Archie
Junior Member
Non,je ne regrette rein!!!!
Posts: 64
|
Post by Archie on Nov 18, 2014 5:42:55 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 6:12:01 GMT -5
www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/1611_authorized_king_james.htmFor a quick comparison I recommend that people study chapter 8 of the Book of Acts i.e. Philip's encounter with the Ethiopian Eunuch, in both the KJV and the NIV. This is only one of MANY examples of discrepancy between these (and other) versions. You will be able to decide for yourselves which of the two is the Word of God and which is not. I also recommend a "proper" study (there are many sources available) of the sources of the KJV and every other Bible translation in the English language.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 6:13:29 GMT -5
A Brief History of the King James Bible
By Dr. Laurence M. Vance
As the reign of Elizabeth (1558-1603) was coming to a close, we find a draft for an act of Parliament for a new version of the Bible: "An act for the reducing of diversities of bibles now extant in the English tongue to one settled vulgar translated from the original." The Bishop's Bible of 1568, although it may have eclipsed the Great Bible, was still rivaled by the Geneva Bible. Nothing ever became of this draft during the reign of Elizabeth, who died in 1603, and was succeeded by James 1, as the throne passed from the Tudors to the Stuarts. James was at that time James VI of Scotland, and had been for thirty-seven years. He was born during the period between the Geneva and the Bishop's Bible.
One of the first things done by the new king was the calling of the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604 "for the hearing, and for the determining, things pretended to be amiss in the church." Here were assembled bishops, clergymen, and professors, along with four Puritan divines, to consider the complaints of the Puritans. Although Bible revision was not on the agenda, the Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, "moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original."
The king rejoined that he:
"Could never yet see a Bible well translated in English; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva is the worst. I wish some special pains were taken for an uniform translation, which should be done by he best learned men in both Universities, then reviewed by the Bishops, presented to the Privy Council, lastly ratified by the Royal authority, to be read in the whole Church, and none other." Accordingly, a resolution came forth:
"That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; and this to be set out and printed, without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England in time of divine service." The next step was the actual selection of the men who were to perform the work. In July of 1604, James wrote to Bishop Bancroft that he had "appointed certain learned men, to the number of four and fifty, for the translating of the Bible." These men were the best biblical scholars and linguists of their day. In the preface to their completed work it is further stated that "there were many chosen, that were greater in other men's eyes than in their own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise. Again, they came or were thought to come to the work, learned, not to learn." Other men were sought out, according to James, "so that our said intended translation may have the help and furtherance of all our principal learned men within this our kingdom."
Although fifty-four men were nominated, only forty-seven were known to have taken part in the work of translation. The translators were organized into six groups, and met respectively at Westminster, Cambridge, and Oxford. Ten at Westminster were assigned Genesis through 2 Kings; seven had Romans through Jude. At Cambridge, eight worked on 1 Chronicles through Ecclesiastes, while seven others handled the Apocrypha. Oxford employed seven to translate Isaiah through Malachi; eight occupied themselves with the Gospels, Acts, and Revelation.
Fifteen general rules were advanced for the guidance of the translators:
1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit.
2. The names of the Prophets, and the Holy Writers, with the other Names of the Text, to be retained, as nigh as may be, accordingly as they were vulgarly used.
3. The Old Ecclesiastical Words to be kept, viz. the Word Church not to be translated Congregation &c.
4. When a Word hath divers Significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most of the Ancient Fathers, being agreeable to the Propriety of the Place, and the Analogy of the Faith.
5. The Division of the Chapters to be altered, either not at all, or as little as may be, if Necessity so require.
6. No Marginal Notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek Words, which cannot without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed in the Text.
7. Such Quotations of Places to be marginally set down as shall serve for the fit Reference of one Scripture to another.
8. Every particular Man of each Company, to take the same Chapter or Chapters, and having translated or amended them severally by himself, where he thinketh good, all to meet together, confer what they have done, and agree for their Parts what shall stand.
9. As any one Company hath dispatched any one Book in this Manner they shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and judiciously, for His Majesty is very careful in this Point.
10. If any Company, upon the Review of the Book so sent, doubt or differ upon any Place, to send them Word thereof; note the Place, and withal send the Reasons, to which if they consent not, the Difference to be compounded at the general Meeting, which is to be of the chief Persons of each Company, at the end of the Work.
