Vernon J. Willie wrote:Dear fellow lessoners,I work on a computer about eight hours a day for the past two years & have grown in leeps & bounds because of gods using of sermonaudio my thirst for gods word has been temperted by gods wisdom to desern between the different opinions of many godly men both dead & living on a variaty of topics (WARNING) are some scruples running lose even on sermonaudio. i HAVE Discovered I am a Fundementalist,Calvinist,Covanant,Reform,Prodistant,Puritan,Baptist,Elect,Posttrib,Premillennialist(CHRISTIAN) at least for now
Preacher wrote:I visit this site every day and have done for a long time. I am grateful for the faithful men of God who preach the Word unashamedly and without fear or favour. I have learned much from them.Psalm 12:6,7 - I have recently read an amazing book called "The Final Authority" defending the King James. I would like to say that these days we have many versions of the Bible, but only one translation. I had been led to believe that there was essentially little difference between all the versions, but know now I have been duped.The NIV is an accursed virus which has caused a serious infection in English Christendom. I wish it were not the most popular Bible sold today for it is not the Word of God, but a deliberate butchery thereof.
Psalm 12:6,7 - I have recently read an amazing book called "The Final Authority" defending the King James. I would like to say that these days we have many versions of the Bible, but only one translation. I had been led to believe that there was essentially little difference between all the versions, but know now I have been duped.
The NIV is an accursed virus which has caused a serious infection in English Christendom. I wish it were not the most popular Bible sold today for it is not the Word of God, but a deliberate butchery thereof.
I took the previous posters theological temperature and he seems to be in good health.
But if that's your requirement for proof, that I have to have first-hand knowledge in order to discuss this subject, we may as well end this now because I wasn't there and I just rely on people I trust to give me information.
I do believe my KJB to be perfect, without error, and I believe the words of Jesus that said His Word would stand forever. I do believe God was able and willing to give me a Bible I can believe and trust in my own language, English. If you don't believe that, I think you're underestimating God a lot and if the KJB Bible doesn't hit you as God's Word, then what can I say?
I listen to Sam Gipp and Gail Riplinger, the smartest, most insightful and informative people on the Bible that I know. You can use your sources, and I'll use mine, mostly the Bible itself as to what it says about itself.
Murray is so used to using scientific means to the preservation of Scripture that he makes absolutely no room for the Holy Spirit to lead the church into all truth.
That's why although he makes an accurate portrait of the historical settings upon which the KJV was born, he fails to acknowledge the Holy Spirit witness within the people of God in favor of an analysis based strictly on purely political factors.
I prescribe him I Timothy 6:20-21
"Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:which some professing have erred concerning the faith."
What manuscripts? They are not mine!But more substantially, as Jesus said to Pilate, "sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?" (cf. John 18:34) Second-hand "information" is a dangerous thing, as Jesus quite correctly observed.
I doubt very much that this conclusion comes from any original researches of your own. You are merely reproducing what your KJVO "popes" have trotted out.
How many manuscripts and papyri display an Alexandrian text? Tell me!Have you done any study of Greek manuscripts or papyri?What is your estimate of P13, P20, P27, P45, P46, P47, P66, P72, P75, P100, P115, etc. etc.?
BTW, the "very pure" of Psa.12:6 is quite correct. "Purity" admits of degrees; "perfection", however, does not.
Actually, MurrayA, Psalm 12:6,7 talks about purifying God's Word seven times in a furnace of earth, that God's Word is "very pure."
It's one thing to have pure gold with a bit of dross in it that needs to be burned away, and another thing entirely to have fool's gold, a complete fake.
You can't get good fruit from a rotten tree, and your manuscripts are corrupt, so how can you expect corrupt manuscripts to produce an accurate, pure Bible?
2. "All the Bibles that came before the KJB were perfect, but less perfect than the KJB,"This is a nonsense statement! There are no degrees of perfection!
3. "A few pilgrims across the ocean..." Come off it! Puritanism was a mainstream movement in the C17th. But following 1620 Puritan pilgrims, with their Geneva Bibles, came across in droves. You have not answered my point about Puritanism being the dominant spiritual movement in those days. They weren't just "a few". Or are you a sympathiser with the Anglican formalists of that era?
4. As to preservation, yes, God has preserved His Word, but I have a different view of that preservation than you and the KJVO movement. To take Psalm 12:6-7, even if that is a statement about preserving the Word (it is not - not there anyway), to equate that preservation with an English version some 2600 years into the future is a logical jump of gargantuan proportions!
MurrayA, you are the one who hasn't responded to the points I've brought up and still haven't given a convincing argument why a few Pilgrims across the ocean should be able to hold up the King James Bible. People were free to use whatever Bible they wanted, and the fact is that people took to the KJB like ducks to water.
But my main points which you have just ignored are:
1. Psalm 12:6,7
2. Jesus words about His Word never passing away.
3. That God promised to preserve His Word, God's Word is higher than everything else. God is able to give us a Bible we can believe and trust that is error free.
4. All the Bibles that came before the KJB were perfect, but less perfect than the KJB, in that they were accurate translations from the true manuscripts.
5. The Bishops Bible was a compilation of the other Bibles also.
As to the number of translators,you can have that one. Chalk one up to MurrayA.
A condition David saw when few righteous were present
2 They (the ungodly of V 1) speak vanity every one with his neighbour: [with] flattering lips [and] with a double heart do they speak.
The Lord's response:Ps 12:3 The LORD shall (future tense) cut off all flattering lips, [and] the tongue that speaketh proud things:
Psa 12:1-5 - A statement of fact about the faithful men failing and God's response, but V 6,7 makes it clear his words will never fail.
6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
They will prevail even during the times when the wicked men are exalted and they walk on every side.
This is comforting!
I notice that you did not reply to the other points of fact I raised: your peccadilloes about the number of the translators, and the degree to which Tyndale's translations appeared in the KJV.
The rest was just rhetorical slather.
BTW, I very much believe in using phonics to teach reading! But I don't see what that has to do with the issue at hand, except as one more item of abuse, for which it serves you well.
Psalm 12:6,7 is not rhetoric or bile or "standard King James rhetoric."
Nor are the words of Jesus when he said His Word would never pass away.
And if you want to get into the weeds, the fact is your NASB is a poor translation from corrupt manuscripts that were mangled and manhandled by Origin and other Platonian heretics, straight from the RCs to you, Mr. Murray.
So you are deceived and deceiving, using your position and your academic credentials as a cover.
But the Word of God is sharper than a two-edged sword, and you can't fight against it. God's Word stands on its own, and has a power all its own, which your paraphrases from your corrupt manuscripts do not have.
You and JD like to blow a lot of smoke at each other, and pose and posture back and forth. Most people wouldn't bother with such a chameleon and heretic as he, but you have found your soulmate to post with.
You remind me of the professors in the teachers colleges who sneer and mock at phonics as a method to teach reading.
It seems that all you blokes are capable of is spitting out the standard KJV-only line; no argumentation; no interaction with evidence; no care for facts. Just bile-filled rhetoric.So just turn it off.
On matters of fact:1. The number of translators were 47, not 54. But that soon reduced to 46 with the death in 1607 of Dr. John Reynolds of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. His place was never refilled.
2. The translators were instructed to make the Bishops' Bible of 1568 the basis of their work, while they could refer to Tyndale. They did this, but Tyndale's work did figure rather more than James would have wished. However, it is simply incorrect to state, as you do, that "Most of Tyndale's work was taken intact into it." Space forbids a detailed study, and you probably would not listen anyway.
3. Psalm 12:6-7 does not say what you and KJVO-ers allege that it says. I discuss this matter on my website (forthcoming).