|
|
Post by Guest123 on Dec 24, 2018 14:15:31 GMT -5
Does one have to hold to "KJV-only" beliefs to join here? The SOF seems to imply that the AKJV is the only version any Christian should use. My impression is that any Christian who is not convinced that the KJV is exclusively God's Word in English would be in violation of the SOF and shouldn't join. Clarification would be appreciated.  Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Dec 24, 2018 14:24:19 GMT -5
Feel free to visit and praise the Lord . Its not kjv only .
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Dec 24, 2018 14:24:51 GMT -5
You do not have to be KJV only to join, and you may use text from other translations. All that means is that we fully trust the KJV Bible to be absolute truth, and measure things by it. The main reason that is in the SOF is because there are many who will claim the Bible we have today is not fully trustworthy, that only the original manuscripts are, and they use that to defend not following the Bible. They will claim that when we point out something in scripture, it doesn't mean what it says because of translation errors. But no, we are not demanding that everyone is KJV only to join. We don't allow attacks on the KJV Bible in the forums, but we are not thought police, in the sense that we do not expect everyone must believe exactly as we do on everything. I hope that answers your question.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on Dec 24, 2018 14:36:44 GMT -5
Feel free to use a different translation, as long as it doesn’t result in attacks on KJV. Good translations should be all in harmony with each other, not trying to deligitimize each other.
|
|
Cletus
Senior Member
Posts: 2,517
|
Post by Cletus on Dec 24, 2018 15:49:20 GMT -5
i occasionally use other translations when I quote The Bible. no one has thrown stones at me yet.  |
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Dec 24, 2018 17:23:06 GMT -5
Let every living creature just leap up and praise the LORD .
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest123 on Dec 24, 2018 21:12:24 GMT -5
I appreciate the responses. I think I'll lurk some more and prayerfully consider if I'd be an asset or detriment here. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Dec 24, 2018 21:22:21 GMT -5
I appreciate the responses. I think I'll lurk some more and prayerfully consider if I'd be an asset or detriment here. Thanks. IF you love OUR LORD CHRIST , you surely wont be a detriment here . Just throw those hands up and praise the LORD .
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Dec 26, 2018 4:52:40 GMT -5
I appreciate the responses. I think I'll lurk some more and prayerfully consider if I'd be an asset or detriment here. Thanks.
Even among those who are KJV only, they are not all the same in what that means to them. Some believe that God moved on the translators and the KJV Bible was as inspired as the originals. When I say I am KJV only, I am coming from the point of view that the translators had the manuscripts that were in use and trusted by the church, and used those manuscripts as the foundation of the translation. The translators used the best possible English words when going from Hebrew to English or Greek to English. I recognize that there were times where you might have 3 or 4 Greek words that could only be translated to a single English word, which would cause you to lose something in the translation, but I am saying the best word was used.
My biggest concern is that when the canon was created, it was based on the 66 books, but that doesn't mean just a representation of the contents, but it means everything that was contained within those books. In other words, when the book of Mark was said to be canon, that meant every verse in that book. To come along later and question the last part of Mark chapter 16 is to re-open an already closed canon. If all the canon means is that a book must be represented, you could in theory take out as much of the contents as you like and still claim the canon is in tact. You could have John in your Bible, remove John 3:16, and still claim the canon hasn't been messed with. I hope this helps you to understand more fully why our Statement of Faith contains what it does about the KJV Bible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2019 13:32:04 GMT -5
I like the KJV, but use mainly the NKJV in my teaching as it is easier to read aloud and some of the archaic words have been updated. But of the other 30+ translations that i own, I also us the Hebrew/Greek Interlinear, the NASB, the RSV, HCSB, Rotherham's the JPS Tanakh, the ESV and a few others. Comparing translations, along with the Strong's and Vine's, and of course inquiring of the Spirit of Christ, really helps in understanding the True meaning of the Scriptures. Our English, including the KGV, can really limit understanding as this modern language often tries of convey entire thoughts into a single word, missing some crucial aspect as times of what the writer of the Scripture was saying. Just my 2 cents.  |
|
|
|
Post by John on Jun 12, 2019 16:19:21 GMT -5
I like the KJV, but use mainly the NKJV in my teaching as it is easier to read aloud and some of the archaic words have been updated. But of the other 30+ translations that i own, I also us the Hebrew/Greek Interlinear, the NASB, the RSV, HCSB, Rotherham's the JPS Tanakh, the ESV and a few others. Comparing translations, along with the Strong's and Vine's, and of course inquiring of the Spirit of Christ, really helps in understanding the True meaning of the Scriptures. Our English, including the KGV, can really limit understanding as this modern language often tries of convey entire thoughts into a single word, missing some crucial aspect as times of what the writer of the Scripture was saying. Just my 2 cents. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2019 16:34:34 GMT -5
