False Bibles, An Enemy of Soul Winning

FlamingTorch.org ^ | Unknown | Jack Hyles

[fortheDeclaration]

Bump for read

[connectthedots]

Did you know that the Boers of South Africa at the turn of the last century claimed that the Dutch Bible was the one true inspired version of the Bible? What makes you think the KJV is any better than the Dutch Bible of the Boers?

[fortheDeclaration]

Did you know that the Boers of South Africa at the turn of the last century claimed that the Dutch Bible was the one true inspired version of the Bible? What makes you think the KJV is any better than the Dutch Bible of the Boers?

The Boers are Dutch are they not?

When we speak of the King James we are speaking for English speaking people.

I would bet that the Bible that the Dutch were using and believed to be God's living word came from the TR!

Next time you witness to someone in a foreign language you can use the Bible that is from the TR or a translation of the King James into that language, either will suffice.

If, however, you are witnessing in English, use the King James.

[maestro]

Next time you witness to someone in a foreign language you can use the Bible that is from the TR or a translation of the King James into that language, either will suffice.

If, however, you are witnessing in English, use the King James.

Amen!!

(Romans 10:17)

Maranatha!!

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Excerpts from the preface to the origional KJV, found only in larger editions of Cambridge and 1611 Nelson bibles...

FROM THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER

The translation of the Seventy dissenteth from the original in many places, neither doth it come near
it for perspicuity, gravity, majesty; yet which of the Apostles did condemn it? Condemn it? Nay,
they used it, (as it is apparent, and as Saint Hierome and most learned men do confess) which they
would not have done, nor by their example of using it, so grace and commend it to the Church, if it
had been unworthy the appellation and name of the Word of God.
*******
Now to the latter we answer, that we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest
translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of
theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the Word of God, nay, is the Word of God.
As the King's Speech which he uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian,
and Latin, is still the King's Speech, though it be not interpreted by every translator with the like
grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere. For it is
confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part: and a natural man could say,
Verum ubi multa nitent in carmine, non ego paucis offendor maculis, &c;.87

[Commander8]

Great article from a great preacher.

[Commander8]

Most Bible Believers support foreign language Bible versions on the conditions that:
1.)The versions are based on the Hebrew Masoretic Texts and the Textus Receptus (i.e the Spanish 1909 Reina-Valera, the Italian Diodati, the French Vaudois, the Czech Kralika, the Romanian Cornilescu etc.)

2.)That the translators of those versions avoid the error of replacing Biblical terms with cultural dynamic equivalents (i.e. replacing "sheep" with "hamsters" and "wolves" with "piranhas") to make the version more "understandable" to indiginous populations.

[drstevej]

***Most Bible Believers support foreign language Bible versions.... ***

This is the height of spiritual arrogance. So KJV-onlyists are the only "Bible Believers"?

And you wonder why we react so strongly to such tom foolery?

[Gamecock]

So, would that be the KJB from 1611, including the Apocrypha?

[Wrigley]

Is it safe to say an idol has been made out of the KJV?

[RochesterFan]

Steve, you're right. This is more of the same from ftD that has been rebutted many times by the regulars here on FR. It is getting extremely tiresome to see this placed as a stumbling block in front of believers who would be better edified by a more readable translation. His same old rehash is getting more tiresome than the posts from a well-known one who inspired you to post pictures of a canned meat product.

[jude24]

I had an enlightening experience last week as a camp counsellor at a Christian camp.

I've done counselling for five years, so I've seen all kinds of stuff, including waking up to see several kids tying another to his bunk (turned out the kid was a willing participant, he wanted to try a Houdini stunt.)

This year, translations became an issue. Half the kids had NIV's, the other half had KJV's. Some had them because their parents went to a church that used them, others got them because it was what the camp store stocked.

I found it interesting, though, to watch the kids try to read the KJV. With few exceptions, they couldn't read them. They stumbled over the words and grammar. I might as well have handed them my UBS Greek New Testament. They would have understood about as much.

At great length, I explained to them that the KJV, NIV, and NASB all said the same thing, just in slightly different words.

Then the camp director and counsellor-in-training director publically pulled the rug out from underneath me. The camp director told the kids -- preteens -- that they should get a NKJV or KJV because the editors of the NIV made bad translation decisions. Later, the CIT director publically made a point to give his CIT's NKJV Bibles because they were all using NIV's.

I'll be honest: I find this trend of KJV/NKJV-onlyism in the Brethren scary. 8 years ago, I bought a NASB Bible. Someone remarked that I shouldn't trust it because it was corrupted by Westcott and Hort. I decided to use that new tool, the internet, to investigate it, and was horrified to find a vast, Satanic conspiracy was removing key doctines in the Bible. Charts like this one convinced me that the KJV was the only way to go.

That next summer, I was a CIT. The CIT directors (different than the one this year) patiently explained the errors in the KJV-onlyism.

This fight to me is intensely personal -- I will stand up to anyone who seeks to lead someone astray in KJV-legalism. I know all too well the arrogant pride bred by that belief. I will not stand idly by and watch false teachers spread their damn nonsense in the church. Especially not one that I am a member in.

[jude24]

Oops.... the link is http://www.av1611.org/biblecom.html

Still getting used to a different keyboard (new notebook....)

[ksen]

At great length, I explained to them that the KJV, NIV, and NASB all said the same thing, just in slightly different words.

This statement is false. They do not all say the same thing with different words.

[drstevej]

May your tribe increase! Well said.

[jude24]

This statement is false. They do not all say the same thing with different words.

Says you. And I really don't care to hear the drivel about how the NASB takes out the blood in Col. 2:14 or whatever else bullcrap the KJV-legalists have to offer.

[jude24]

The King James Version: used and approved by such discerning theologians as Benny Hinn.

Also by Joseph Smith and Charles Taze Russell.... bastions of Christian theology all....

[maestro]

KJV.....!!!

(Jude 2-4)

Maranatha!!!

(Romans 10:17)

[drstevej]

I have no quarell with the KJV itself. I think it is a very good translation that has served the Church well. I simply reject the underlying assumptions of the TR-KJVonlyists as well as the sanctimonious attitude..

As to Joseph Smith... he really had no respect for the KJV except to plagarize from it. His "translation" of Romans 8:30 shows he will change it whenever convenient despite the utter lack of any manuscript support for his revision.