Radio Streams
SA Radio
24/7 Radio Stream
VCY America
24/7 Radio Stream

My Favorite Things
Home
NewsroomALL
Events | Notices | Blogs
Newest Audio | Video | Clips
Broadcasters
Church Finder
Live Webcasts
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Category
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Language
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -45 sec
Top Sermons
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
Our Services
Broadcaster Dashboard
Members Only

Breaking News All | United Prayer | SA Center | SA Newsroom
FRONT PAGE  |  7/26/2021
TUESDAY, JUL 21, 2015  |  500 comments
Oldest Bible Text Since Dead Sea Scrolls Discovered

Israeli archaeologists said on Monday they had discerned biblical writing on a charred 1,500-year-old parchment with the help of digital imaging and described the text as the oldest found since the Dead Sea Scrolls.

U.S. and Israeli researchers made the discovery using advanced medical and digital technology to examine the object, first unearthed 45 years ago when then-standard forensics could not decipher any script on the scroll.

"This is a really big discovery," Pnina Shor, curator at the Israel Antiquities Authority, told a news conference where the five-centimeter-long (two-inch) cylindrical object was put on display. ...


CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article
www.charismanews.com

Best way to study the Bible?
  START  
  Recommended sermons | more..
•  Christ's Prayer, Our Holiness • Bill Welzien | 12/29/2019
•  Best way to study the Bible?Dr. Alan Cairns | 3/16/2009
•  What Teacher is Right? • Frank Jones | 10/6/2002
•  Scripture's SufficiencyRev. Geoff Thomas | 8/21/2015
COMMENTS  locked  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: Last 500 user comments shown
News ItemSystem Notice
SermonAudio.com
This forum thread has been closed by SermonAudio.
No further comments are permitted for this news item.

News Item8/12/15 3:03 PM
TS  Find all comments by TS
Jim Lincoln wrote:
The Debate Over the King James Version. This fellow seems to be even-handed. I don't care that much if you use the AKJV or the NASB, as long as you use a Bible and don't try to push your favorite version down someone's throat.
I would suppose everyone might remember something out of the KJV, it has history.
The problem with Wade's argument is, like you, he ignores the fact of the heretics Westcott, Hort, Aland and Nestle's involvement in translating the modern versions.

The King James comes from a better source and far more accurate Greek text, the TR.

I might add that more intelligent and trustworthy Christians were involved in the translation in 1611, than have been used in more modern times.

500

News Item8/12/15 1:19 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Rick Wade wrote:
For some people, the multiplicity of versions is a nuisance, but they accept it, believing that it is all a matter of personal preference. For others, however, this is a serious issue; not because of the inconvenience of multiple versions, but because they believe the King James Version is the only correct version for the church....

Although arguments from tradition and style can be powerful, there might be other considerations which outweigh them. A significant problem with the KJV, of course, is the language. People who did not grow up using the KJV have a hard time understanding it. Some of its words are no longer in use, and the antiquated forms of many words impede the understanding of the text. Over time they can learn to understand it, but without any more compelling reasons than tradition and style, it is hard to see why they should bother.

[URL=http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/kjvdebat.html]]]The Debate Over the King James Version[/URL]. This fellow seems to be even-handed. I don't care that much if you use the AKJV or the NASB, as long as you use a Bible and don't try to push your favorite version down someone's throat.

I would suppose everyone might remember something out of the KJV, it has history.

499

News Item8/12/15 12:01 PM
Frank  Contact via emailFind all comments by Frank
Observer wrote:
The sarcasm is duly noted, as is the misrepresentation in your post. I must have missed the similar sarcastic post on the multi version only approach. You know the new kid on the block with his pseudo-science who wishes to displace the majority witness with a handful of lately discovered texts which the pseudo-science experts assure us are more ancient and therefore more reliable! How do they know? Because they tell us so! Strange that despite all their efforts not one of them can agree on the correct text, and they've been at it over 130 years!
Forgive the sarcasm.
No misrepresentation intended! I figured if the shoe fit then someone should wear it. But, I certainly didn't think it fit every KJV user. I used the KJV for years and had no trouble with it and found that it was easier to memorize from it. Truthfully, my comment wasn't aimed at anyone; simply what I thought is part of the problem. I thought it was pretty good by the way and still do.

