HisManySongs
Passed on, February 28, 2022
This is a topic which has been thoroughly discussed with much more heat than light being generated.
Both sides are well dug in and unwilling to give an inch.
Bible Recommendations
- Thread starter Scott C F
- Start date
Both sides are well dug in and unwilling to give an inch.
Not sure how to take your response? I will assume that some issues have been discussed but is that not the whole of the forum? We debate these issues over and over and as long as no personal attacks etc.. The conversation and debate is allowed?
I understand and I'm not defending the KJV. No translation is perfect and since we do not have all the information to accurately defend one version over another, it's a mooted debate. There are site dedicated to bashing the KJV and others for bashing the NIV and still more against every one written, even the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. There are sites dedicated to the "fact" that the original New Testament was written in Aramaic and not Greek. No one is qualified to say which stories are accurate and true, only more and more speculations. I've said from the beginning that everyone needs to do their own homework and go to the originals - which also begs the question, which ones! 
It's not a debate that will lead to any good other than to stir up dissent, cause the weak to doubt, and the devil wins. God is able to use the green grass or rocks to cry out His word to speak to those willing to listen for His word is written on our hearts.
It's not a debate that will lead to any good other than to stir up dissent, cause the weak to doubt, and the devil wins. God is able to use the green grass or rocks to cry out His word to speak to those willing to listen for His word is written on our hearts.
HisManySongs
Passed on, February 28, 2022
Yes, theses issues are debated ad infinitum with the same results. When the amount of heat exceeds the light being cast, the thread is closed.
Civil debate following the Forum rules is allowed.
Jesus Freak
Previously DanaCovert68
@HisManySongs: if you believe this thread is getting heated, which I just asked about the KJV bible, then by all means close AND lock it up and throw away the key.
No one really answered my question: is the KJV bible the one that I should read? I do have a large print version.
No one really answered my question: is the KJV bible the one that I should read? I do have a large print version.
Jesus Freak
Previously DanaCovert68
I will respond using reddish font to try to preserve clarity.
Words are important but they can not override context. Context is what gives words their exact meaning. I am noticing that you seem to focus on words but seem to be a trifle indifferent to context.
Now, I would like you to consider a few other issues.
When Dinah's brothers exacted retribution for their sister's rape, there was no thought of her being left a spinster...in fact her rapist wanted to marry her. see Gen 34. I'm not offering this as a model response, just as an insight into the thinking of those days. There was much indignation, but no thought of Dinah being left on the shelf.
Next consider the affair of David's daughter Tamar. True, she seems to have lived a life in recluse, but note the attitude of her brother Absalom. His thought is for his sister to put it behind her. see 2 Sam 13 (v20) So it was her 'choice' to live as she did.
I'm not seeing a very strong social stigma here, but a very very distraught young girl..
Next, consider
Deu_17:6 On the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses the one who is to die shall be put to death; a person shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness.
Deu_19:15 "A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established.
Now then in the case of Deu 22:25,26,27. Where are the two + witnesses to this crime, such that the bad guy can be put to death.??
See how context is so vitally important in placing the correct understanding on mere words?
Note also that in V28,29, They are discovered, suggesting the possibility of two + witnesses, yet no thought of execution...a life sentence yes..........
This conversation is I believe not off topic as the thread is interested in what versions of the Bible are 'best'.
I have raised serious objections to the Niv and I have defended my position through the application of a consideration of context and also looking at the broader picture. The use of 'rape' by the Niv does not fit the specific context, nor the context of the whole counsel of God's word.
I believe the use of the word 'rape' in this case by the Niv is unjustifiably wrong and can hamper a proper understanding of Scripture and most importantly, the nature and character of God.
And it is the character of God we need to be understanding here because the way in which things were treated socially 3k years ago are not as we would today, but the Lord is the same yesterday, today and forever.
Yes you are correct here, however, I believe we need to focus on context not mere words.
Think on your words here when considering your later comment.
In your understanding of v25, you see that the rapist only is put to death , leaving his victim to face a life of rejection. Now, in this later case, you argue the exact opposite....why is that? Surely if stigma was an issue, it would have to be an issue also in the case of the victim of V25...no?
Words are important but they can not override context. Context is what gives words their exact meaning. I am noticing that you seem to focus on words but seem to be a trifle indifferent to context.
Now, I would like you to consider a few other issues.
When Dinah's brothers exacted retribution for their sister's rape, there was no thought of her being left a spinster...in fact her rapist wanted to marry her. see Gen 34. I'm not offering this as a model response, just as an insight into the thinking of those days. There was much indignation, but no thought of Dinah being left on the shelf.
Next consider the affair of David's daughter Tamar. True, she seems to have lived a life in recluse, but note the attitude of her brother Absalom. His thought is for his sister to put it behind her. see 2 Sam 13 (v20) So it was her 'choice' to live as she did.
I'm not seeing a very strong social stigma here, but a very very distraught young girl..
Next, consider
Deu_17:6 On the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses the one who is to die shall be put to death; a person shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness.
Deu_19:15 "A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established.
Now then in the case of Deu 22:25,26,27. Where are the two + witnesses to this crime, such that the bad guy can be put to death.??
See how context is so vitally important in placing the correct understanding on mere words?
Note also that in V28,29, They are discovered, suggesting the possibility of two + witnesses, yet no thought of execution...a life sentence yes..........
This conversation is I believe not off topic as the thread is interested in what versions of the Bible are 'best'.
