- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi H,
Play your games if you must then, but do not expect the more serious students to take your words as seriously as they otherwise might.There is no games when it comes to the word of God Nick. It is a matter of life and death. It is the matter of men's souls. This is no game. The devil it out trying to steal the souls of men and if we are not armed and do not arm the saints with the full armor of God, even the very elect can be and are being decieved.
Hi H,
Then why do you try to prove yourself and your ilk as the only truly inspired ones, by attempting to set up trivial conflicts and divisions over what we regard as precious?Quote So here is the delemma. It is alright to attack the KJ. Yet, how many of you are willing to stand up against my attacks on your translations. H, I believe you have continously repeatedly said:
'The KJV is infallible.'
No one else has made such claims about other Bibles, as far as I can tell. You are the one making the claim.
And, when someone attempts to show you the why the KJV is not infallible, you largely ignore them and post on something else. You attack elsewhere, but never really defend, instead, pointing to links.
I am personally very fond of the KJV. But sadly, I cannot accept that it is infallible.
As I've asked you several times:
At PS 83:18 and in a couple of other places, we find the name “Jehovah.” Originally, God's name occurs about 7000 times in the Scriptures. Elsewhere in the KJ, I believe we find God's name has been replaced with “LORD” or “GOD” in capital letters.
My question which I am certain proves in isn't infallibe is this:If the right thing to do was include God's name and not take it out of the Bible and replace it with titles several thousand times, then why did it leave “Jehovah” in these few places? If it is wrong to have that name in all the other places, wouldn't it be a mistake to include there?
Conversely, if the right thing to do was to replace God's name with titles, then why have “Jehovah” in those few spots? Most Bibles leave God's name out entirely. And the KJ largly follows this. But in these few places, it doesn't? If it is wrong to include God's name, why does it do so?
H, thus far you have ignored all my posts concerning this and other issues with the KJ.
I'm almost certain that instead of answering my question, you will attack me in some way, and dismiss my very real argument as false based on the theory that nothing I say means anything. Sound logic. If you suprise me and don't, I am sorry for saying you would.david
Dear David,
Do you have all of the materials used by the translators to do the work involved in the translations?
Dear David,
Does the names Jehovah, God, Father mean anything different to you? Is there more then one God?
What makes the KJ infallible is it's doctrine. It is perfect. It's tenses on words are perfect. I am glad you love the KJ.
Nick, I can do what I want or what God wants me to do. Which do you think I should do? If you cannot understand doctrine because you refuse to try and understand the KJ, I don't know what to tell you. If you can't understand by using your translations, and if the Holy Spirit does not reveal it to you in your translations, how will you ever understand.
It was for this reason I gave the litmus test quite some time ago. And even these simple verses became a huge stumbling block. These simple verses are not difficult to understand if the Holy Spirit reveals them. I ask you as a brother to go back and reread it. Pray the Lord reveal the truth of these verses to your heart. I don't like dispute, it has no benefit for any. It only causes those who are weak in the faith to turn from the faith altogether.
Quote Dear David, Do you have all of the materials used by the translators to do the work involved in the translations?
Let me check my pockets. Nope. I must have left them in my other pants.
Dear H,
Similarly, I ask you: Have you been present in every moment of time to have accurate knowledge of whether every letter in the KJV has followed a straight path?Quote Dear David,
Does the names Jehovah, God, Father mean anything different to you? Is there more then one God?The name Jehovah is a name, it is distinctive. And it does have meaning.
“Father” is a discrptive title, applied to many. “God” is also a title that can be applied to many.
“There are many “gods”.” (1 cor 8:5)I'm not sure what your point was in asking those questions. None of them answer my questions:
If the right thing to do was include God's name and not take it out of the Bible and replace it with titles several thousand times, then why did it leave “Jehovah” in these few places? If it is wrong to have that name in all the other places, wouldn't it be a mistake to include there?Conversely, if the right thing to do was to replace God's name with titles, then why have “Jehovah” in those few spots? Most Bibles leave God's name out entirely. And the KJ largly follows this. But in these few places, it doesn't? If it is wrong to include God's name, why does it do so?
Quote What makes the KJ infallible is it's doctrine. It is perfect. It's tenses on words are perfect. I am glad you love the KJ. So, you're saying that it is infallible in that it's grammer or it's use of tenses on words are perfect?
Ya, I was just thinking it might be infallibe because it removed Jehovah's name several thousands of times.
God inspired his name to be recorded in his word thousands of times. But if the translators of the KJV think it would be better to only use God's name about 3 or 4 times, ya, I guess they would know better than God Almighty, the Author of the Bible.
The KJV has removed the name of the Author of the Bible several thousand times. Now, someone could say: “God's name isn't that important. Who cares.” But I wouldn't say that. And I wouldn't say that to God.
There are those that like to use Bibles that don't contain God's name at all. Most of them argue that “Jehovah” is not how it was originally pronounced. You don't have that luxury. Your Bible does contain “Jehovah” 4 times I believe. Yet, the other 6 thousand, and several hundred times, you have erased his name and put “LORD” or “GOD.”
In my mind, there is no possible way you can defend such actions.david
Hey David,
Glad to see you're still here too. I enjoy you humour:Quote Let me check my pockets. Nope. I must have left them in my other pants. 
Speaking of versions, which is the more accurate IYHO – the KJV or the NWT?
Put it this way David if you want to take the translation challenge. When we are finished, your pockets will be empty.
As for when and where the translators decided to put the name of Jehovah in place of God and Lord is between the translators, the materials they used in doing the translations and God. If you cannot accept this, what can I say. Whom are you to judge? Are you saying that you could have done a better job of translating then that of the 45 or so scholars used in doing the translation of the KJ? How can you assume anything unless you know what the translators had before them in doing the translation? I have a name everyone calls me and my sons call me dad. Calling me dad is more personal while calling me by my name is more formal. Anyway, I hope this helps you understand at least somewhat. I think it is foolish to argue over something this long. I have posted that I believe the KJ is infallible and I let the doctrine do the talking. The doctrine is untouchable. I believe it is of the Lord. If it were of me, it would be full of lies and be able to be shred to pieces. If something is proven wrong, I will be the first to tell the group and apologise. For we are all men and capable of sin.
Hi,
If you claim infallibility then you are saying you cannot be proved wrong.
Your mind is closed and true dialogue and learning for you is impossible.
Unteachable.Sad really.
The rest of us are here to share and learn.
Quote Are you saying that you could have done a better job of translating then that of the 45 or so scholars used in doing the translation of the KJ? I am simply pointing out that God's Word originally contained the tetragrammaton about 7000 times. And in all but 3 or 4 of those instances, the translators of the KJ decided to substitute it with “GOD” or “LORD.” In 4 places, they decided to keep God's name. In several thousand, they rejected it, and substituted titles. I wonder what gives them that right?
My point is a simple one:
–If it is wrong to have Jehovah's name, then why is it there?
–And if it is right to have Jehovah's name, then why did they exclude it several thousand times?
Both cannot be right, can they? Either God's name which God himself inspired to be there should be in modern translations, or, it shouldn't.Quote As for when and where the translators decided to put the name of Jehovah in place of God and Lord is between the translators
This is wrong. They did not decide to put “GOD” or “LORD” in place of God's name. They decided to subsitute those titles in place of God's name. It's an undeniable fact that in the Hebrew Scriptures, God's distinctive name appears almost 7000 times.Quote the materials they used in doing the translations and God.
It wasn't material that lead them to conclude that this was the right course of action. Many many Bible translators have followed the TRADITION of substituting titles for God's name.Quote How can you assume anything unless you know what the translators had before them in doing the translation?
I simply assume that God's Word really is inspired of God. And hence, if He inspires His name to appear several thousand times (more times than every title that applies to him put together) then it belongs there. That's all.Quote I have a name everyone calls me and my sons call me dad. Calling me dad is more personal while calling me by my name is more formal.
That's great. Jehovah is called Father too. But who are you or who are they to decide that God's name doesn't belong in all those places it originally was? It seems that Satan (not God) is the one who would want to remove God's name.Quote I have posted that I believe the KJ is infallible and I let the doctrine do the talking. The doctrine is untouchable.
A lot of people that use the kj, believe in the trinity. Part of the reason it's so very easy to believe this, is because of the removal of God's name, thus making the Lord of the Hebrew Scriptures less personal and making it easy to confuse Him with the Lord of the Greek scriptures.david
Quote This is wrong. They did not decide to put “GOD” or “LORD” in place of God's name.
What I wrote above, should say:
This is wrong. They did not decide to put God's name in place of those titles.David, is Jesus God or the Son of God? Are all references in the OT referring to God the Father or the Son of God who was given all authority of the Godhead, thus making him God over all of creation? Or do you not believe that Jesus should be referred to as God?
Nick,
I am a man and being a man, I am a sinner. Thus, imperfect. My only hope is my faith in God's blessed Son, my loving saviour who died, that I might have eternal life by believing in him. To say that I am incapable of mistakes would make me a liar, yet, let God be true, for all men are liars.
Hi H,
Even translators of bibles are imperfect and not infallible?
Then why place your faith on such unstable ground?My God is not unstable. And neither is his word. As I said before, I fear no other translations or doctrines. For the doctrine of the Lord will destroy all false doctrines. His word is truth. His love unending.
Quote (heiscomingintheclouds @ July 20 2006,23:08) My God is not unstable. And neither is his word. As I said before, I fear no other translations or doctrines. For the doctrine of the Lord will destroy all false doctrines. His word is truth. His love unending.
Why don't you guys just duel. Word for Word Scripture for Scripture. That would be interesting and just maybe the truth would come out and be final.
Just a thought
Quote (heiscomingintheclouds @ July 20 2006,23:08) My God is not unstable. And neither is his word. As I said before, I fear no other translations or doctrines. For the doctrine of the Lord will destroy all false doctrines. His word is truth. His love unending.
Hi H,
And God is greater and bigger than the KJV.Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 21 2006,00:47) Quote (heiscomingintheclouds @ July 20 2006,23:08) My God is not unstable. And neither is his word. As I said before, I fear no other translations or doctrines. For the doctrine of the Lord will destroy all false doctrines. His word is truth. His love unending.
Hi H,
And God is greater and bigger than the KJV.
God IS bigger than His Word. This is true! The Father IS Greater than the Son
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