Now lastly, I know that you aren't going to try and destroy a "general" statement that is true because it doesn't fit each and every KJV user. That would be like me saying men are stronger than women and then you find some woman power lifter, etc.

498

News Item8/12/15 11:49 AM
Intro  Find all comments by Intro
This is an eye opener:

[URL=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx6bfCPDOfM]]] Anything but the King James Bible - Dr. Kirk DiVietro [/URL]

497

News Item8/12/15 8:46 AM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Dr. Wallace wrote:
Well, you could look at Titus 2:13. One of the interesting things about this text here is that the King James translators knew Greek less well than they knew Latin, and so they constantly relied on the Latin to get themselves through the Greek. When it came to this text, they translated it something like “the appearing of the glory of our great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ,” as if they are two distinct persons. And yet the Greek text is very plain. It says, “the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
Gipp: You inserted a word. I mean, no offense, but you inserted a word which does make it sound like what you’re saying right.
--[URL=https://www.jashow.org/articles/uncategorized/the-king-james-controversy-revisited-program-6/]]]Do New Translations Water Down Important Bible Doctrines?[/URL]

Good article from Ankerberg, BM, you should read it.

496

News Item8/12/15 8:21 AM
B. McCausland  Find all comments by B. McCausland
Mike wrote:
Too general...
Titus 2:13
... there is disagreement...
1. What is too general?
2. There are plenty of passages to demonstrate the deity of Christ. The rendering of KJV in Ti 2:13 follows the Greek syntax making that, as you point out, it could be understood booth ways.

3. Observer: thanks your taking time to explain. It is easy to miss 'sarcasm/jokes' based in associations one is not familiar with.

495

News Item8/12/15 7:25 AM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
B. McCausland wrote:
---
The renderings in the AV are not only more accurate, but convey the stronger meaning closer to the intended point.
Too general, B. There are also such as this:

Titus 2:13

KJV: Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

NASB: looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,

The rendering in the NASB conveys unmistakably that Jesus is God. Deity confirmed. The KJV, by using "..the great God and our Saviour.." rather than "..our great God and Savior.." as in The NASB, conveys potential distinction made between God and Savior, thus lessening the Deity of Christ.

btw if there is disagreement, this is the type of argument the KJV folks use. If the methodology is ok, it's ok both ways

494

News Item8/12/15 7:02 AM
Observer | USA  Find all comments by Observer
Frank wrote:
I believe that the KJ bible is the most accurate translation in the world today and that all other translations are modern and therefore should be rejected or certainly not used in lieu of the KJV. ......
Yes, the above was meant to be purely sarcasm.
The sarcasm is duly noted, as is the misrepresentation in your post. I must have missed the similar sarcastic post on the multi version only approach. You know the new kid on the block with his pseudo-science who wishes to displace the majority witness with a handful of lately discovered texts which the pseudo-science experts assure us are more ancient and therefore more reliable! How do they know? Because they tell us so! Strange that despite all their efforts not one of them can agree on the correct text, and they've been at it over 130 years!

Forgive the sarcasm.

493

News Item8/12/15 6:58 AM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Another question answered.

Dr. Robert Joyner wrote:
At least when you read the modern versions you know the doubtful verses have been deleted. Therefore you know you are reading the pure word of God. When you read the KJV you may be reading a verse which is doubtful or is not in any manuscript in existence.

Actually many verses that are left out of the modern versions are repeats....

...the 1611 KJV added 14 entire books, a total of 172 chapters, called the Apocrypha. Certainly no other version adds or takes away this many verses. The 1611 KJV is the worst version of all about adding verses. How dare the KJV Only people to even talk about leaving out verses! I know Peter Ruckman ... give silly excuses and explanations for the 1611 KJV containing the Apocrypha, but the bottom line is, the original KJV contained the Apocrypha.