11. When any Place of special Obscurity is doubted of, Letters to be directed by Authority, to send to any Learned Man in the Land, for his Judgment of such a Place.
12. Letters to be sent from every Bishop to the rest of his Clergy, admonishing them of this Translation in hand; and to move and charge as many skilful in the Tongues; and having taken pains in that kind, to send his particular Observations to the Company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford.
13. The Directors in each Company, to be the Deans of Westminster, and Chester for that Place; and the King's Professors in the Hebrew or Greek in either University.
14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the Text than the Bishops Bible: Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, Whitchurch's, Geneva.
15. Besides the said Directors before mentioned, three or four of the most Ancient and Grave Divines, in either of the Universities, not employed in Translating, to be assigned by the vice-Chancellor, upon Conference with the rest of the Heads, to be Overseers of the Translations as well Hebrew as Greek, for the better observation of the 4th Rule above specified.
The work began to take shape in 1604 and progressed steadily. The translators expressed their early thoughts in their preface as:
"Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one,...but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against, that hath been our endeavor."
They had at their disposal all the previous English translations to which they did not disdain:
"We are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henry's time, or King Edward's...or Queen Elizabeth's of ever renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance."
And, as the translators themselves also acknowledged, they had a multitude of sources from which to draw from: "Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch." The Greek editions of Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza were all accessible, as were the Complutensian and Antwerp Polyglots, and the Latin translations of Pagninus, Termellius, and Beza.
Four years were spent on the preliminary translation by the six groups. The translators were exacting and particular in their work, as related in their preface:
Neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered: but having and using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have at the length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see.
The conferences of each of the six being ended, nine months were spent at Stationers' Hall in London for review and revision of the work by two men each from the Westminster, Cambridge, and Oxford companies. The final revision was then completed by Myles Smith and Thomas Bilson, with a preface supplied by Smith.
The completed work was issued in 1611, the complete title page reading:
"THE HOLY BIBLE, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: and with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties Special Commandment. Appointed to be read in Churches. Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. ANNO DOM. 1611." The New Testament had a separate title page, the whole of it reading:
"THE NEWE Testament of our Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST. Newly Translated out of the Originall Greeke: and with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties speciall Commandment. IMPRINTED at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Majestie. ANNO DOM. 1611. Cum Privilegio." The King James Bible was, in its first editions, even larger than the Great Bible. It was printed in black letter with small italicized Roman type to represent those words not in the original languages.
A dedicatory epistle to King James, which also enhanced the completed work, recalled the King's desire that "there should be one more exact Translation of the Holy Scriptures into the English tongue." The translators expressed that they were "poor instruments to make GOD'S holy Truth to be yet more and more known" while at the same time recognizing that "Popish persons" sought to keep the people "in ignorance and darkness."
The Authorized Version, as it came to be called, went through several editions and revisions. Two notable editions were that of 1629, the first ever printed at Cambridge, and that of 1638, also at Cambridge, which was assisted by John Bois and Samuel Ward, two of the original translators. In 1657, the Parliament considered another revision, but it came to naught. The most important editions were those of the 1762 Cambridge revision by Thomas Paris, and the 1769 Oxford revision by Benjamin Blayney. One of the earliest concrdances was A Concordance to the Bible of the Last Translation, by John Down-ham, affixed to a printing of 1632.
