King James Onlyism supported

[ayin jade]

27 minutes ago, WBO said:

A lot of negative comments but no one named any errors in the KJV yet. I didn’t make the thread to break down ones faith by saying the Bible is flawed by man! I attempted to build others faith up by saying that the Bible contains no errors. Which view is more comforting? 

I could name some poor word choices that are not accurate but to do so would be attempting to tear it down. I will not do that. It isnt a bad bible but it has flaws.

I want to read the bible in a language i understand. Not have to learn another one just to read it.

[ayin jade]

Btw you keep talking about the jw bible. That you consider it a bad translation is fine but that you consider it and the jws as Christian undermines your credibility.

[missmuffet]

30 minutes ago, joebloggs said:

KJV is reasonably good translation. NIV is better though. Not much in it if you're using them right though to be fair

 The greatest ‘con’ of the 2011 NIV, of course, is the inclusion of gender-neutral language and the necessity of interpreting rather than translating in order to present a more culturally sensitive or politically correct version. That is why I don't read it. 

[joebloggs]

4 minutes ago, missmuffet said:

 The greatest ‘con’ of the 2011 NIV, of course, is the inclusion of gender-neutral language and the necessity of interpreting rather than translating in order to present a more culturally sensitive or politically correct version. That is why I don't read it. 

Yeah I agree the NIV the gender neutral language is probably its biggest flaw to be fair. But like I said it's got to be used correctly. You cant take any of them at face value you have to look into their nuances and study with them in mind. 

I use a site called blue letter bible . Org if I'm not using my physical NIV.  You can flip between the different versions, view the actual greek and aramaic alongside the English and till give you word definitions from the major references e.g strongs etc. You can even hear the original words if you click the right buttons. 

For all its flaws I still rate NIV above KJV

[The_Patriot21]

On 12/11/2019 at 8:00 AM, Jaydog1976 said:

Another thing to point out is that we only have 2 Greek manuscripts. We need to find a third that would corroborate one or the other. This would actually cause the argument to end but of course there is no third manuscript. As mentioned before a translation is a translation and none are perfect. 

We actually have dozens, and translators pull from multiple ones. We have 2 that are mostly complete, but not entirely. So translators use those 2 as the base and pull from others to verify accuracy and fill in the gaps.

The only issue is none of them are the original texts. But, I don't think that's an issue at all seeing as this Book has Divine protection.

[The_Patriot21]

1 hour ago, Margo1945 said:

"Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act." Deitrich BonHoeffer

Yes, @The_Patriot2019, the above quote is sooooooooooo very true as is true peace must include justice. In some ways, not to speak and not to act speaks and displays volumes in that how are we to interpret such - not caring, afraid to speak up or act, not knowing what to say/do, etcetra ... at least, when one speaks or acts, we have some idea of how to interpret such .. eg. hate speech is seen for what it is but those who listen and don't speak out - are they in agreement or disagreement with what was said .. 

as for the many translators and translations, such again causes me not to put my trust in man but only in God .. the original text actually doesn't really matter when translators may erroneously translate and interpret it and then other translators through the ages erroneously go with those translations or give their own .. someone told me that in order to get a copyright to have a new Bible version, one has to change some wording to make one's translations unique, not just another copy .. thus, in one of my previous posts, I said how someone asked me to define abhor and I said it meant despise, detest, hate, ... and the person found the dictionary said "dislike" .. so, if one were to get a copyright for another Bible version, he/she might cite the passage "to abhor evil" as "dislike evil" .. that is an entirely erroneous and subsequently deceitful .. anyway, the bottom line for me still remains that it IS God's Word and Truth so Who better to say what He said and Who better to say what He meant than the author Himself aka God the Holy Spirit .. I know that in many ways what I have said just now may not make a lot of sense but I know what I said and I know what I mean and I stand by it .. lol .. Go with GOD, not with MAN!!!!!! .. God's Holy Spirit does speak in our heads and hearts and IF we become attuned to His voice and not just hearing voices, He can and will speak VERY CLEARLY to us .. we may not like what He says but we can depend upon Him 100% to TELL IT AS IT IS!!!!!

That is true, in order to get a copyright they can't be worded the exact same as an other. 

However that doesn't mean that all translators are out to change the word of God. Often they don't even have to try. Many Greek words translate into multiple English words and different translators often disagree with how certain words should translate, so that creates some minor differences, also different translators use different texts to translate from. I've already touched on the fact that this is one of the differences between the KJV and the NASB is they use different texts.

And also the language changes. The English language changes almost daily lol. So what a word meant in 1611 it may no longer mean.

Another thing they can do is you can often say the same thing many different ways. Aaaah, the complexity of the English language.

So do some translators mix their own opinions/politics in? Certainly. There are some horrible translations out there, which I'm not going to *cough cough* like the message *cough cough* name, but that doesn't mean they're all like that. It's important to research and study, to figure out what's good and what's bad, to discern the facts from the myths and rumors.