I have raised serious objections to the Niv and I have defended my position through the application of a consideration of context and also looking at the broader picture. The use of 'rape' by the Niv does not fit the specific context, nor the context of the whole counsel of God's word.
I believe the use of the word 'rape' in this case by the Niv is unjustifiably wrong and can hamper a proper understanding of Scripture and most importantly, the nature and character of God.
And it is the character of God we need to be understanding here because the way in which things were treated socially 3k years ago are not as we would today, but the Lord is the same yesterday, today and forever.
MichaelH
Inactive
Never failed me............. In fact..................... The KJV is the only bible that you can use a bible program to reference "Like Phrases" like later rain and expected end.
It's consistent, and only thing I study out of.
I do use other translations to compare though. I am not a KJV only person, but I only read and study from the KJV. Won't steer you wrong.
Blessings.
HisManySongs
Passed on, February 28, 2022
Didn't say it was, just that there is that tendency.
So if she wasn't yet betrothed then, though she was raped, she should be put to death?? are you serious??
I think you missed my points earlier....Was I not clear enough??
Is the betrothal status of the woman an issue here?...really??
Now I ask you, "Where are the witnesses for her innocence, where are the witnesses for her (alleged) attackers guilt??"
Look you seem to be stuck on words at the expense of context and meaning.
If the betrothal status of a rape victim was meant to be an issue, we might reasonably expect that it be covered more fully....like the ungodly defense arguments in a modern day rape trial, except that then it would indeed be ungodly and therefore not to be found in the Law..
"Was she a virgin before the alleged attack? How many sexual partners had she had prior to the alleged incident?" and so on.
You seem to be espousing a very uncaring attitude toward women and girls who fall victim to a sexual predator...I hope this is just a communications problem.
I think I have outlined my concerns with the Niv well enough here and I can see no value in pursuing this particular issue any further with you.
Ok you are turning this into something other than what the bible says in the old testament. I am ex law enforcement and in no way feel how you seem to think I feel. The old testament has God telling the Jews to kill everything in battle. I guess I believe in genocide also? I really have no more words to waste on you.
I would stay with the KJV for English; but have the original Greek & Hebrew on hand for clarification (Strong's Concordance).
But I listed a couple of websites that can be most useful earlier if you are interested...
MichaelH
Inactive
Jesus Freak
Previously DanaCovert68
I have a bible dictionary app on here(my iPod touch) that will help me if I need it.
I think maybe at some point I should start a thread on the KJV, and I am sorry to disagree with those who think there is no real problems with the KJV and the TR text. The most glaring example is Rom 8:1 The very heart of the gospel Paul was teaching. He made a clear statement that justifies the believer "in Christ" from the judgment and condemning power of the law. Then in this later text (1000 years later) with about "6 partial manuscripts" used by the KJV, we find this conditional statement added to this profound truth. With this condition added, the power of what Paul is teaching is diminished if not made void for many who would rejoice at the intended truth. I carry a pocket KJV everyday, I like the translation, I know the words and what they mean. I know what has been added and where the issues of translation are. I would not recommend the KJV for a new believer, maybe a NKJV with footnotes on the different text.
Do you know if they where using the same TR text? Or those few "6" manuscripts? I assume they where so the point is still the same, there are real issues with this Version and with the text used. That have a great effect on the gospel. And thanks for the catch on the signature, I noticed it but decided it was not an issue.
P.S. its right on this one?
The Net Bible also adds this note:
"The earliest and best witnesses of the Alexandrian and Western texts have no additional words for v1. Both the external evidence and the internal evidence are completely compelling for the shortest reading. The scribes were obviously motivated to add such qualifications (interpolated from v4), for otherwise Paul’s gospel smelled too much of grace."!
Dr Harry Ironside has an interesting thought on the variation in translations remarking that...
Careful students of the original text discover that the last part of Romans 8:1 in the King James version is an interpolation properly belonging to verse 4 [Romans 8:4]. The magnificent statement that opens Romans 8 - "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus" - requires no qualifying clause. Our justification does not depend on our walk. Freedom from condemnation is given to all who are in Christ, and to be in Him means to be of the new creation. A glance at the Revised version or any critical translation will show that what I am pointing out is sustained by all the editors. It was man's innate aversion to sovereign grace, I am certain, that brought these qualifying words into the text of the King James version. It seemed too much to believe that freedom from condemnation depended solely on being in Christ Jesus and not on our walking after the Spirit. So it was easy to lift the words from verse 4
"The earliest and best witnesses of the Alexandrian and Western texts have no additional words for v1. Both the external evidence and the internal evidence are completely compelling for the shortest reading. The scribes were obviously motivated to add such qualifications (interpolated from v4), for otherwise Paul’s gospel smelled too much of grace."!
Dr Harry Ironside has an interesting thought on the variation in translations remarking that...
Careful students of the original text discover that the last part of Romans 8:1 in the King James version is an interpolation properly belonging to verse 4 [Romans 8:4]. The magnificent statement that opens Romans 8 - "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus" - requires no qualifying clause. Our justification does not depend on our walk. Freedom from condemnation is given to all who are in Christ, and to be in Him means to be of the new creation. A glance at the Revised version or any critical translation will show that what I am pointing out is sustained by all the editors. It was man's innate aversion to sovereign grace, I am certain, that brought these qualifying words into the text of the King James version. It seemed too much to believe that freedom from condemnation depended solely on being in Christ Jesus and not on our walking after the Spirit. So it was easy to lift the words from verse 4
Last edited: