The KJVO myth...

[Bob_1000]

We dont have an official English translation so there are a variety that get used. NKJV or RSV tends to be favored for use in services. However, the English translation of our services can be awkward or clumsy as the phrasing can be iffy at best.

For example, in the funeral service, there is a hymn called the Final Kiss that is sung repeatedly while the attendees can give a final goodbye before the coffin is closed.

One translation tries to rephrase παραδίδοται τάφῳ γάρ, καλύπτεται λίθῳ, - "taken for burial underneath stone" to this:

* Come to kiss him/her who was with us just a short time ago. * He/she is taken for burial,and lies six feet under.

IMHO its a terrible use of an idiom. This is why I support updating the English to keep up with modern usage.

LOL I agree that's not a good idiom. What is your native language?

 

[GreekOrthodox]

LOL I agree that's not a good idiom. What is your native language?

I'm American so English, but I can get my way through Koine and liturgical Greek and some smattering of modern Greek, at least enough to order food at festivals. I've served as a chanter for 20 years now.

 

[Bob_1000]

I'm American so English, but I can get my way through Koine and liturgical Greek and some smattering of modern Greek, at least enough to order food at festivals. I've served as a chanter for 20 years now.

I went the Greek and Hebrew route for a while but it didn't work out for me.

 

[Oseas]

Thanx for the article, but you still didn't answer my question:"What do you mean by 'pre-trib cult'?" There are several definitions, but I'd liketa know which one you're referring to.

The point of my reply was not to answer your question, neither to define for you what the "pre-tribe cult" means, in fact I added in parallel some questions about other kinds of cults: Examples:

1 - What will be the "CULT" and main belief of the foolish virgins when they go to buy oil of the sellers?

2 - What will be the "CULT" and main belief of the sellers of oil, Pastors, and Bishops, and Evangelists, among others?

3 - What good is this multitude's belief (50%???) destined to perdition forever and ever?

By the way, what do you say about your main belief and cult? Is it more relevant or superior than the others, or is it similar, equal, or worse?

Proverbs 16:v.2 - 2 All the ways of a MAN are clean in his own eyes; but the Lord weigheth the spirits.

The hand of GOD wrote: "Tekel" - Translation: Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting.

THE WORD IS GOD

 

[Bob_1000]

Yeah, YOU ARE RIGHT. The Word is GOD. GOD is Spirit. GOD is light, "in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin"-1John 1:v.5-7.

Jeremiah 1:v.11-12
11 Moreover the Word of the Lord came unto me(the Word is GOD), saying, Jeremiah, what seest thou? And I said, I see a rod of an almond tree.
12 Then said the Lord unto me, Thou hast well seen: for I will hasten my Word to perform it.

Why did Jeremiah see well, as said GOD to him? Now, now, Jeremiah saw well because in his vision was a rod of an almond tree. What is the significance for GOD's people today on Jeremiah's vision concerning the rod of an almond tree? The Word gives us the answer - Numbers 17:6-8 and henceforwards:

6 And Moses spake unto the children of Israel, and every one of their princes gave him a rod apiece, for each prince one, according to their fathers' houses, even twelve rods: and the rod of Aaron was among their rods.
7 And Moses laid up the rods before the Lord in the tabernacle of witness.
8 And it came to pass, that on the morrow Moses went into the tabernacle of witness; and, behold, the rod of Aaron for the house of Levi was budded, and brought forth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and yielded almonds.

Hebrews 4:v.12-13
12 For the Word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we must render an account.

Ecclesiastes 12:v.10-14
10 The preacher sought to find out acceptable words: and that which was written was upright, even words of Truth. (GOD is Truth)
11 The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one Shepherd.
12 And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.
13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14 For GOD shall bring every work into Judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

The Word is GOD.

Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy, To the only wise GOD our Saviour, be Glory and Majesty, Dominion and Power, both now and ever. Amen. Jude 1:v.24-25

Good post! I think you're the only person I've ever ran across that understands the word of the Lord in the Old Testament was Jesus.

 

[robycop3]

So your trying to tell me that the HIM in verse 5 magically transforms into THEM in verse 7?

I guess your logic is - if you insert a verse in between two verses that means you can change the context of the passage from HIM to THEM. Is this your reasoning?

Psa 12:5 For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.
Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

The AV translators wrote "them" because they knew the verse refers to multiple people, but they added the footnote because the LITERAL Hebrew says "him", a singular personal pronoun.

That aside, JUST WHERE DOES PSALM 12 MENTION THE KJV OR ANY OTHER TRANSLATION WHATSOEVER?????????????????????

 

[robycop3]

The pretribulation rapture teaching, invented by Edward Irving in 1825. Irving was a charismatic was excommunicated from the Scottish church for heresy because of his teaching that Crist had propensity to sin, and he also, according to one of his ex followers taught that Christians have actual righteousness rather than an imputed righteousness.

