[boaz212]

A good friend has been thinking about the KJV issue. He is not KJVO. He wants me to comment on this article:
http://glorygazer.blogspot.com/2008/...-in-light.html

especially on questions #1, #2, and #3.
Any assistance will really help me to have a more complete answer. Thanks.
Tim

[BornAgainBibleBeliever514]

One foundational book I read that began my sincere conviction about the AV1611 was Sam Gipp's Answer Book.

You can read the whole thing online for free from Chick Publications here:

http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158cont.asp

It covers the LXX, and many other questions you may have, its a great place to get started.

~Brian.

[peopleoftheway]

Hi Brother

I only glanced over that webpage a little, but I am guessing from the Title it has to do with the KJB translators and inspiration.
I am sure many other the better informed Brothers here may refute it better, but in the meantime here is a section from Sam Gipps answer book regarding the subject.

Did the KJV translators claim divine inspiration?

Related articles: Inspiration and Translation; Two Lies, The

The following is from Sam Gipp's The Answer Book.

QUESTION: Did the translators of the Authorized Version claim to be inspired by God?

ANSWER: No. But Biblically that does not mean that they could NOT have been inspired.

EXPLANATION: The men on the translation committee of the King James Bible were, without dispute, the most learned men of their day and vastly qualified for the job which they undertook. They were overall both academically qualified by their cumulative knowledge and spiritually qualified by their exemplary lives.

Among their company were men who, academically, took a month's vacation and used the time to learn and master an entirely foreign language; wrote a Persian dictionary; invented a specialized mathematical ruler; one was an architect; mastered oriental languages; publicly debated in Greek; tutored Queen Elizabeth in Greek and mathematics; and of one it was said, "Hebrew he had at his finger's end." Yet head knowledge can be a curse if not tempered by a fervent, pious heart.

In this, the spiritual realm, they were light years ahead of many today who flaunt their education yet fail in any attempt at a practical, personal witness.

This company was blessed with men known for their zeal and tact in debating and converting Romanists to Christ. They spent hours in private and family devotions. Many did the work of evangelism and even that of missionary representatives of later Queen Elizabeth. One lived to the age of one hundred and three years. In the closing years of his life, after preaching for two full hours, he said to his congregation, "I will no longer trespass on your patience"--to which the entire congregation cried out with one consent, "For God's sake go on!" He then continued his exposition of the Word of God at length.

Yet humanity was a universal trait shared among them as is so amply revealed in the Epistle Dedicatory:

"So that if, on the one side, we shall be traduced by Popish Persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make God's holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness; or if, on the other side, we shall be maligned by self- conceited Brethren, who run their own ways, and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their anvil;...."

Yet, in spite of their outstanding character, they never claimed divine inspiration. (A claim which, if they had made, would overjoy their detractors as evidence of a prideful spirit.) They never even claimed perfection for their finished work.

Does this mean that, because they did not claim God's hand in translating the Scripture, that He could not be or was not in control of their commission? For the answer we must look to the Bible, our final authority in all matters of faith and practice.

When John the Baptist was accosted by the Levites in John chapter one and asked if he was Elijah (John 1:21) he answered that he was not Elijah. Yet in Matthew chapters 11:7-14 and 17:10-13 Jesus Christ plainly stated that John was Elijah.

Did John the Baptist lie? No. Did Jesus Christ lie? Of course not. The answer is very simply that John was Elijah but he didn't know it! Thus we see from our Bible example that a man can have God working through him and not know it. Likewise, God could easily have divinely directed the King James translators without their active knowledge.

[boaz212]

Hi Brian, thanks for the link to the Answer Book. I wish I have more brain power to retain lots more information. Take care.
Peopleoftheway, thanks for your comment on one of the questions.
The hand of God was evident on the work of these translators. The power of God is evident in His use of the KJB and those who use it. To question the humility and honesty of these men in order to justify another corrupt translation work is beyond me.
Thankfully, my friend is a seeker. He is a thinker and wants evidence of what we believe. Since I am quite limited in my knowledge so any help will be much appreciated!

[Winman]

Boaz

I used to visit another forum of so called "bible-believers" but there were so many there who tried to tear down the KJV. And this was one of their common arguments. I am not the scholarly type, I read some very good books on the men who translated the KJV many years ago, and as POTW said, these men were some of the most learned ever, far superior to anyone in the world today.

But you know what? That is really not the issue. God himself promised to preserve His word. God could have used unlearned men to preserve His word. This is something you cannot get across to these pseudo-intellectuals.

Psa 12:6 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 hate these verses and constantly attack them. They have to. Because the LORD himself promised to keep His pure words from this generation for ever. They don't want to talk about God, so they try to distract and talk about men, or original documents... But they never talk about God himself who is the one who promised to preserve His own Word.

Matt 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

You cannot fight these folks in your own power. Just stick them with God's Word. God is fully able to deal with them. Don't get all bogged down in arguments that no one can answer and twisted logic.

[bibleprotector]

Some people look at the translators’ words, and try and twist them to cause people to doubt the King James Bible.

A few days ago I made some video teaching clips on this area, which you can view here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LWrzwU33HQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aJyDN2oEsI

These points answer the accusations presented in the blog which is linked at the beginning of this thread:

1. The translators affirm and laboured to present the very Word of God.

2. The translators never said anything that supports the modern version view.

3. The translators never said that margins were for “clarifying” or were “alternates”.

4. The translators knew the right value of the Latin.

5. The translators knew the right value of the Septuagint.

6. The translators said nothing that would contradict a proper KJBO view.

7. The translators did not commend variety of translations as an ongoing situation, since they laboured to present one more exact translation in English which benefited from the variety which they consulted for us.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by boaz212

A good friend has been thinking about the KJV issue. He is not KJVO. He wants me to comment on this article:
http://glorygazer.blogspot.com/2008/...-in-light.html

especially on questions #1, #2, and #3.
Any assistance will really help me to have a more complete answer. Thanks.
Tim

Tim, what you must first do, and I had to do it with my older brother and His NASB: You have to cross your arms, gird up thy loins, set your jaw, and adopt the truthful attitude that it is NOT up to you to prove anything. It's up to them. The KJV was not given by inspiration? Prove it. Burden of proof is NOT on us, it's on them.

The entire blog is a straw man. Proving the KJV is not inspired because the translators were not inspired proves nothing. Nowhere do we have proof Paul was inspired. Words are inspired, not men. Paul was not "given by inspiration", God's words were given THROUGH him. Inspiration is a PROCESS, not a "condition", like a holy trance the writers were in. Paul says all scripture IS given, not WAS given. Inspiration continues to this instant(Job 32:8).

Straw man argument on number two. So what if the Koran and the LXX was claimed to be "inspired"? Charley Manson claimed to be God, don't mean I have to become an atheist.

Marginal notes is an empty argument that proves nothing. I write stock quotes in the margin of my bible don't make them inspired.

Brother Rolando and I discussed my statement that I'd rather use, it I ONLY had the choice between the two, I'd rather use the NWT of the Watchtower before I'd use an NIV. I can prove to the most hardened JW the Deity of Christ from his own corruption, BUT, if you find a Rolex watch in a trashcan don't make the trashcan a jewelry store, does it?

The best thing you can do is get your friend to join this forum and get some honest answers, not Watchtower word games and lawyer tricks as this "blog" tries to do. I notice also no venue to respond to this blog either.

Grace and peace to you Tim.

Tony