, and only modern Christians (who reject it for modern translations) are saved?

 

[justbyfaith]

The newer translations are all watered-down impaho.

 

[Wordkeeper]

So the KJV will bring us off course, and only modern Christians (who reject it for modern translations) are saved?

I never use only one version. Humans even if they try to be impartial cannot but help forcing their theology on the text. Some versions however DO list out the alternative translation.

 

[justbyfaith]

I hold the KJV to be the standard that is not watered-down in the slightest. I find that all others dilute God's message.

 

[kiwimac]

And you would be wrong. The KJV is NOT the standard by which we judge other translations into English. It is the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic autographs which are.

 

[Wordkeeper]

I hold the KJV to be the standard that is not watered-down in the slightest. I find that all others dilute God's message.

Just a simple 'net search "problems with the KJV" will give you answers. All versions have problems, but the KJV with less document material as foundation has more. But the KJV was a great blessing as a resource it its time. Just that we are blessed today with even more.

 

[Deadworm]

justbyfaith: "So the KJV will bring us off course, and only modern Christians (who reject it for modern translations) are saved?"


Since Mormons can be saved "justbyfaith," despite the bogus nature of the Book of Mormon, I assume that even some KJV users might be saved despite their indifference to using the most corrupt text of God's Word.

"The newer translations are all watered-down impaho."

LOL, and you make this claim in blissful ignorance (1) of the biblical languages and (2) of the modern science of Text Criticism, which establishes the original text with the greatest certitude. Why don't you love the Lord enough to check into these issues by actually reading a book on Text Criticism? You do realize that the King James translators lacked access to the earliest and most reliable texts, right?

 

[nChrist]

And yes I am of the opinion that the KJV is both inspired and inerrant, though I do not intend this to be a KJV-only post, per se.

The KJV translators stated the opposite in the introduction to the KJV. The KJV is just a good English translation. The Holy Bible wasn't written in English. There are many good English translations of the Holy Bible, and NONE of them are inspired or without error.

 

[Wordkeeper]

http://margmowczko.com/7-things-about-the-king-james-bible/

By Margaret Mowczko

Quote
(3) KING JAMES AUTHORISED THE NEW BIBLE TRANSLATION FOR POLITICAL REASONS.
King James believed that a single ‘authorized version’ was a political and social necessity. He hoped this book would hold together the warring factions of the Church of England and the Puritans that threatened to tear apart both church and country. Most of the translators, however, were clergymen belonging to the Church of England, but at least some had Puritan sympathies.[3]

King James issued over a dozen rules that the translators had to follow. He disliked the Geneva Bible, the Bible used by the Puritans, because he believed that some of the commentary in the margin notes did not show enough respect for kings.[4] James’ new translation was to have no commentary in the margins.

King James favoured the hierarchical structure of the Church of England and wanted the new translation to keep words that supported a bishop-led hierarchy. In keeping with James’ preferred views on church government, he specified, “The old ecclesiastical words [are] to be kept; as the word church [is] not to be translated congregation.” (I personally believe congregation is a better translation in some instances.) King James also ruled that only his new Bible could be read in England’s churches. The translation rules of King James can be found here. The political motives of King James had a direct influence on the translation of the KJV.

(4) THE TRANSLATORS OF THE KJV 1611 WERE UNTRAINED IN KOINE GREEK.
Koine (“common”) Greek is the original language of the New Testament. Koine Greek had been a dead language for about a thousand years when the KJV was published for the first time in 1611. The KJV translators of the New Testament were scholars of Classical Greek, but they didn’t know what Koine Greek was. Some believed that the Greek language of the NT was a unique, Spirit-inspired dialect.[5] It was not until the late 1800s and early 1900s, when tens of thousands of papyri documents were discovered, many written in Koine, that we could begin to understand the language more fully.[6] Unlike the translators of the KJV, modern translators of the New Testament are scholars of Koine Greek.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

There are slight differences in meaning from translation to translation in every verse. Won't this turn out to change the meaning of the whole Bible from translation to translation? If I change my course by 1 degree every five miles, I will never reach my destination. So I contend that if you are reading a different translation than me, your breed of Christianity will be different from mine. This may indeed be very dangerous for you, if my breed of Christianity is the one, narrow, and ONLY way to eternal life (see Matthew 7:13-14), that would mean your breed of Christianity will take you off course and not bring you into heaven.

And yes I am of the opinion that the KJV is both inspired and inerrant, though I do not intend this to be a KJV-only post, per se.

Sorry, there is no doctrine test to get to heaven, except of course do you believe Jesus is your Savior? I think every translation gets that right.

Lastly, you don't understand these words of Jesus.
"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations"

This means translations are to be made. God ensures they are usable to effect his command.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

Premise:
Many Bible Translations destroys unity.

This premise is false. Many Bible translations destroy unanimity, but not unity. Even if we all agreed on the same translation, the understanding of that translation depends on the varied predispositions of the readers. Even if we all understood it exactly the same way (rather a human impossibility), we might still not have unity. Churches with a unified doctrine are often divided by factors as mundane as the choice of carpet for the church building. Such churches may be unanimous in doctrine, yet still fail to have unity.

I prefer to think that we can have unity without unanimity. Such things are only possible through the love of God, which is something that we ought to have anyway.

 

[Radagast]

I do not intend this to be a KJV-only post, per se.

Yes you do.

 

[justbyfaith]

No, I don't. If someone can show that a version other than the KJV is inerrant and inspired and not watered-down, I will gladly replace my KJV with that translation if it is available (the Geneva is not).

Now if any or all of you want to reject the KJV for a watered-down version, that is on you. I will only say that the way to life is strait and narrow. As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

 

[justbyfaith]

Sorry, there is no doctrine test to get to heaven, except of course do you believe Jesus is your Savior? I think every translation gets that right.

Lastly, you don't understand these words of Jesus.
"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations"

This means translations are to be made. God ensures they are usable to effect his command.

Someone can believe Jesus is their Saviour and not be saved. The question is, Is He their Saviour? If He is not their Lord, He is not their Saviour either. And yes, translations are to be made in every language. But to have more than one translation in any given language only brings confusion, especially if the translations differ in their overall message (which they do).

 

[justbyfaith]

"thou shalt not bear false witness" is conveniently removed from non-KJV translations in Romans 13:8-10. And there are many other things like this. But it goes to show what kind of attitude towards truth the non-KJV translators must have had!