I see. But the rapture WILL occur before the trib, as Rev. 3:10 says 10 Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth. Now, some will say that applies to just the Philadelphia church, but, as the great trib hasn't yet happened, & the church at Philadelphia, now Alasahir, is now Catholic. It refers to Christians in general, as all will be raptured when it occurs.

 

[robycop3]

I'll tell you a couple of things that you don't know about Acts 12:4 and Easter, because had you known this you would've never said what you said about Easter. Easter is not "glaring error", it's the name God gave for the fulfillment of Passover.

Mature believers weren't celebrating Passover during that time because mature believers don't celebrate FORESHADOWS of things to come, we celebrate the real AFTER it has been fulfilled. The Passover in Act's 12:4 is the ONLY celebration of Passover mentioned anywhere in the bible AFTER Passover had been fulfilled.

Easter has nothing to do with Ishtar , fertility goddesses or anything else pagan. The word Easter comes from the German bible which used the word Oester which means - "the rising Sun".

Well, at least we agree that the "Ishtar/Easter" thingie is false.

But there are a few things YOU apparently don't know-EASTER DIDN'T EXIST when Luke wrote "Acts". He used the Greek word "pascha", the same word JESUS used for passover,(Unless you believe Jesus observed Easter-LOL!) & in Luke's day, meant only passover. Besides, if Easter HAD then existed, neither Herod nor the Jews he was trying to please would've left off dealing with Peter to have observed it. No, the Jews were observing PASSOVER, as Acts 12:3 proves.

And the Geveva version, older than the KJV, has "passover" in Acts 12:4.

 

[Bob_1000]

The AV translators wrote "them" because they knew the verse refers to multiple people, but they added the footnote because the LITERAL Hebrew says "him", a singular personal pronoun.

That aside, JUST WHERE DOES PSALM 12 MENTION THE KJV OR ANY OTHER TRANSLATION WHATSOEVER?????????????????????

Can you post the Hebrew word that says "him"?

 

[Bob_1000]

Well, at least we agree that the "Ishtar/Easter" thingie is false.

But there are a few things YOU apparently don't know-EASTER DIDN'T EXIST when Luke wrote "Acts". He used the Greek word "pascha", the same word JESUS used for passover,(Unless you believe Jesus observed Easter-LOL!) & in Luke's day, meant only passover. Besides, if Easter HAD then existed, neither Herod nor the Jews he was trying to please would've left off dealing with Peter to have observed it. No, the Jews were observing PASSOVER, as Acts 12:3 proves.

And the Geveva version, older than the KJV, has "passover" in Acts 12:4.

Would you agree that Easter is the celebration of the fulfillment of Passover?

 

[Bruce Leiter]

I notice one "Bible Highlighter" tried to defend the KJVO myth with some 40-yr. old stuff that's been long-refuted.

Does he, or any other KJVO have anything new ? Far as I'm concerned, the KJVO myth is just that-a MAN-MADE MYTH -& is phony as a Ford Corvette!

One question for KJVOs-

WHERE IS THE SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT FOR THE KJVO MYTH ?
Without Scriptural support, no doctrine of faith/worship can be true.

I'm asking RESPECTFULLY; no flaming or word war intended. I just want to see some ACTUAL JUSTIFICATION for the KJVO myth.

In my Greek seminary studies, I discovered that one of the few KJV errors in translating happened when the translators confused two very similar verbals translated "only begotten" by them in the KJV. The correct Greek word is translated much more accurately as "one and only," meaning "unique," for Jesus as the Father's Son, as the NIV correctly translates it.

We can talk about the implications for a long time, but a friend of mine declared that on the basis of the KJV, Jesus had to have experienced birth before he came to earth and was therefore less than the Father in essence, a false conclusion proved to be so by the correct translations of the four much-more-ancient, major manuscripts discovered since the KJV was published.

My point is that wrong translations can lead to heresies. We should compare all of the translations with the Greek.

 

[Bob_1000]

In my Greek seminary studies, I discovered that one of the few KJV errors in translating happened when the translators confused two very similar verbals translated "only begotten" by them in the KJV. The correct Greek word is translated much more accurately as "one and only," meaning "unique," for Jesus as the Father's Son, as the NIV correctly translates it.

We can talk about the implications for a long time, but a friend of mine declared that on the basis of the KJV, Jesus had to have experienced birth before he came to earth and was therefore less than the Father in essence, a false conclusion proved to be so by the correct translations of the four much-more-ancient, major manuscripts discovered since the KJV was published.

My point is that wrong translations can lead to heresies. We should compare all of the translations with the Greek.

