Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | KJV Only Help | Bible general Archive 4 | EdB | 232919 | ||
G Preston Great chart! But I have one question how do you know the things listed under the KJV are God inspired? How do you know they weren't added by over zealous scribes? It a simple question you have two books one you say is correct and the other is wrong. In fact in this case you have 3 that agree with each other yet you say they are wrong and yours is right. Based on what proof? |
||||||
2 | KJV Only Help | Bible general Archive 4 | G. Preston | 232927 | ||
I don't believe I said that. Please re-read my note. It was offered for your consideration. In finality we have what we have. Pray about it and use common sense discernment. When someone changes references from G-d(singular) to G-ds(plural)...as an example...I become concerned..don't you?. When questioned... they offer the reasoning using the Father/Son/Holy Spirit as a basis for G-ds. Perhaps In the next edition they will omit any reference to G-d and at that time there will be those who argue against what the.. now new.... one says. I am sure you are aware but, for reminders to all of us the origional KJV was brought about by the king of england who assembled the greatest scholars known at the time, who used the only known to man... manuscripts. I don't know how much closer we will ever be able to come to the origional Word. Please answer a question for me...we have one from the origional manuscripts...why is another/new one necessary...for what purpose? Faith and G-d's guidance from prayer is fullfilling. |
||||||
3 | KJV Only Help | Bible general Archive 4 | EdB | 232928 | ||
Actually we don't have one from the original manuscripts, since we don't have any original manuscripts. What we have are very reliable manuscripts but as we find older ones we see things that simply aren't there and things included that our manuscript doesn't have. The question becomes are these simple scribal mistakes or were they intentional deletions or additions done by zealous scribes. Some are fairly easy to identify, a missing title or jot can change the meaning of a original language word. Others are more problematic where many verses were added, could they be inspired or additions. Yes King James did use the best translators in the land at the time however new discoveries in the original language make even our average translators superior to most of his. Also King James did have an agenda, which was to justify his theological position on a number of issues. Interestingly in most cases his translation did just that. Coincidence or collusion? Know also the King James was preceded my some older English Translations. Such as the Great Bible and Geneva Bible and all three are slightly different for the others. |
||||||