The Authorized Version eclipsed all previous versions of the Bible. The Geneva Bible was last printed in 1644, but the notes continued to be published with the King James text. Subsequent versions of the Bible were likewise eclipsed, for the Authorized Version was the Bible until the advent of the Revised Version and ensuing modern translations. It is still accepted as such by its defenders, and recognized as so by its detractors. Alexander Geddes (d. 1802), a Roman Catholic priest, who in 1792 issued the first colume of his own translation of the Bible, accordingly paid tribute to the Bible of his time:
"The highest eulogiums have been made on the translation of James the First, both by our own writers and by foreigners. And, indeed, if accuracy, fidelity, and the strictest attention to the letter of the text, be supposed to constitute the qualities of an excellent version, this of all versions, must, in general, be accounted the most excellent. Every sentence, every work, every syllable, every letter and point, seem to have been weighed with the nicest exactitude; and expressed, either in the text, or margin, with the greatest precision." As to whether the Authorized Version was ever officially "authorized," Brooke Westcott, one of the members of the committee that produced the Revised Version, and the editor, with Fenton Hort, of an edition of the Greek New Testament, stated that:
From the middle of the seventeenth century, the King's Bible has been the acknowledged Bible of the English-speaking nations throughout the world simply because it is the best. A revision which embodied the ripe fruits of nearly a century of labour, and appealed to the religious instinct of a great Christian people, gained by its own internal character a vital authority which could never have been secured by any edict of sovereign rulers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 6:33:47 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 12:32:45 GMT -5
that might be your biblical scholars take on it but not all think that.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 12:40:33 GMT -5
that might be your biblical scholars take on it but not all think that..... What do you u think Wally .... and, perhaps more importantly, why do you think what it is that you think? Matt10
|
|
|
Post by snow on Nov 18, 2014 14:22:31 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 15:15:53 GMT -5
The Word of God is foolishness to those who don't believe it, but it is Spirit and Life to those who do. Reza's remarks are "slow," because the Spirit "quickens!"
|
|
|
Post by snow on Nov 18, 2014 15:29:37 GMT -5
The Word of God is foolishness to those who don't believe it, but it is Spirit and Life to those who do. Reza's remarks are "slow," because the Spirit "quickens!" I don't believe that kind of stuff for a minute. It's just a way to say, 'you'll never get it like I can because you don't have guidance from the holy spirit'. Divisive and pompous imo. Not at all loving and that is the only thing that matters in life. How well we learn to be compassionate and loving, bringing people together instead of dividing them with statements like that one. Do you have any idea how that sounds and how it divides? He has done a huge amount of work and he isn't the only one that knows about the origins of the books in the bible. By ignoring what is commonly known and saying you get it because you have the holy spirit, is just keeping everyone at odds with each other. How is that Godly?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 15:55:34 GMT -5
The Word of God is foolishness to those who don't believe it, but it is Spirit and Life to those who do. Reza's remarks are "slow," because the Spirit "quickens!" I don't believe that kind of stuff for a minute. It's just a way to say, 'you'll never get it like I can because you don't have guidance from the holy spirit'. Divisive and pompous imo. Not at all loving and that is the only thing that matters in life. How well we learn to be compassionate and loving, bringing people together instead of dividing them with statements like that one. Do you have any idea how that sounds and how it divides? He has done a huge amount of work and he isn't the only one that knows about the origins of the books in the bible. By ignoring what is commonly known and saying you get it because you have the holy spirit, is just keeping everyone at odds with each other. How is that Godly? FIRST SNOW....Please consider how offensive this man's remarks are to those who truly believe the Word of God before we look at responses! I apologise for posting this "unGodly" quote. John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.1 Cor. 2.14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Nov 18, 2014 16:22:17 GMT -5
I don't believe that kind of stuff for a minute. It's just a way to say, 'you'll never get it like I can because you don't have guidance from the holy spirit'. Divisive and pompous imo. Not at all loving and that is the only thing that matters in life. How well we learn to be compassionate and loving, bringing people together instead of dividing them with statements like that one. Do you have any idea how that sounds and how it divides? He has done a huge amount of work and he isn't the only one that knows about the origins of the books in the bible. By ignoring what is commonly known and saying you get it because you have the holy spirit, is just keeping everyone at odds with each other. How is that Godly? FIRST SNOW....Please consider how offensive this man's remarks are to those who truly believe the Word of God before we look at responses! I apologise for posting this "unGodly" quote. John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.1 Cor. 2.14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.Ram wouldn't you rather know that how the bible was made up rather than just believing in it? Why would you want to believe something if it's been shown over and over to not be accurate? Why believe in a divisive message when you don't need to?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 16:23:46 GMT -5