To be KJV Only you have to abandon all logic, ignore the facts, spin your view, slant everything in your favor, and have the attitude, “My mind is made up. Don’t bother me with the facts. They don’t matter.”

excerpt from, [URL=http://www.kjvonly.org/robert/joyner_have_we_been_lied_to_pr.html]]]Have We Been Lied to? [Yes!] [/URL]
492

News Item8/12/15 6:57 AM
B. McCausland  Find all comments by B. McCausland
Amended grammar in last paragraph of previous post:

"The Forum, though public, is not part of the state, but of an independent setting with a particular ethos and with the potential choice to reserve rights to guard against 'wild grapes'. Homes, road traffic, institutions ... often exercise self-guarding reserved rights by which privileges become restricted"

491

News Item8/12/15 5:57 AM
B. McCausland  Find all comments by B. McCausland
reminder wrote:
SermonAudio ('s) ... comments board must be ecumenical and free to practice the law of free speech and free religion as per the Constitution.
...it is your 'Christian' duty to recognise their rights and allow respectful debate on the board.
Western thinking is infested with 'rights' mentality to the point on insanity.
Any right comes with responsibilities and all 'rights' are privileges we enjoy.

Illustration: Is 5

"And he fenced it (vineyard) and planted it and ... he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes... What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done? ... I will tell you what I will do ... I will take away the hedge ... and it shall be eaten up; [and] break down the wall ... and it shall be trodden down"
Privileges were taken for granted, then withdrawn.

Posting in SA Forum is a privilege yet is it a pity to observe wild fruit produced instead of grapes.
The Forum, though public, is not part of the state, but of an independent setting with a particular ethos and with the potential choice of reserve rights to guard against 'wild grapes'. Homes, road traffic, institutions ... often exercise self-guarding reserve rights by which privileges become restricted

490

News Item8/12/15 4:51 AM
Just sayin  Find all comments by Just sayin
SteveR wrote:
To me that sage advice just looks like a few immature people bad mouthing Jim Lincoln because they don't agree with him.
If you don't want to interact with him, just ignore his posts
just sayin'
That bad mouthing thing that YOU do, how's that working out for you, hipocrite?!
489

News Item8/12/15 4:26 AM
B. McCausland  Find all comments by B. McCausland
Frank wrote:
Thanks for the reply, but you left off the sarcasm part which was the purpose of my post. No big deal though, if someone reads your post they will in all probability go to the original post and they will notice it.
My apologies but we might have a different sense of humour or simply there was something not understood.
488

News Item8/11/15 11:42 PM
Albert | Ca  Find all comments by Albert
Albert wrote:
It would seem everyone is defining their positions at this time, so I will expand on mine a little more. The kjvo person sees the small differences in the right text, so he would recommend correcting to Greek with the English. The tr person would correct the av if they could. Seeing these two difficulties I would just say that God is in control of the bible and could update it anytime he chooses. Therefore, I believe it to be the way he wants it with no mistakes
Correction, the Greek
487

News Item8/11/15 11:16 PM
Dave | from oz  Find all comments by Dave
oh you are just a loving bundle of joy,you know who you are
You ooze loving kindness.
They shall be known by their fruits.

Up to your old tricks again,
God Bless you

486

News Item8/11/15 9:56 PM
Albert | Ca  Find all comments by Albert
It would seem everyone is defining their positions at this time, so I will expand on mine a little more. The kjvo person sees the small differences in the right text, so he would recommend correcting to Greek with the English. The tr person would correct the av if they could. Seeing these two difficulties I would just say that God is in control of the bible and could update it anytime he chooses. Therefore, I believe it to be the way he wants it with no mistakes
485

News Item8/11/15 9:36 PM
Frank  Contact via emailFind all comments by Frank
B. McCausland wrote:
Needed insight and very much appreciated explanation
Thanks for the reply, but you left off the sarcasm part which was the purpose of my post. No big deal though, if someone reads your post they will in all probability go to the original post and they will notice it.
484

News Item8/11/15 7:43 PM
B. McCausland  Find all comments by B. McCausland
Frank wrote:
I believe that the KJ bible is the most accurate translation in the world today and that all other translations are modern and therefore should be rejected or certainly not used in lieu of the KJV. ... The KJ translators were men of God and God led them in their translation of scripture, although I reluctantly admit that the translation was not perfect. All of the other translators used defective manuscripts and their agenda was to undermine the word of God; therefore they should be avoided. However, since I am a Christian and am called to love my brothers and sisters and know that I must separate myself from any hint that I am a KJV”O” person, I will of course not tell them they are heretics but simply not discerning if they believe differently than I do. They are simply just misled and we all need to learn and grow in this matter...
Needed insight and very much appreciated explanation
483