You do realize that we as believers are sons of God which means that Jesus isn’t God’s one and only son.

 

[Der Alte]

You do realize that we as believers are sons of God which means that Jesus isn’t God’s one and only son.

We are adopted, not "sons" in the normal human way.

Romans 8:15
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
Galatians 4:5
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Ephesians 1:5
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,​

People need to accept the FACT that "monogenes" the Greek word incorrectly translated "only begotten" in the KJV does not mean "only begotten" but means "unique,""one of a kind," etc.
NET John 3:16 translator's note.

37tn Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (tevkna qeou', tekna qeou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).
​

 

[Jipsah]

Without Scriptural support, no doctrine of faith/worship can be true.

So much for the canon of Scripture, then.

 

[Bob_1000]

We are adopted, not "sons" in the normal human way.

Romans 8:15
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
Galatians 4:5
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Ephesians 1:5
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,​

People need to accept the FACT that "monogenes" the Greek word incorrectly translated "only begotten" in the KJV does not mean "only begotten" but means "unique,""one of a kind," etc.
NET John 3:16 translator's note.

37tn Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (tevkna qeou', tekna qeou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).
​

The fact is monogenes comes from two words, monos and ginomai. Monos means one or only and ginomai means to cause to be or bring into existence. That’s why the KJV translated it as “(monos)only (ginomai)begotten”. Jesus is the only human being ever who had part of his DNA supplied by God.

 

[Fervent]

The fact is monogenes comes from two words, monos and ginomai. Monos means one or only and ginomai means to cause to be or bring into existence. That’s why the KJV translated it as “(monos)only (ginomai)begotten”. Jesus is the only human being ever who had part of his DNA supplied by God.

It's not proper to look at the roots of a word to gain the meaning, unless it is a recent coinage. Many words have roots that have nothing to do with what the word itself means. Besides that, ginomai is a fairly flexible term and in the case of monogenes its contribution is more likely something like "kind" or "class" as in the modern scientific "genus." So what "monogenes" most likely means is "unique member of a class," which is why Isaac is "monogenes" even though Ishmael was Abraham's first born son. In the case of Jesus, He is God's son in a way that other "sons of God" are not as while we may become partakers; His essence is Divine.

 

[Bob_1000]

It's not proper to look at the roots of a word to gain the meaning, unless it is a recent coinage. Many words have roots that have nothing to do with what the word itself means. Besides that, ginomai is a fairly flexible term and in the case of monogenes its contribution is more likely something like "kind" or "class" as in the modern scientific "genus." So what "monogenes" most likely means is "unique member of a class," which is why Isaac is "monogenes" even though Ishmael was Abraham's first born son. In the case of Jesus, He is God's son in a way that other "sons of God" are not as while we may become partakers; His essence is Divine.

Isaac wasn't a unique "one of kind" flesh descendant of Abraham, he was NO DIFFERENT than Ishmael in that regard. Isaac is monogenes because Isaac was the ONLY BEGOTTEN SPIRITUAL SON of Abraham. How do you not know this?

Seriously when the bible calls Isaac an ONLY BEGOTTEN son and you KNOW he's not Abraham's "one and only son" how is that IMMEDIATELY you don't understand that this is a reference to the SPIRITUAL descendants of Abraham?

 

[Bob_1000]

The reason you didn't recognize this Fervent is because you have exchange the truth monogenes means “(monos)only (ginomai)begotten”, for a lie that monogenes means "one and only UNIQUE".

 

[Fervent]

Isaac wasn't a unique "one of kind" flesh descendant of Abraham, he was NO DIFFERENT than Ishmael in that regard. Isaac is monogenes because Isaac was the ONLY BEGOTTEN SPIRITUAL SON of Abraham. How do you not know this?

Seriously when the bible calls Isaac an ONLY BEGOTTEN son and you KNOW he's not Abraham's "one and only son" how is that IMMEDIATELY you don't understand that this is a reference to the SPIRITUAL descendants of Abraham?

That's one way to try to rescue the "only begotten" claim, but it's not what Hebrews is speaking to. Hebrews uses "monogenes" because Isaac is the child of promise, so he is Abraham's unique son because he is the one that God had ordained for the biological line that would lead to Jesus to be established through. So it isn't simply a spiritual thing, but also a matter of his flesh and the line of descendents to come through Isaac.

 

[Bob_1000]

That's one way to try to rescue the "only begotten" claim, but it's not what Hebrews is speaking to. Hebrews uses "monogenes" because Isaac is the child of promise, so he is Abraham's unique son because he is the one that God had ordained for the biological line that would lead to Jesus to be established through. So it isn't simply a spiritual thing, but also a matter of his flesh and the line of descendents to come through Isaac.

Nice try but Hebrews is quoting Genesis 22:2.

Gen 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.