FIRST SNOW....Please consider how offensive this man's remarks are to those who truly believe the Word of God before we look at responses! I apologise for posting this "unGodly" quote. John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.1 Cor. 2.14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.Ram wouldn't you rather know that how the bible was made up rather than just believing in it? Why would you want to believe something if it's been shown over and over to not be accurate? Why believe in a divisive message when you don't need to? Snow, quite simply because I believe in the foolish things of God rather than the wisdom of man! You might believe in the inaccuracy of the Bible. I believe otherwise! Jude 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
2 Peter 3 3 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Nov 18, 2014 16:43:43 GMT -5
Ram wouldn't you rather know that how the bible was made up rather than just believing in it? Why would you want to believe something if it's been shown over and over to not be accurate? Why believe in a divisive message when you don't need to? Snow, quite simply because I believe in the foolish things of God rather than the wisdom of man! You might believe in the inaccuracy of the Bible. I believe otherwise! Jude 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
2 Peter 3 3 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Ram who do you think wrote the Bible, if it wasn't man? I have never said you were foolish, but good try at putting that onto me. If you have decided that this message is Godly, then go for it. But I cannot see it as loving or compassionate and that's what matters to me. The verses you have posted is a message of division meant to manipulate and guilt people. Do you really believe a loving God would write stuff like that?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2014 16:58:05 GMT -5
Snow, quite simply because I believe in the foolish things of God rather than the wisdom of man! You might believe in the inaccuracy of the Bible. I believe otherwise! Jude 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
2 Peter 3 3 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Ram who do you think wrote the Bible, if it wasn't man? I have never said you were foolish, but good try at putting that onto me. If you have decided that this message is Godly, then go for it. But I cannot see it as loving or compassionate and that's what matters to me. The verses you have posted is a message of division meant to manipulate and guilt people. Do you really believe a loving God would write stuff like that? Snow, you have just highlighted why I have no faith in the wisdom of man. Nowhere did I accuse you of saying I was foolish. Nor was it a "good try" at putting that onto you. Nothing was further from my mind. The Bible clearly tells us that the things of God are foolish in man's eyes. It is that foolishness that I am happy to take on board, nothing to do with you. These words that I quoted are Spirit and life to those who truly believe them. Yes God is a very loving and patient God, but he is also a wrathful God. A good balance is to see these things in equal measure.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Nov 18, 2014 21:04:41 GMT -5
Ram who do you think wrote the Bible, if it wasn't man? I have never said you were foolish, but good try at putting that onto me. If you have decided that this message is Godly, then go for it. But I cannot see it as loving or compassionate and that's what matters to me. The verses you have posted is a message of division meant to manipulate and guilt people. Do you really believe a loving God would write stuff like that? Snow, you have just highlighted why I have no faith in the wisdom of man. Nowhere did I accuse you of saying I was foolish. Nor was it a "good try" at putting that onto you. Nothing was further from my mind. The Bible clearly tells us that the things of God are foolish in man's eyes. It is that foolishness that I am happy to take on board, nothing to do with you. These words that I quoted are Spirit and life to those who truly believe them. Yes God is a very loving and patient God, but he is also a wrathful God. A good balance is to see these things in equal measure. Ok, thanks for the clarification. Bringing up belief in the foolishness of believing in God seemed to come out of no where and I don't believe people are foolish for believing in God. I don't see a wrathful God as being a good balance though to get back to the subject. An all powerful being should have no need to be wrathful. There should be nothing it needs to strike out against when he has the power to just bring people to their senses through love.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Nov 18, 2014 21:23:44 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 4:27:55 GMT -5
Snow, you have just highlighted why I have no faith in the wisdom of man. Nowhere did I accuse you of saying I was foolish. Nor was it a "good try" at putting that onto you. Nothing was further from my mind. The Bible clearly tells us that the things of God are foolish in man's eyes. It is that foolishness that I am happy to take on board, nothing to do with you. These words that I quoted are Spirit and life to those who truly believe them. Yes God is a very loving and patient God, but he is also a wrathful God. A good balance is to see these things in equal measure. Ok, thanks for the clarification. Bringing up belief in the foolishness of believing in God seemed to come out of no where and I don't believe people are foolish for believing in God. I don't see a wrathful God as being a good balance though to get back to the subject. An all powerful being should have no need to be wrathful. There should be nothing it needs to strike out against when he has the power to just bring people to their senses through love. Snow, this is how a person learns of a truly non-wrathful God. Obedience is the key. Matthew 11:29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.On the other hand, you may visit some of the mainstream churches nowadays. Through them, Satan is doing some rather nice "cover versions" of God's word. All lovey-dovey. No wrathful God. In fact, Satan is more "Christian" than Jesus in many respects.....if you know what I mean!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 4:54:55 GMT -5
Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?*** THE AUTHORIZED VERSION WAS SPECIALLY COMMANDED BY A KING *** A king (King James VI (Scotland) & I (England)) specially commanded the translation of the Authorized Version of the Bible at the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604. On earth, amongst men, there is no greater authority than a king-- Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou? The king is supreme. 1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; SUPREME, a. Highest in authority; holding the highest place in government or power. King James was not only King of Great Britain--a Bible-believing, Protestant nation--but he was also the head of the Church of England. The King's College website states (emphases ours), The development of the Bible in English differs from that of other European vernacular translations. Only England has an "authorised version", issued under the auspices of a king who was also the head of the Church. The vernacular Bible was illegal in England long before the Reformation and so began its development at a great disadvantage, but once England became a Protestant country the translated Bible became a symbol of [the] state. THE KJV IS THE ONLY VERSION OF THE BIBLE IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE WHICH HAS THE AUTHORITY OF A KING. When King James took the throne we saw the beginnings of the British Empire which became the World's super power. Following close on its heels as it conquered the world was the Word of God by virtue of the KJV which evangelised the world. It is my belief that God raised up the British Empire for this purpose. Since it was produced Satan has tried everything in his power to discredit King James and his Authorised version of the Bible, but it still stands because it is the Word of God. Over the last 100+ years we have seen the production of "alternative" versions (from different and corrupt texts) and the rate these are being produced at is growing apace. Satan is attempting to suffocate the KJV in a cloud of more easily read, but corrupted translations. I understand he is now working through publishers who are now producing copies of "amended" KJVs. The UK has been the seat of much of this. Is it any wonder the country has lost God's favour?
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Nov 19, 2014 6:26:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Nov 19, 2014 7:03:33 GMT -5
Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?*** THE AUTHORIZED VERSION WAS SPECIALLY COMMANDED BY A KING *** A king (King James VI (Scotland) & I (England)) specially commanded the translation of the Authorized Version of the Bible at the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604. On earth, amongst men, there is no greater authority than a king-- Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou? The king is supreme. 1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; SUPREME, a. Highest in authority; holding the highest place in government or power. King James was not only King of Great Britain--a Bible-believing, Protestant nation--but he was also the head of the Church of England. The King's College website states (emphases ours), The development of the Bible in English differs from that of other European vernacular translations. Only England has an "authorised version", issued under the auspices of a king who was also the head of the Church. The vernacular Bible was illegal in England long before the Reformation and so began its development at a great disadvantage, but once England became a Protestant country the translated Bible became a symbol of [the] state. THE KJV IS THE ONLY VERSION OF THE BIBLE IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE WHICH HAS THE AUTHORITY OF A KING. When King James took the throne we saw the beginnings of the British Empire which became the World's super power. Following close on its heels as it conquered the world was the Word of God by virtue of the KJV which evangelised the world. It is my belief that God raised up the British Empire for this purpose. Since it was produced Satan has tried everything in his power to discredit King James and his Authorised version of the Bible, but it still stands because it is the Word of God. Over the last 100+ years we have seen the production of "alternative" versions (from different and corrupt texts) and the rate these are being produced at is growing apace. Satan is attempting to suffocate the KJV in a cloud of more easily read, but corrupted translations. I understand he is now working through publishers who are now producing copies of "amended" KJVs. The UK has been the seat of much of this. Is it any wonder the country has lost God's favour? A King who wanted to divorce his wife to marry his mistress ! Then started the Church of England !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 10:23:00 GMT -5
Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?*** THE AUTHORIZED VERSION WAS SPECIALLY COMMANDED BY A KING *** A king (King James VI (Scotland) & I (England)) specially commanded the translation of the Authorized Version of the Bible at the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604. On earth, amongst men, there is no greater authority than a king-- Ecclesiastes 8:4 Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou? The king is supreme. 1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; SUPREME, a. Highest in authority; holding the highest place in government or power. King James was not only King of Great Britain--a Bible-believing, Protestant nation--but he was also the head of the Church of England. The King's College website states (emphases ours), The development of the Bible in English differs from that of other European vernacular translations. Only England has an "authorised version", issued under the auspices of a king who was also the head of the Church. The vernacular Bible was illegal in England long before the Reformation and so began its development at a great disadvantage, but once England became a Protestant country the translated Bible became a symbol of [the] state. THE KJV IS THE ONLY VERSION OF THE BIBLE IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE WHICH HAS THE AUTHORITY OF A KING. When King James took the throne we saw the beginnings of the British Empire which became the World's super power. Following close on its heels as it conquered the world was the Word of God by virtue of the KJV which evangelised the world. It is my belief that God raised up the British Empire for this purpose. Since it was produced Satan has tried everything in his power to discredit King James and his Authorised version of the Bible, but it still stands because it is the Word of God. Over the last 100+ years we have seen the production of "alternative" versions (from different and corrupt texts) and the rate these are being produced at is growing apace. Satan is attempting to suffocate the KJV in a cloud of more easily read, but corrupted translations. I understand he is now working through publishers who are now producing copies of "amended" KJVs. The UK has been the seat of much of this. Is it any wonder the country has lost God's favour? A King who wanted to divorce his wife to marry his mistress ! Then started the Church of England ! King Henry VIII !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 10:29:45 GMT -5
Most of the errors in early versions of the KJV were "printing" errors not errors in translation. Consider the primitive printing methods of the times. Here is an interesting link. www.biblestudy.org/basicart/bible-errors.htmlIn considering the so called errors, one has to compare the "corrections" against the text to see if it alters the meaning of the text. The KJV outperforms every other translation in the English language.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Nov 19, 2014 13:14:34 GMT -5
Ok, thanks for the clarification. Bringing up belief in the foolishness of believing in God seemed to come out of no where and I don't believe people are foolish for believing in God. I don't see a wrathful God as being a good balance though to get back to the subject. An all powerful being should have no need to be wrathful. There should be nothing it needs to strike out against when he has the power to just bring people to their senses through love. Snow, this is how a person learns of a truly non-wrathful God. Obedience is the key. Matthew 11:29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.On the other hand, you may visit some of the mainstream churches nowadays. Through them, Satan is doing some rather nice "cover versions" of God's word. All lovey-dovey. No wrathful God. In fact, Satan is more "Christian" than Jesus in many respects.....if you know what I mean! Well I have to agree with you about modern day churches. Satan is the bad guy and God is just love. Never do I hear about how God committed all those genocides in church on Sunday morning. That is conveniently swept under the rug. My birth family are fundamentalist Baptists and they don't know about half the stuff I ask them. It's not what is read in church so they just don't know. The Christian God is a very volatile being. One never knows when he will commit genocide. Not someone I would worship that's for sure. If there is any good feeling coming to you it's likely because it was in your heart to start with. People give credit to this being when it's them all along that are loving and good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2014 13:39:41 GMT -5
Snow, this is how a person learns of a truly non-wrathful God. Obedience is the key. Matthew 11:29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.On the other hand, you may visit some of the mainstream churches nowadays. Through them, Satan is doing some rather nice "cover versions" of God's word. All lovey-dovey. No wrathful God. In fact, Satan is more "Christian" than Jesus in many respects.....if you know what I mean! Well I have to agree with you about modern day churches. Satan is the bad guy and God is just love. Never do I hear about how God committed all those genocides in church on Sunday morning. That is conveniently swept under the rug. My birth family are fundamentalist Baptists and they don't know about half the stuff I ask them. It's not what is read in church so they just don't know. The Christian God is a very volatile being. One never knows when he will commit genocide. Not someone I would worship that's for sure. If there is any good feeling coming to you it's likely because it was in your heart to start with. People give credit to this being when it's them all along that are loving and good. That that thou doth speakest on behalf of thy observations is certainly true. Jesus preached "Love thy God/neighbour" and "coming wrath of God" in about equal proportions. Modern churches focus on the former. So much has this happened in recent times they are oblivious to the wrathful promises of God. This is Satan's work and partly explains my remark that he is often more "Christian" than Christ as modern day Christianity only sees the lovey dovey Gospel. It blinds people to the coming wrath of God and encourages an anything goes and anything is accepted gospel. All is covered in love. I disagreeth with thee on God being a very volatile being. God exercised patience in great abundance in the OT before he brought about his judgement. In the NT it has been over 2000 years, though time is running out. Do you know of anyone else with that kind of patience? God is extending that patience to you too! As Bert would imply.... "Though the wallaby cannot jump as high, nor as far, as the kangaroo, doth it crave those attributes?" In all things, crave the contentment of the wallaby!
|
|
Archie
Junior Member
Non,je ne regrette rein!!!!
