Another reason to avoid the KJV

[milordsheep]

There are many footnotes in all translations of the bible I have seen that quote the septuigint translations...from all sources...that consider it authoritative..suficient enough for me to accept that. But the historical proof probably went the way of the Library of Alexandria...where it was translated.

the "plumb line" always is and always will be the Holy Spirit. But in comparison with different translations...ie NIV to NAB to KJV...and also internally comparing scripture to scripture...falsehoods are inevitably revealed.

God's Word is not hidden...and He will not allow His children to be given stones instead of bread.

[sheep wrecked]

(03-02-2009 07:26 PM)milordsheep Wrote:  There are many footnotes in all translations of the bible I have seen that quote the septuigint translations...from all sources...that consider it authoritative..suficient enough for me to accept that. But the historical proof probably went the way of the Library of Alexandria...where it was translated.

I wonder what LXX they are referring to - there were 4 different ones and none of the them agree with each other. It troubles me that those who add footnotes do not do their homework.

Actually, history gives us a nice credible witness. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, the latest LXX, which is used by most people today, does not match the one found at Qumran. Oopps ......... that makes for a big problem. So the LXX should not be used for much when it comes to the Bible. It has also been noted by scholars that the 4th "recention" of the LXX was "smoothed" to match the Greek NT. So what appears to be Jesus and the writers of the NT quoting from it, it's actually the other way around. I just love decent research, don't you? :excited:

Quote:the "plumb line" always is and always will be the Holy Spirit. But in comparison with different translations...ie NIV to NAB to KJV...and also internally comparing scripture to scripture...falsehoods are inevitably revealed.

God's Word is forever. Psalms 12 says that it is refined 7 times. He also said that He magnified His Word above His Name. So obviously, the Word is His final authority. The Holy Spirit will ALWAYS validate the Word, not the other way around

Btw, if one compares the NIV to NAB, the falsehoods will not be evident, because they are both corrupt

Quote:God's Word is not hidden...and He will not allow His children to be given stones instead of bread.

Yes, the true Word of God has been preserved as God chose it to be. You are right, it was never hidden - the trail is there for all to see, if they care enough to look. Whether or not one gets stones instead of bread depends on which version they use

[milordsheep]

"Yes, the true Word of God has been preserved as God chose it to be. You are right, it was never hidden - the trail is there for all to see, if they care enough to look. Whether or not one gets stones instead of bread depends on which version they use."


I think rather it more depends in their Trust and Faith in the Lord.

[sheep wrecked]

(03-05-2009 12:44 PM)milordsheep Wrote:  "Yes, the true Word of God has been preserved as God chose it to be. You are right, it was never hidden - the trail is there for all to see, if they care enough to look. Whether or not one gets stones instead of bread depends on which version they use."


I think rather it more depends in their Trust and Faith in the Lord.

When you have a version that deletes verses, eliminates words and phrases, and changes what the verses actually say - you get stones, not bread. This is not God's fault, but people are still affected by corrupted versions. They get stones cause it messes people up spiritually and theologically. It's how I got sheep wrecked

[milordsheep]

Indeed Indeed. My own background was in a doctrine of heresy....one that popular opinion holds the false prophet comes from. I do not belittle the importance or right Scripture. Far from it.

Fortunately for me, this translation mania was not as prevalent when I desired to read the word, and while Bibles were abundant, translations were not as varied...and differences, at least to me, were more of a grammar or synonym nature. I used to have an ols NAS bible that worked well for me...as well as the KJV...of the old Gideon variety...that I cut my teeth on. When I asked what church to Follow...the Lord said " Follow Me".. From then on demoninational differences, and the translations that followed seemed to me to complicate what Jesus so freely gave me... Cleansing in His Blood, and Salvation in His Name!

And I truly thank God that He made it that simple for me.

[sheep wrecked]

(03-05-2009 05:35 PM)milordsheep Wrote:  I used to have an ols NAS bible that worked well for me...as well as the KJV...of the old Gideon variety...that I cut my teeth on.

The NAS is one of those modern versions that is corrupted

You can read all about it here:

http://www.seekgod.ca/chart.htm#ABOUT

[milordsheep]

I daresay the particular one that I had was not all that "modern".... had it back in the 80's. It was at least a generation old then.

But then again the Holy Spirit has made it simple for me...since my walk came from the sing for your supper missions... It is a special Care He uses with those He brings up from the gutter...and He made many a crooked path straight in my life...I need not change my Trust in the Lord...nor the manner...I am a footsoldier and giver of aid.

And you sheep, are called to dilligent intelligent search; to be a voice against the Great Falling Away.

And the Savior, Jesus is the head of it all

Praise God

[sheep wrecked]

(03-05-2009 06:54 PM)milordsheep Wrote:  I daresay the particular one that I had was not all that "modern".... had it back in the 80's. It was at least a generation old then.

The term "modern" versions is probably misleading. "Modern" means within the last 100 years. A modern Bible version refers to those versions that use the Nestle/Aland/Wecott/Hort translations in which the NT is based on the errant Alexandrian Greek manuscripts.

A little bit of history - there are only 3 Alexandrian manuscripts [mss]. One was found in the trash, the other buried in the desert. None of the 3 match each other and even contradict each other. They are the oldest mss, but are not better.

The KJV, for example, was translated from the Greek Byzantine or Textus Receptus [TR - received texts] mss of which there are over 5,000. They all match up quite nicely other than a few spelling differences and word choices and phrasing, but do not "mess" with the theology as does the Alexandrian. The early church "fathers" from 100 CE and forwards all quote from the TR, not the Alexandrian.

The modern versions are not credible because of the mss that was used. It is obvious from researching this controversial subject, that the modern versions are detrimental to one's spirituality because of the subtle changes in deleted verses, missing words, and mis-worded phrases that encroach on the Deity of Christ.

Another Bible comparison chart:

http://www.av1611.org/biblecom.html

[LindaR]

That is the Bible comparison chart I always use. Thanks for posting the link.

[Princess of Heaven]

great thread