One quick instance. Jesus' interaction with Peter after the Resurrection, when He asked him "do you love Me?" three times... most misunderstand this interaction to be a reversal of Peter's 3 denials of Christ. But the Greek (and some of the other translations) correctly identify the two separate meanings of the word "love" used in their conversation. It changes what actually transpired there on the shoreline, from man's interpretation to the Truth. And there are countless other instances I could point out, where the English wording leaves much to be desired. Again, to each his own, but our English language period (which didn't exist in the time the Scripture was written) truly does limit our understanding if we stick to just the English words used, and we do miss out on some of the deeper meanings of what the Lord God is revealing. And God bless those who read the 1611 in it's original lettering! I've got mine right next to me here at my desk. I can read it fine, but the lettering is awkward, and the newer King James versions do not subtract anything from the text. |
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Jun 12, 2019 16:42:50 GMT -5
One quick instance. Jesus' interaction with Peter after the Resurrection, when He asked him "do you love Me?" three times... most misunderstand this interaction to be a reversal of Peter's 3 denials of Christ. But the Greek (and some of the other translations) correctly identify the two separate meanings of the word "love" used in their conversation. It changes what actually transpired there on the shoreline, from man's interpretation to the Truth. And there are countless other instances I could point out, where the English wording leaves much to be desired. Again, to each his own, but our English language period (which didn't exist in the time the Scripture was written) truly does limit our understanding if we stick to just the English words used, and we do miss out on some of the deeper meanings of what the Lord God is revealing. And God bless those who read the 1611 in it's original lettering! I've got mine right next to me here at my desk. I can read it fine, but the lettering is awkward, and the newer King James versions do not subtract anything from the text. And / or / concerning TORAH. How many times is "TORAH" in the TORAH, PROPHETS, PSALMS and in the NEW TESTAMENT ? (174 times in OT, 236 times in NT (MORE in the NT than in the OT) Can this be seen in the KJV ? (no, not that I know of) Does it contradict the KJV ? (no, not that I know of) Is it "easy" to find "TORAH" in the BIBLE ? (yes, on biblegateway search CJB, or maybe also Blue Letter Bible Site, and other Hebrew ? sites ) And Yahuweh's Name? and Yahushua's Name ? over 1000 times in the Bible, not seen in English versions. This does not contradict the KJV. It may often help, in fact, to understand a passage that is not clear in English. (this is more common than expected) |
|
|
|
Post by John on Jun 12, 2019 19:17:14 GMT -5
One quick instance. Jesus' interaction with Peter after the Resurrection, when He asked him "do you love Me?" three times... most misunderstand this interaction to be a reversal of Peter's 3 denials of Christ. But the Greek (and some of the other translations) correctly identify the two separate meanings of the word "love" used in their conversation. It changes what actually transpired there on the shoreline, from man's interpretation to the Truth. And there are countless other instances I could point out, where the English wording leaves much to be desired. Again, to each his own, but our English language period (which didn't exist in the time the Scripture was written) truly does limit our understanding if we stick to just the English words used, and we do miss out on some of the deeper meanings of what the Lord God is revealing. And God bless those who read the 1611 in it's original lettering! I've got mine right next to me here at my desk. I can read it fine, but the lettering is awkward, and the newer King James versions do not subtract anything from the text. |
|
Cletus
Senior Member
Posts: 2,517
|
Post by Cletus on Jun 12, 2019 21:47:38 GMT -5
One quick instance. Jesus' interaction with Peter after the Resurrection, when He asked him "do you love Me?" three times... most misunderstand this interaction to be a reversal of Peter's 3 denials of Christ. But the Greek (and some of the other translations) correctly identify the two separate meanings of the word "love" used in their conversation. It changes what actually transpired there on the shoreline, from man's interpretation to the Truth. And there are countless other instances I could point out, where the English wording leaves much to be desired. Again, to each his own, but our English language period (which didn't exist in the time the Scripture was written) truly does limit our understanding if we stick to just the English words used, and we do miss out on some of the deeper meanings of what the Lord God is revealing. And God bless those who read the 1611 in it's original lettering! I've got mine right next to me here at my desk. I can read it fine, but the lettering is awkward, and the newer King James versions do not subtract anything from the text. last wednesday the preacher had a song for us to sing, it was scripture out of the NIV. I had to get out my KJV so i could understand. i had a nice laugh about that. |
|