Posts: 64
|
Post by Archie on Nov 19, 2014 20:54:45 GMT -5
Once , the Kings word was power. Nowadays , not so.
So ,King James had his cardinal write a bible to control people ,as the second most powerful word ,was from the priest.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Nov 19, 2014 21:28:57 GMT -5
Well I have to agree with you about modern day churches. Satan is the bad guy and God is just love. Never do I hear about how God committed all those genocides in church on Sunday morning. That is conveniently swept under the rug. My birth family are fundamentalist Baptists and they don't know about half the stuff I ask them. It's not what is read in church so they just don't know. The Christian God is a very volatile being. One never knows when he will commit genocide. Not someone I would worship that's for sure. If there is any good feeling coming to you it's likely because it was in your heart to start with. People give credit to this being when it's them all along that are loving and good. That that thou doth speakest on behalf of thy observations is certainly true. Jesus preached "Love thy God/neighbour" and "coming wrath of God" in about equal proportions. Modern churches focus on the former. So much has this happened in recent times they are oblivious to the wrathful promises of God. This is Satan's work and partly explains my remark that he is often more "Christian" than Christ as modern day Christianity only sees the lovey dovey Gospel. It blinds people to the coming wrath of God and encourages an anything goes and anything is accepted gospel. All is covered in love. I disagreeth with thee on God being a very volatile being. God exercised patience in great abundance in the OT before he brought about his judgement. In the NT it has been over 2000 years, though time is running out. Do you know of anyone else with that kind of patience? God is extending that patience to you too! As Bert would imply.... "Though the wallaby cannot jump as high, nor as far, as the kangaroo, doth it crave those attributes?" In all things, crave the contentment of the wallaby! lol Ram, I will try to better in the coming days to have the contentment of the wallaby!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 3:24:42 GMT -5
Once , the Kings word was power. Nowadays , not so. So ,King James had his cardinal write a bible to control people ,as the second most powerful word ,was from the priest. Yes God's system of earthly Government has eroded away to "rule by the will of the people." Kings were duty bound to be fully answerable to God for their standard and quality of Government. God never wanted democracy. That's what put his Son on the cross! With the coming of Jimmy (a Scotsman I may add.......wait a minute, so was Irvine?), the Bible, God's word was made freely available to all as well as freedom of religion, to believe according to one's conscience. Things didn't happen overnight. Scotland and England had had many years of internal religious wars and strife. This in part continued through the following reigns of Jimmy's progeny, i.e. Chic I and his laddie, Chic II, but Jimmy's spread of the Word through his Authorised Version eventually brought about freedom of religious conscience in GB, and with the growing British Empire, Jimmy's Bible steadily and surely evangelised the whole world, just as God's Word said would happen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2014 3:34:08 GMT -5
That that thou doth speakest on behalf of thy observations is certainly true. Jesus preached "Love thy God/neighbour" and "coming wrath of God" in about equal proportions. Modern churches focus on the former. So much has this happened in recent times they are oblivious to the wrathful promises of God. This is Satan's work and partly explains my remark that he is often more "Christian" than Christ as modern day Christianity only sees the lovey dovey Gospel. It blinds people to the coming wrath of God and encourages an anything goes and anything is accepted gospel. All is covered in love. I disagreeth with thee on God being a very volatile being. God exercised patience in great abundance in the OT before he brought about his judgement. In the NT it has been over 2000 years, though time is running out. Do you know of anyone else with that kind of patience? God is extending that patience to you too! As Bert would imply.... "Though the wallaby cannot jump as high, nor as far, as the kangaroo, doth it crave those attributes?" In all things, crave the contentment of the wallaby! lol Ram, I will try to better in the coming days to have the contentment of the wallaby! Or the Koala! Is it not the most content of beings when it plucks the leaves of the eucalyptus tree? Has Bert not driven home this message time and again? Think not after thine own desires, but desire after the examples of the marsupial!
|
|