[Jaydog1976]

10 hours ago, Cletus said:

I must disagree with this statement.  what one needs do is pray that God would lead them into understanding in truth in scripture and then study it out.  you do not need a third text, all you need is The Holy Spirit to lead you into understanding and truth... scripture says this.  and I have been led to the KJV and find other versions lacking or saying something completely different.  the KJV is the most reliable version period.  read what ever helps you grow... i.e.  the version God speaks to you in... but the end goal should be to get a KJV and read that. it is hard at first and one must really study.  its almost like learning a different language.  this is why i do not hold to a strict KJV only stance, but i wil be quick to say KJV is the best.  just because someone lacks the literacy skills to comprehend the kjv they go with another... BUT... you can ask God anything and if its His wil He will make it come to pass.  His children knowing His Word is well within the scope of His will. 

So here is the rub. The choice of Bible versions is not a textual one but on of preference. You choose the KJV because you prefer it over other versions. No one can really know if the KJV is perfect because it is a translation which did have Anglican and other influences in it. What I find interesting is that the KJV was revised several times. Why? Because no translation is perfect and evolves as language and word usage evolves. Do I think the KJV is a good version: Yes I do. However I don't not hold it to be perfect. It has it's issues to. 

10 hours ago, Cletus said:

Rom 8:1  KJV  There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Romans 8:1 NIV  Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,

this is a prime example of how the NIV is watered down.  the part who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit is not something to scoff at and holds significant meaning.  it clearly shows one needs to be a practicing christian... not just a name it and claim it christian. 

lets see what your NIV says on this verse, and please do respond by quoting me and post this verse out of your NIV bible:

Mat 17:21  Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.

and this verse also:

Mar 9:44  Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

and here is one that really gets me scratching my head on why its taken out...

Rom 16:24  The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

i used to read the niv.  when someone told me it was weak sauce at best... i prayed for God to show me and i prayerfully studied.  i didnt argue with my mentors like i knew everything.  i investigated with an open mind.  if you would do the same you would be eager to educate yourself in the what saith thou dialect. 

 

now what the pro NIV-ers always respond with is those verses are not needed or there is a footnote that says blah blah blah.  nope.  NIV took it out.  it is a lesser version with footnotes that read otherversions have verses like... or see this other verse. 

 

Mat 4:4  But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

the word every is :

G3956
πᾶς
pas
pas
Including all the forms of declension; apparently a primary word; all, any, every, the whole: - all (manner of, means) alway (-s), any (one), X daily, + ever, every (one, way), as many as, + no (-thing), X throughly, whatsoever, whole, whosoever.
Total KJV occurrences: 1238

your NIV does not have EVERY word. 

 

Now to answer this argument. As I said before, these versions were translated from 2 completely different texts. You cannot make the argument that the NIV omits stuff. You are basing your argument on the fact the the KJV is perfect and is the absolute translation to compare other with. My question is this : How do you know the Textus Receptus doesn't have additions or subtractions in itself? You won't know because you don't have the original authors to talk to about it. So this argument about additions and subtractions from the NIV or any other version is moot because they are translated from two completely different Greek texts. 

Ultimately, and most KJV only supporters will deny this, your chose of Bible version is based upon preference. And this preference lead you to using the KJV as your choice of Bible version. I prefer the NIV and NASB because they are easier to read and lend to reading in language that we use today. Neither is right or wrong. God uses both translations to bring people to Christ as well as to help the grow in the faith. 

[Jaydog1976]

16 hours ago, The_Patriot2019 said:

We actually have dozens, and translators pull from multiple ones. We have 2 that are mostly complete, but not entirely. So translators use those 2 as the base and pull from others to verify accuracy and fill in the gaps.

The only issue is none of them are the original texts. But, I don't think that's an issue at all seeing as this Book has Divine protection.

That was my point. We have 2 main Greek texts that are used. I understand that there are fragments of greek texts that are used to make the 2 main ones. What I was driving at is that there isn't a 3rd main text that supports one or the other. It is hard to compare 2 texts without having a tie breaker. Otherwise it is a serious waste of time to say one is better than the other without knowing what we are comparing them against. 

[JustPassingThru]

2 hours ago, Jaydog1976 said:

That was my point. We have 2 main Greek texts that are used. I understand that there are fragments of greek texts that are used to make the 2 main ones. What I was driving at is that there isn't a 3rd main text that supports one or the other. It is hard to compare 2 texts without having a tie breaker. Otherwise it is a serious waste of time to say one is better than the other without knowing what we are comparing them against. 

I'm not arguing with you brother, ...but can't we say the Holy Spirit is what you and others are "referring" to as the "third" text, ...for me personally, ...I prefer to go to the Author whenever I have a "textual" problem?

It's a simple prayer, "Holy Spirit, I don't understand the spiritual principle You are speaking about in this verse(s), ...please explain it to me, ...sometimes He does so immediately, ...and sometimes He has to explain other things to me before I can understand His answer to my question...

Lord bless

[JustPassingThru]

19 hours ago, WBO said:

A lot of negative comments but no one named any errors in the KJV yet.

Uhmmm, I did, it's on the fourth page...