News Item8/11/15 7:29 PM
SteveR | Mt Zion  Find all comments by SteveR
Unporfitable Servant wrote:
Actually SteveR, it is difficult to have a discussion with links. If in order to discuss the issue at hand you have to read the links and somehow answer the content of the links in a way that lets those who have not read the links know what you are talking about. Jim needs to respond to the questions with his own words if he wants a discussion. Links can be use for research or to back up a point you are making. But when it is the point, then it comes down to a one-sided conversation.
It would be like Jim's infamous Inadequacy of Morality, does he expect people to come back an hour later to pick up the discussion? Links have their place, but not as a replacement for your own thinking or points.
Reminder you are either deliberately ignoring the long history of posts by those mentioned by sister ladybug or you are new to the forum and are speaking of things about which you are ignorant. If the latter is true, then you are being the judgmental person about whom you complain,
To me that sage advice just looks like a few immature people bad mouthing Jim Lincoln because they don't agree with him.

If you don't want to interact with him, just ignore his posts

just sayin'

482

News Item8/11/15 7:12 PM
B. McCausland  Find all comments by B. McCausland
The approach/philosophy of modern bible translators often filters throughout the word renderings provided.

This is an instance found today exhibiting devaluation of meaning in Mat 7:17 by using the adjectives "healthy' and 'diseased', instead of 'good' and 'corrupt', and 'bad fruit' instead of 'evil fruit"

ESV: So, every healthy tree bears good fruit,
but the diseased tree bears bad fruit.

KJV: Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit;
but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit.

The literal meaning of the Greek words are:

GOOD = agathós; "good" :—benefit, well. honest, meet, well, worthy.

CORRUPT = saprós; rotten, i.e. worthless (literally or morally):—bad, corrupt.

EVIL = ponerós; hurtful, i.e. evil, wicked

A tree can be healthy but not conducive for a purpose given, say a healthy oak is no use if desiring apples; and a tree can be diseased but not totally corrupt/worthless. Being 'evil' is more descriptive that being 'bad'. Something bad can indicate not suitable, or convenient, for a particular reason, but good in itself;- evil implies sinful/wicked connotation. ponerós comes translated in most other instances as evil.

The renderings in the AV are not only more accurate, but convey the stronger meaning closer to the intended point.

481
There are a total of 500 user comments displayedSubscribe to these comments
Jump to Page : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 more | last


Bill Parker
The Manner of True Prayer (5)

The Manner of True Prayer
Sunday Service
Eager Avenue Grace Church
Play! | MP4 | RSS


Tech Talk Zoom // Episode 06


Sponsor:
Community Demographic Report ($175)

Gain val­uable ins­ights to help your Church serve the comm­un­ity God has placed you in.
https://churchanswers.com/s..

Sponsor:
Leading a Post-COVID Church

Free eBook by Thom Rainer - A Past­or's Guide to Min­istry Chall­enges & Opp­ort­un­it­ies
https://churchanswers.com/l..

Sponsor: Simple Church in a Post-COVID World
https://churchanswers.com/s..

SPONSOR | 4,600+

SPONSOR




SA UPDATES NEWSLETTER Sign up for a weekly dose of personal thoughts along with interesting content updates. Sign Up
FOLLOW US


Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal

MOBILE
iPhone + iPad
ChurchOne App
Watch
Android
ChurchOne App
Fire Tablet
Wear
Chromecast TV
Apple TV
Android TV
ROKU TV
Amazon Fire TV
Amazon Echo
Kindle Reader


HELP
Knowledgebase
Broadcasters
Listeners
Q&A
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
TECH TALKS

NEWS
Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe
Staff Picks | RSS
SA Newsroom
SERVICES
Dashboard | Info
Cross Publish
Audio | Video | Stats
Sermon Player | Video
Church Finder | Info
Mobile & Apps
Webcast | Multicast
Solo Sites
Internationalization
Podcasting New!
Listen Line New!
Events | Notices
Transcription
Billboards | Biz Cards
Favorites | QR Codes
Online Donations
24x7 Radio Stream
INTEGRATION
Embed Codes
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword | BLB
JSON API

BATCH
Upload via RSS
Upload via FTP
Upload via Dropbox

SUPPORT
Advertising | Local Ads
Support Us
Stories
ABOUT US
The largest and most trusted library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide.

Our Services | Articles of Faith
Broadcast With Us
Earn SA COINS!
Privacy Policy

TECH TALK
Tech Talk Zoom // Episode 06
Copyright © 2021 SermonAudio.