Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Question for Glory Bound | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 134440 | ||
Glory Bound - I have every right to carry on this discussion as long as you continue to dodge the question. You say you have answered the question. You have not! I ask this Forum to read the exchange of posts in this thread and decide for themselves whether you have answered this important question asking for reasonable proof of your assertion that the KJV and NIV are inspired translations. If you or I or anyone else who posts to this Forum makes an assertion that could seriously mislead the readers of this Forum, it is quite the right of other Forum members to hold him to account by requiring that he offer documented, authoritative proof of such an assertion. It is abundantly clear that you have not done so, and equally clear that you have no intention of doing so. One can only suspect that you refuse to offer reasonable proof of your assertion simply because you have no proof and you are unable to find any proof; and that you are unwilling to admit that fact and confess that it is merely your opinion based on nothing more substantial than thin air. So what's the big beef? someone may ask. Why make an issue of this business about the KJV and NIV being inspired translations? For starters, it's ridiculous. No TRANSLATION of Scripture is inspired. The only words that were breathed of God are those that were written down in the original manuscripts called autographs. So far as anyone has ever been able to determine, there are no autographs extant. What we have is a group of ancient manuscripts which are copies of the originals, that is, they were copied from the autographs themselves, or they were copied from copies of the original autographs. These are not translations but copies. Now from these copies come translations. So how can it be that the KJV and the NIV just happened to be inspired translations? Were the KJV and NIV translators divinely inspired? If they were, what need would they have had for copies of manuscripts that were themselves copies of the truly inspired documents, the autographs? There is not one iota of proof anywhere that the King James Version or the New International Version teams of translators were inspired, no more than there is any proof that the NASB team or any other group of translators were inspired. So to make an assertion of this magnitude is to mislead people into thinking that the KJV and the NIV are divinely inspired, and therefore this leaves the impression on readers' minds that they must accept these two "inspired" versions of Scripture and reject all others because they are not inspired. This position is not only supremely fatuous and inane but it is dead wrong and grossly misleading. .... One would think that two versions of Scripture that were both divinely inspired would agree with one another to the letter on all points, and that they would not be dependent upon ancient manuscripts. We know that the KJV and NIV translators by no means agree to the letter on all points, and we further know that not only were both of them dependent upon the ancient manuscripts but that they didn't both use identical manuscripts throughout! Some of the manuscripts that the NIV translators used were completely unknown to the KJV translators. Case closed. --Hank | ||||||
2 | Question for Glory Bound | Bible general Archive 2 | Glory Bound | 134514 | ||
HANK. I HAVE BEGGED YOU NOT TO DRAW ME INTO SUCH A GODLESS DISCUSSION AS WHAT YOU HAVE TURNED THIS MATTER INTO. If you wish to go against what it is you profess, this is between you and our Lord. As for me, you can take your senseless insistence on quarreling the matter, and thus disgracing our Lord, up with the mirror, or perhaps a telephone pole, for it appears that there would be little difference. Insult me as you wish. I forgive you. I also pray your eyes will be opened before you soil the word more than you now insist on doing. Tell everyone there is no inspired bible as you wish. It is you who will have to answer for your ignorance. Not I. The blood of those you turn aside will be on your head. Not mine. . May God Bless and have mercy on you, Hank. Evil as you are portraying yourself to me, I know there is something there worth loving. And I do love you, and all who would be mislead and turned aside from scripture due to your hardheaded insistence. As to the proof you insist on Hank. I expect Christ felt just as sad performing His miracles and speaking the truth to those who refused to see and hear, as I am, concerning your senseless refusal to see, your insistence on continuing the argument, and refusal to accept my answer for the truth it is. I cannot make you see Hank. I cannot open your eyes. I can only make you aware. GB |
||||||
3 | Question for Glory Bound | Bible general Archive 2 | EdB | 134523 | ||
GB I don't think you are fair or correct in your characterization of Hank. You made a statement that is confusing and misleading by calling a translation inspired and implying others weren’t. I know I have been trying to get an understanding of what you saying and I think that is what Hank has done. I don’t see him attacking you on any issue other they you reluctance to directly answer his question. I think to place all the blame on him and not accept some responsibility for this break down of communications between you two is wrong. I think you would be wise to rethink and restate you position in a way that there is no doubt, confusion or misunderstanding between you two. But to insist Hank is attacking you when in fact he asking you for a clarification is patently unfair and could be seen as un-Christ like on your part. Please consider what you said, what your now saying. Take time to think it through and then post a response that clears the air. If you refuse to do that then perhaps your right to question your participation here on the forum. EdB |
||||||
4 | Question for Glory Bound | Bible general Archive 2 | EdB | 134529 | ||
GB I just had my eyes opened are you "Exhorter" and "GeorJoy" of the past? Isn't that deceit? Is that how a Christian is to act? You were asked by Lockman to stop posting on this forum. Now you come back under an alias as wolf in sheep clothing and start calling another honored member of this forum a non Christian. God said we would know them by their fruit and now we see yours. EdB |
||||||
5 | Question for Glory Bound | Bible general Archive 2 | Mommapbs | 134580 | ||
Misdirected Post from GB to EdB Ed I am who I am. Neither now, nor have I ever claimed to be anyone other. I wonder though, are there not many herein depicted in your note? Do you consider me a criminal because I defend what I have learned in scripture, or because you disagree with how, or what I advocate? Are you so offended by one who rocks your boat that you would consider me one whom you apparently hated in times past? When have I "called another honored member of this forum a non Christian?" As I suspected, you rally to the support of your friend, rather than admit that he may have been wrong. I rebuked this person when he was in the wrong. He then chose to take offense, and proceeded to attack my very next post in every sort available. I begged this person not to drag me into such a godless conversation. He refused, and was then joined by others such as yourself. He then chose to nit pick my profile. You did the same. If this is what you consider "how a Christian is to act," then I can only pray for you and your friends. I will not, however continue to allow them to drag me into their Godless splutter. I come to this forum to learn, and hopefully to share my gift. It is apparent that there are those herein who profess, yet have no desire to adhere to scripture. So be it. This is there decision. I cannot, nor do I intend to attempt to change them. I only ask for the same respect, which has been refused me thus far. |
||||||