Guest Biblicist Posted March 2, 2008 Share Posted March 2, 2008 Did the KJV translators claim divine inspiration? Yet, in spite of their outstanding character, they never claimed divine inspiration. (A claim which, if they had made, would overjoy their detractors as evidence of a prideful spirit.) They never even claimed perfection for their finished work. What they believed about their writings is irrelivant. John the Baptist didn't realize he was the one refered to as Elijah, but he was. John the Baptist being refered to as Elijah didn't make him Elijah. actually Bibs it did make him Elijah.. Matthew 11 (KJV) 13For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. 14And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. 15He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. Matthew 11 (NKJV) 13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. 14 and if you are willing to receive it, he IS Elijah who is to come 15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear! This is curious. So there were two Elijah's? OR was John the Baptist Elijah reincarnated? Maybe this proves reincarnation... Sorry I know this is off topic. He came in the spirit of Elijah. Then he wasn't really Elijah, nor was he Elijah reincarnated? He was John the Baptist, a completely different person. He just came for the same purpose. Is that correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia1 Posted March 2, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 44 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,858 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 9 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/24/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/23/1957 Share Posted March 2, 2008 John was John with the same Spirit as Elijah. I believe it is Malachi talks about Elijah preparing the way for the messiah, wait I gotta look, Yes Maalchi 4:12 Some people think this verse means the Literal Elijah as one of the prophet of revelations but it was John who declared the coming of the Lord..and yet I do believe the literal Elijah alone with Enoch are the revelation prophets at this time in my walk. Niether tasted death. I always read from the king james version until I started to speak king James version...hahahehe Lol I do use the Spiros Zodhiates Hebrew greek key study bible in which I use for teaching and preaching. Certain things are definitely lost in some other translations. I use the American standerd for quick reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Biblicist Posted March 2, 2008 Share Posted March 2, 2008 I don't believe he was really Elijah reincarnated, but he is the person spoken of in the book of Malachi, refered to as Elijah. When John the Baptist was asked about it, he said he was not Elijah, but Jesus said that he was. Anyway, I will admit this is a rather complex story to fully decipher. The one thing to keep in mind is that Elijah never died. He was taken to heaven in a chariot, so John couldn't have been the reincarnation of Elijah. Also, since he was born of earthly parents, and didn't come down from heaven, he couldn't be the actual Elijah that went up in the chariot. Most people believe that the Old Testament prophet will be one of the two witnesses in Revelation along with Enoch, since they are the only two men to be taken to heaven without dying first. Then I restate it... John the Baptist being refered to as Elijah didn't make him Elijah. He was John, period, end of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patricia1 Posted March 2, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 44 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,858 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 9 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/24/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/23/1957 Share Posted March 2, 2008 bibs... I was just gonna call you babs. I agree with you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aleksander Posted March 2, 2008 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 16 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 147 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 2 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/18/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/19/1983 Author Share Posted March 2, 2008 Link Here-Click Now I am not sure what to make of this exactly. But a few things that the authour points too in the article is, well, causing me to be concerned. Because if its all true, we have a problem on our hands. There are some paraphrased bibles that are like story books and should be considered as such. Saying this, you have to remember that the Holy Spirit is our teacher and He will teach us the truth. John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. Good point. I do have to watch what I say . I am sorry LORD . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted March 3, 2008 Share Posted March 3, 2008 If I may ask, Shiloh, what are the criteria for inspiration? Thank you. Well, very simply, the only people who can rightly claim to have been inspired are the original human authors to whom the relevation of the Scriptures came. No one else can rightly claim that, and that includes translators of any age sense the originals were written. God breathed (inspired) the revelation that came to the OT prophets, Paul, Peter, and others. Translators are not "inspired" on the grounds that they are not receiving additional revelvation. The cannon is closed, and God is not adding to His word. Translators are simply conveying the information already extant in the Bible which was inspired by God thousands of years of ago upon his prophets and apostles. So, unless the translators can claim divine revelation of new spiritual truth, they do not fit the criteria as being "inspired" with regard to their handling of the Scriptures. That is not to say that God does not lead them, or has not led them, but that is different than being "inspired." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard_yaash Posted March 3, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 940 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/10/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted March 3, 2008 No, the Greek Dictionary is not divinely inspired, but it is a useful reference tool. Thank you and I agree. The purpose of a dictionary is only to give us the meaning of words. Agreed. However, dictionaries can be mistaken. Shiloh claims that the use of the word Easter in the KJV Bible is incorrect, and my Dictionary shows it to be correct. Of the approximately 27 occurrences of 'pascha', why is only one translated different from the others? Does that not at least perhaps make you curious? Perhaps there is a 'textual' reason for it? Would you be willing to delve into the manuscript to see if perhaps we may learn from this occurrence alone? I don't claim that my Dictionary proves me right And that is good. but only that it shows that Shiloh could be wrong. Is there the possibility that your dictionary is less than perfect? If the answer is yes, then it also shows that Shiloh may be correct. I have just gone downstairs and dug out the first four Greek reference books that I came across: Analytical Greek Lexicon Liddell and Scott's Lexicon Lust Eynikel Hauspie Lexicon Hath and Redpath Concordance Are you willing to pit your Greek Dictionary against my references? If even one of the references named above contains the English word "Easter", I will concede this thread. Considering that, are you willing to place your Greek Dictionary against the references named above? Further: If not one of the above named reference books contain the English word "Easter", would you be willing to look into the manuscripts? Would you be willing to consider that perhaps Shiloh is correct? In other words, we are at a stale mate with regard to this argument. The reason I believe Easter is the correct word is because I believe the KJV Bible is innerant, therefore I would believe it was correct based on that alone. Fair enough. Would you be willing to place that against the Greek reference books that I have named above and therefore break the stalemate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard_yaash Posted March 3, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 940 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/10/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted March 3, 2008 So...circular reasoning works, because circular reasoning works. Ulay, ulay lo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard_yaash Posted March 3, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 940 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/10/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted March 3, 2008 bibs... I was just gonna call you babs. I agree with you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard_yaash Posted March 3, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 940 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/10/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted March 3, 2008 Then he wasn't really Elijah, nor was he Elijah reincarnated? He was John the Baptist, a completely different person. He just came for the same purpose. Is that correct? It is a good question Biblicist. One that has a lot of depth of it own. I have thought about this in the past. To this point I have never delved in deep to come to a place in which I felt I could say anything one way or the other. As it is, I will simply accept the text according to the pshat [plain/simple/face value] reading of it. Beyond that, hopefully I am wise enough not to speculate at this time, if ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts